Einstein's gravity model, which he said took over 40 years to develop, can be explained by placing a ball on a soft covered pool table. The ball sinks. Hence space is curved around the mass of a star. When an approaching planet falls into this curved space it circles the star, therefore explaining gravity. Einstein's model suggests that the large mass of the Sun defines the curvature of space and that space is somehow two dimensional from the perspective of the planet. As the planet orbits this curved space they are forced to follow space's curvature. Space is somehow filled with these tiny curved pockets.

How would a planet's orbit follow an elliptical orbit and still maintain it's flat orbit in a curved space? These curved planetary orbits are

*not*observed in the Solar System. If the orbits of the solar planets were circular as demonstrated in this model and not elliptical, then the planets would have no change in velocity throughout their orbits. Planets do have variable changing velocities in their orbits, as discovered by the great German Physics Kepler. As they approach the Sun the planets accelerate to their maximum velocity at the point of their perigee. Conversely their velocities decrease as they approach the point of apogee.

Does Einstein's model properly demonstrate what is observed in the Solar System?

The planets orbit the solar system on a plane. The exact opposite to Einstein's theory of curved space. How would this model demonstrate nine planets with the exception of Pluto, exhibiting a flat plane when orbiting the Sun? How would you even attempt to illustrate this model of nine planets in curved space with a flat orbital plane? There is no curvature to the planet's orbits as predicted by Einstein's curved space theory.

Diagram of Einstein's curved space

Newton's law of gravity, defined gravity as a relationship between two Masses and there distance.

Einstein's theory suggested that curved space defines gravity.

The problem with both of these explanations to demonstrate gravity is that both are unable to explain many simple observed behaviors. Why are some orbits perfectly circular and others elliptical?

Einstein received his Nobel Award for a paper identifying light having mass, so then why does light react differently then other masses, when passing near the sun?

1)

**Objects as in, planets and comets, accelerate as they approach the Sun, but light's observed velocity, in contrast slows. This is a discrepancy. If space is curved would they both not react the same?**

2) How does curved space demonstrate elliptical orbits?

3) How does curved space explain why the planets with the smallest mass, Mars and Mercury, have the most severe elliptical orbits?

4) How does curved space demonstrate 9 planets orbiting the Sun on a flat plane?

5) How does curved space explain the fact that many comets and asteroids orbit the Sun perpendicular to the solar plane?

6) As a planets orbits this 2 dimensional curved space it also has moons that simultaneously are orbiting the planets defined curved space, as the planet orbits it's Sun. How does Einsteins field equations account for these 2 curved spaces interacting and existing in the same curved space? Many of these moons in the solar system orbit their planets several million km. from the surface of the planets, which would extend them far from the Sun's curved space dimension.

7)

*Probably the most troubling flaw in the curved space theory*. If gravity is defined as curved space and equals to the values of Newton's gravity equations, then why were Shapiro's experiments to determine time/ space alteration value, so small.

, (the Einstein field equations are a set of non-linear second-order partial differential equations in the metric, and imply the curvature of space time is equivalent to a gravitational field)

8) Another troubling problem for curved space defining gravity is the Shapiro's experiments were done many times, and found that the time/space values decreased and disappeared rapidly with only small incremental distance changes from the Sun. With these time/space values disappearing how would this support the expansive solar system required gravity?

*One must remember; Shapiro's experiments are used by those supporting Einstein's theory as proof that his theory's are correct. In actual fact they do the opposite.*

9) The biggest question for curved space theory to overcome is

*scientific*. If curved space reflects gravity then the force of gravity must also be curved.

That is a BIG problem for Einstein's theory. The vector force of gravity from the Sun extends from the centre of the mass through the equator of the Sun to the centre of the mass of the planet. There is no curved gravity force in Newton's gravity equation. There is no curvature to gravity. When an object is reacting to the gravity of another mass, does it follow a straight line or a curved line? When a large passenger airliner is landing on an airstrip, does it have to make minor correction due to the curvature of gravity. Planets do not orbit around the Sun on a curved line. Galaxies orbit their central mass of a Black Hole extending from it's mass, and are flat.

Andromeda Galaxy pictured below shows no curvature. The galaxy's of the Universe are almost flat as a pancake, as they extend outwards some hundreds of light years from the central mass of their Black Hole. Black Holes the largest formed mass in the Universe do NOT curve space.

__N. Tesla__stated on Einstein's curved time/space theory that it is not observed and is impossible to exist.

"

*Since action and reaction are coexistent, it follows that the supposed curvature of space is entirely impossible - But even if it existed it would not explain the motions of the bodies as observed. Only the existence of a field of force can account for the motions of the bodies as observed, and its assumption dispenses with space curvature."*

__Newton__clearly stated gravity acts as a straight line;

*The gravitational attraction force between two*

**point masses**is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of their separation distance. The force is always attractive and acts along the line joining them.*10) The final problem facing the curved space theory;*Einstein's theory of curved space

**contradicts itself.**

If as Einstein suggest that a star's mass curves space, then curve space is predetermined by the mass of the star, therefore pre-exists. This would put gravity as defined as curved space as instantaneous.

This detracts from Einstein's theory that the force of gravity cannot exceed the speed of light..

A clear contradiction..

If gravity is predetermined, and exists as a condition of space as defined by the mass of a star...(curved space) then it must always exist..and the force it implies must be therefore instant.

For more information;

**Blog; For Man to become God**

Einstein's very complex field equations are attempting to explain a very complex universe by a very overly simple explanation of a 2 dimensional curved space theory that is NOT demonstrated or observed in nature.

Einstein's relativity work is a magnificent mathematical garb which fascinates, dazzles and makes people blind to the underlying errors. The theory is like a beggar clothed in PURPLE whom ignorant people take for a king... its exponents are brilliant men but they are metaphysicists rather than scientists."

-Nicola Tesla

The Sun is definitely distorting space, but not as Einstein's theory suggests.

Space is not being curved, but it's being

*contracted.*The Sun doesn't curve space by imaginary gravity waves, but space is distorted by being contracted while at the same instance time is altered/ contracted by being slowed, all because of the Sun's massive spinning magnetic field. This magnetic field contracts space proportionally as the object approaches the sun. This contraction of space then causes the acceleration of planets as it nears the Sun. This is what explains Keplers 2nd law/ and the conservation of angular motion. Less space therefore the object arrives quicker at point "B". This simulates higher velocities.

Light though is different. It doesn't travel in the medium of space, it travels in the medium of time. As time slows, closest to the Sun, light speed appears to slow in relationship to us.

Why? Simply because our time and in this case, the light travelling next to the Sun are in different times

The Sun is both contracting space and slowing time, which gives rise to why light appears to slow and why objects as planets accelerate as they approach the Sun.

This is the basic concept of space and time contraction.

Planets follow the Law of Angular Motion because the medium they are entering is being contracted.

The more you squeeze the spherical orbit of space, the more pronounced the elliptical orbit, hence the more the planet or (object) is forced to accelerate. As you continue to squeeze the spherical space the elliptical orbit approaches the imaginary line between the point of the perigee and the apogee. The closer the orbit approaches this line, the faster the planet or object is forced to accelerate, following the second law of Kepler. Once the orbit is flat lined the objects velocity approaches infinity. This imaginary line is a singular time line with NO intervals of space. As the elliptical orbit is squeezed, spherical space is being squeezed from between the time intervals, producing a singular time line.

As Kepler's 2nd Law predicts, as the object approaches the perigee, closer to this imaginary line, the object acceleration approaches infinity, while the space it occupies approaches Zero. An observable example of this is the comet ISON. The comet's velocity as it entered our solar system, was measured at 44,000 mph, and it's expected velocity as it crosses it's perigee would be a mind boggling 828,000 mph. Conversely the relative speed of light approaches zero as space in the time line approaches zero.

The exact opposite is true as the object then approaches the apogee. The object speed approaches Zero, while the space the object occupies, approaches infinity. As the object approaches it's apogee it's approach becomes closer to the perpendicular of an imaginary line between the perigee and the apogee. The closer to the perpendicular, the closer the objects speed approaches Zero and the space it occupies approaches infinity.

How is space squeezed and reduced to produce an elliptical orbit? The elliptical orbit is produced by the Sun (star) ability to contract space. The Sun's magnetic field that spins through our Solar System produces this contraction in space. As the planet approaches the Sun, the space nearest the Sun is contracted the most, causing the planets velocity to increase. After passing the perigee, the planets velocity begins slowing as less space is contracted.

The reason that Einstein's theory is backwards is that the increasing Mass is the product of his theory as velocity approaches the speed of light, which would take the energy of the entire universe, which contrasts the theory of space contraction. Velocity therefore becomes the product of the equation, not the mass of the object as in Einstein's theory.

The Two Forces of the Universe

__There is two basic questions that remain unanswered.__

1st) Object (comets, planets) accelerate as they approach the Sun. An example of this is the Comet ISON. It's velocity increased by 900,000 mph as it crossed it's perigee. This velocity increase is in discrepancy with light, that slows as it approaches the Sun. Why does one increase it's velocity while the other decreases it's speed? If curved space existed would not the same velocity change be observed for both?

2nd) Some objects have orbits that are elliptical, that follow Kepler's 2nd law, as in the planets of the solar system. Other orbits are perfectly circular, as the orbits of the rings of Saturn. Why does this discrepancy exist. One with a circular orbit while the other with an elliptical orbit? Physicists have determined that elliptical orbits are a result of Newton's gravity law, and it's relationship of mass and distance, but is this true? The planets elliptical orbits seem to have NO correlation with their mass and distance from the Sun, which would have been deducted if Newton's gravity law was the determining factor regarding their orbital paths. Instead Mars, Mercury and Pluto all of which are the smallest planets, but have the largest elliptical orbits and the greatest velocity differential. The question remains why does the smallest planets have the largest in changing orbit velocities, and orbits that are the most pronounced in a elongated form?

Smaller planets are more effected by contracted space as they accelerate towards their apogee, while the effects from a much larger mass are less pronounced, which is observed. It is simply more difficult to accelerate a larger mass than a smaller one, as described in Newton's momentum law.

This phenomenon cannot be illustrated by just Newton's gravity equation.

Newton stated there are 3 states that determine an orbit by 2 bodies in space.

1) Distance

2) velocity

3) mass

Einstein's GR equation states there is a fourth.

From the study of Quantum mechanics, which demonstrates that a particle can not only be observed as a mass particle but also as a wave, Einstein began to formulate his famous theory.

Einstein knew light could be demonstrated as a wave, but this did not properly explain certain light experiments, so he released a paper which won him the Nobel Prise, that stated light also has mass and can act as a particle.

This paper would later relate to his work on his theory of gravity.

The force of gravity was well known since Newton, but the bigger question always held science back. What was the force or mechanism of gravity?

Einstein knew this unseen force could not be a simple Newton force, so he postulated that gravity must be a wave. To be Newton like, Einstein wanted to be more than just a man of theory, so he developed his equation of General Relativity, using Gravity waves to prove this theory.

His initial theory that gravity is a wave held some promise, but to prove it by a nonlinear equation, was a bit of a reach.

An analogy would be to imagine you have a door. This imagined door you then paint red and from that, you now theorize that you must own a red barn.

There are a number of problems with his theory that are difficult to overcome.

His theory states that mass produces a gravity wave..so what is the mechanism that mass has to produce, to create a gravity wave?

The most obvious next problem. What is a gravity wave, and how can it be detected or can it be detected, and why is it not continuously detected?

The most disturbing problem with a gravity wave is it causes a loss of energy and ultimately a loss of mass for the object. Has this ever been observed in our solar system?

Could our solar system even exist if orbital decay was present?

Pulsars have the ability to contract space, causing observed orbital decay but is this from loss of mass? Pulsars are a very unique object in our Universe that discharge energy, which is thought to contribute to their orbital decay. How a Pulsars creates and releases energy is unknown. The real question is how a Pulsar's decaying orbit would relate to proving gravity waves?The latest of interesting theories is that oscillating sound waves produce or convert into gravity waves. Has this ever been reproduced in a lab? What would be the mechanism for this to occur?

There exists two forces of nature that are observable in the Universe. These forces are distinctly different and distinct, though Mass may have a combination of these forces.

**The first force of the Universe is Gravity;**

The Mass of the Star, planet or even a Black Hole produces the force of gravity at it's "x" axis which extents from it's equator. This produces orbits that are perfectly flat as observed by the orbits of the rings of Saturn. The orbits are not only on a flat plane extending from the equator, but they are perfectly circular, and non elliptical. A good visible example of this is in the photo below.

Notice above and below in the photo of Saturn taken from Cassini and it's rings. Saturn's rings are perfectly circular, and are flat as they extend outward from Saturn's equator. Their orbits are not elliptical.

Mars two moons have orbits that are also circular, rather than the elliptical orbits that would have be predicted by Kepler's Second Law. Mar's moon's orbits though are not exactly aligned with Mar's equator.

**The Second Force of the Universe is the Force of Elliptical Orbits.**

This is seen in the motion of the planetary orbits around the Sun. The Force of Elliptical orbit follows the laws of Kepler. Our planet Earth, like the Sun, also exhibits this force. This is seen as the Moon's orbit being slightly elliptical,

Elliptical orbits are produced by the Sun/star/black holes, large spinning magnetic field that contracts space, and accelerates the body as it approaches. The contraction of space nearest the star elongates the orbit into an elliptical pattern.

The

*double pulsars*that were found orbiting together have been long considered examples as proving Einstein's orbital decay, and subsequently his GR, are in effect really only contracting space between themselves as their huge spinning magnetic fields continue to contract space/time.

Gravity can also be defined by contracted space which is predicated by the spinning magnetic field of the mass. Therefore gravity exists.

http://trueancienthistory.blogspot.ca/2012/12/black-holes.html