| |
|
Article: <[email protected]>
From: [email protected](Nancy )
Subject: Re: GRAVITY - the Zetas Explain
Date: 29 Jan 1997 05:17:29 GMT
In article <[email protected]> Greg Neill
writes:
> Nancy ([email protected]) wrote:
>> Light is not composed of a singular particle, but dozens
of
>> particles, thereby accounting for much of what humans
call
>> strange behavior of light.
>
> Well, Nance, you're getting close! Hurrah! A breakthough!
> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
In article <[email protected]> Greg Neill
writes:
> Nancy ([email protected]) wrote:
>> Diffraction of light in water laden air following a rain
storm
>> results in what humans call a rainbow, where the eye
perceives
>> light particles sorted out by the degree, or angle, of
diffraction
>> from one side of the rainbow to the other.
>
> Again, close enough. You're doing well!
> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
Hey Greg, it ain't little ol' ME with the high school diploma. All this is from the guys with the big brains, the Zetas.
In article <[email protected]> Greg Neill
writes:
>> Auroras, colorful light displays of waving banners
across
>> the northern or southern skies, are caused by the
susceptibility
>> of the various particles to the gravitational pull from
the Earth.
>> These light displays are VISIBLE to humans where the
glare
>> of sunlight does not drown them out, as the eye
registers the
>> overwhelming particle nature of the light flood,
discarding
>> minor particles that might be present as so much noise.
>
> Oops, you've lost it. Gravity plays little or no role in
auroral
> displays. If it were so, the auroral displays would be
stronger
> closer to the surface of the Earth, and observable at all
latitudes.
> Also note that auroras have been monitored from space by
> satellites, and they do stay close to the poles.
> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
How nice that we can agree on some things, Greg. Now, about the
disagreement, you're wrong and we're right. Let us explain.
Auroral displays are ONLY visible when the viewer is not receiving a view composed of light particles NOT susceptible to gravity bending. The closeness to the Earth has nothing to do with it. Its the composition of the light flooding toward the eye or recording lens, in the case of a satellite. If the eye or recording lens is getting a full flood of light FROM THAT DIRECTION that is composed of the normal complement of light from the Sun, then no aurora. If the eye or recording lens gets a full flood of light from ONE SIDE of the viewing scope, but from ANOTHER SIDE gets a limited flood, as only light bend into auroral displays, then THIS is what will be recorded at the time!
Thus a human in the far north or far south, gazing toward the
pole, will see auroral displays THEN, but as they turn to look
toward the equator will see the normal light complement. This is
due NOT to the magnetic pole nature of the geographic poles, but
to the way the Earth is tipped! The poles are DARKER for half the
year, receiving less of the full complement of sunlight. THIS is
when auroral displays are notices. Regarding satellites viewing
auroral displays, as they are set to absorb the same light ranges
the humans eye would record, they do so. If the camera is pointed
toward a pole, which is in the dark and consequently revealing a
light show that would NOT be revealed if drowned out by the full
complement of particles present in sunlight, the camera will
record the aurora just as the eye does.
(End ZetaTalk[TM])
In article <[email protected]> Greg Neill
writes:
>> The human eye receives in the dim light of dawn or dusk
an
>> overwhelming flood of light composed of particular
particles
>> which are more prone to bend toward the gravitational
pull
>> of the Earth than other particles. Thus the sunset or
dawn is
>> most brilliant at a point just before or after the full
glare of
>> sunlight, when the particle flood is strong but is not
mixed in
>> with competing light particles to the point of being
drown out.
>
> Singular events such as volcanoes can drastically influence
the
> particulate content on a global scale, and results in
enhanced
> effects. Gravity does not bend the light sufficiently to
produce
> the effects you're describing. If it did, we would be able
to see
> the sun many, many degrees below the horizon. During solar
> eclipses, the Moon would behave as a lense and actually
focus
> the Sun's light on an area of the Earth, rather than casting
an
> umbral shadow.
> [email protected] (Greg Neill)
(Begin ZetaTalk[TM])
You're misinterpreting matters here. After a volcanic eruption,
when the particle content of the air is high, sunsets and dawns
are more brilliant NOT due to the particles ENHANCING the light,
but because they DEFLECT the normal sunlight components, thus
allowing MORE of the component that constitute orange sunsets and
dawn to flood through without contest. You're grasping part of
what we're saying here, Greg, but not all. Whatever you, your
human eye, "sees" is what the brain chooses to
register. You "see" what is in the majority, the
pattern that overwhelms, and during normal sunlight displays,
THIS is what overwhelms!
During an eclipse, you register a shadow in the same manner
you register shadow during a normal day, when a cloud passes
overhead or you are standing under a tree. Shadow to you means
that the sunlight is being blocked by a large object, but as
there is still light in the shadow, obviously light creeps in
from the sides. Things are no different for the area of land
under an eclipse. Light creeps in, deflected from other places.
Bending particles that would create an auroral effect or a
brilliant orange sunset or dawn ARE NOT visible during your
normal day, in shadow, being drowned out by the normal complement
of sunlight particles. Thus, during an eclipse, they are also
drowned out, as it's no different than a shadow!
(End ZetaTalk[TM])