Hildegard and the Cause of Gravity  

  As we have noted earlier, Isaac Newton did not discover the nature of
gravity. He merely gave us a mathematical formula to calculate its effects.
Although Newton and his devotees usually describe gravity as an attractive
force, the most that can be said for this view is that it satisfies the
appearances. The main problem with viewing gravity as a local force due
to some innate property of matter is that it would not begin to explain how
gravity can operate over vast distances, otherwise known as the "action-at-a-
distance" problem, something Newton hardly addressed, let alone
solved.
  Recall in our earlier discussion concerning the makeup of the atom
that there exists a huge volume between the nucleon and the electron. In 1911 Ernest Rutherford, after bombarding very thin sheets of gold with
alpha particles, discovered that even though the alpha particles were 8,000
times larger than the electron, and the metal foil was 400 atoms-thick,
nevertheless, most of the particles penetrated the foil with little problem.
Only a few, perhaps 1 in 1,000, were scattered, some deflected 90 degrees,
others 180 degrees. An obvious interpretation of this phenomenon is that
most of the alpha particles move through the atom as if it were almost
completely empty. The few alpha particles that were deflected had done so
because they hit the nucleus of the atom, which means that most of the
mass of the atom is concentrated at the central point. As it turns out, only a
quadrillionth of the atom is occupied by mass, that is, only
0.000,000,000,000,1%. What constitutes the other
99.999,999,999,999,9%? Hildegard's vision tells us that it is the fourth
element, "air," or what we would understand as a subatomic ether that
pervades the whole universe, yet it does not penetrate the nucleus or the
electron but only the space between the two. In a simple analogy, we could
say that the "fire" of the electron is bathed in a sea of cosmic "air" in order
that it can continue to "burn." As Hildegard describes it: "In each of the
elements there indwells an air that corresponds to its nature."130 Every
cubic centimeter of space, and even matter itself, contains trillions upon
trillions of these little entities, forming an invisible medium throughout the
universe. As Oliver Lodge wrote, quoting J. J. Thomson:

Quote

In fact, all mass is mass of the ether; all momentum, momentum
of the ether. This view, it should be said, requires the density of
the ether to be immensely greater than that of any known
substance.

  Yes, far denser - so dense that matter by comparison is like gossamer,
or a filmy imperceptible mist, or a milky way. Not unreal or unimportant -
a cobweb is not unreal, nor to certain creatures is it unimportant, but it
cannot be said to be massive or dense; and matter, even platinum, is not
dense when compared with the ether.131
  This subatomic ether performs a number of important tasks, but
probably the most important is that it helps create gravity. As it occupies
the space in the atom, as in Rutherford's experiment, most of it passes
through, but some of it hits the nucleus, yet it cannot penetrate the nucleus
because of the latter's density. This fits the science we already know
concerning protons. They are virtually indestructible and do not decay.
Experiments with the proton reveal that its average lifetime must exceed
10^32 years.132 Although the nucleus is about 10-14 cm in length, its density
is far more compact. No one really knows how dense it is. In any case, the atom moves in whatever direction the ether moves the nucleus. There is no
longer any need to wonder why atoms were designed with mostly "empty
space." They were designed as such to allow them to be penetrated by
even smaller unseen entities to create the phenomenon of gravity.133
  As we noted above, modern science has found substantial evidence
that open space is not a vacuum; rather, it is filled with infinitesimal
particles. It was for this very reason that the interferometer experiments in
the course of 50 years all demonstrated positive results for an ether circling
the Earth, but results that were not even close to coinciding with an Earth
revolving around the sun at 66,000 mph. We also noted earlier that Carl
Anderson discovered the positron in 1932. From this discovery various
scientists have understood that space is packed with electron-positron pairs
(or what we have coined as "electropons"), such that the sudden
appearance of an electropon pair when a 1.02 MeV charge is administered
in open space is that the charge is jarring the particles loose from the allpervading
electropon lattice. One scientist, Menahem Simhony, estimates
that the number of electropon pairs in one cubic millimeter of space is 6 ×
10^30, with a binding energy of 27 quadrillion kilowatt hours, yet this
energy is a million times smaller than the binding energy of the atomic
nucleus.134 Hence, the nucleus would remain impenetrable to the
electropons, and thus the electropon sea could move the nucleus. Thus we
have a viable mechanism for gravity. Later we will discover what might
move the electropon sea against the nucleus.

  Simhony's value of 10^30 electropons per cubic millimeter of space is
precisely the same value found by another researcher in the field, Allen
Rothwarf (although the two scientists worked independently).135
Moreover, setting their sights on specifically addressing the gravity
question, Frederick Rothwarf and Sisir Roy combine the electropon pairs
into a second ether composed of particles on the Planck scale, so that there
are "two ethers." Offering a solution to gravity, they write:

Quote

These particles, called partons or gravitons, are assumed to have
a mass equal to the Planck mass136 and to constitute an ether AG,
that transmits gravitational forces at a speed cG, which exceeds
the speed of light c0. Along similar lines, Van Flandern and
Vigier have analyzed planetary and cosmological data to obtain a
lower limit of cG, 2 10^10 c0 = 6 × 10^18 m/s" [i.e., 20 billion
times the speed of light].137

  Einstein had limited the speed of gravity to luminal parameters, but
many physicists admit that this limitation simply will not survive in a universe of Planck dimensions, and it is one of the reasons why Relativity
and Quantum Mechanics have never had a successful union.
  That gravity is based on an ether-pressure is related to the various
corpuscular theories of gravity originating in the work of Nicholas Fatio de
Duillier (b. 1664) and Georges-Louis Le Sage (b. 1724), and continuing in
modern times to the more advanced theories. For example, astrophysicist
Toivo Jaakkola writes:

Quote

A few words about the gravitational ether, and the ether concept
in general may be in place here. The ether hypothesis was
thought to be buried by the Michelson-Morley experiment, but
today it is more alive than ever, in the form of the CBR [Cosmic
Background Radiation]: experiments capable of finding the ether
were not possible in the 1880s, but were possible in the 1960s. In
a sense, the electromagnetic ether has always been observed – as
the heat of the Sun (since as pointed out, CBR is reprocessed
photons).
The gravitational ether must be structured much like its
electromagnetic counterpart. Local fields would cause the
ordinary gravitational processes. Corresponding to CBR, there
must be a cosmic background gravitation, CBG, probably with
its specific gravitational spectrum. How to observe CBG? It has
been already observed, as the cosmological redshift effect, z.
Gravitation works via gravitational quanta, gravitons".
Quantized gravitation is also required by the redshift and other
equilibrium effects. Gravitons are gravitational equivalent to
electromagnetic quanta, photons, both those of the cosmic
background radiation CBR and incident photons from galaxies.
Gravitons and baryonic matter interact and are in equilibrium on
the cosmological scale. The graviton-baryonic interaction is the
redshift effect, and the CBR is re-emission of energy gained by
the cosmological gravitons in the redshift effect.
Gravitation on a body is a pressure effect of gravitons flowing
from the background space. As a rule, due to the equilibrium
principle, the flow is proportional to the mass of the body. As for
all concentric flows (e.g., radiation) the surface density of the
graviton inflow follows the familiar inverse square distance
law".The energy of the gravitons is proportional to the
parameter which we call "strength of gravitation," G. Therefore, we obtain for the surface gravity on a spherical body with mass
M and radius R the familiar Newtonian a = GM/R^2.
All the main cosmological, astrophysical and physical facts: the
gravity and Olbers paradoxes, redshift effects and CBR,
gravitation and radiation, and the existence of particles can be
conceived in the framework of this ether concept.138

In summary, Jaskkola holds that:

• The CMB [CBR] radiation shows that ether exists all over the
  universe.
• The redshift shows that a Cosmic Background Gravitation in the
  form of gravitons also exists.
• Gravitons interact with baryonic matter (the atomic nucleus).
• Gravitation on a body is a pressure effect of gravitons flowing
  from the background space.
• The strength of the gravitons is equal to the gravitational constant
  G, and the force is measured by the inverse square law.

Halton Arp adds that gravitons are:

Quote

...very low mass particles with a huge de Broglie wavelength
compared to photons [and thus] have much less interaction with
the intergalactic medium....The photon is transmitted through
the average cosmic false vacuum, material vacuum or zero point
energy field - to use just a few names given to the old fashion
concept of 'ether.' But the graviton interacts with much less of
this molasses and hence moves much faster.139

  Reginald T. Cahill adds that interferometer experiments dating back
to Miller in 1925 and the coaxial cable experiments up through DeWitte in
1991 show the presence of gravitational waves. These waves are said to be
the proper interpretation of the periodic and non-random fluctuations in the
same forces measured by the "Stanford University-NASA Gravity Probe
B" satellite experiment that measured a geodetic precession and the Lense-
Thirring 'frame-dragging.' Cahill concludes that the data shows "gravity
may be....well represented in terms of a 'flow' system involving a velocity
vector field....and this formalism is physically indistinguishable from the
Newtonian formalism..."140
  How might this ether "flow" system work, mechanically speaking, to
cause the effect of gravity? As we noted previously, the mechanism may
actually be very simple. The ether has a granularity and concentration that
is far finer and far denser, respectively, than ordinary matter. As such,
ether will serve as the interstitial substance that fills the so-called "empty"
space within the atom, as well as the space outside the atom. Since,
however, the ether does not penetrate the atom's individual particles
(protons, neutrons, etc), these atomic particles thus account for a
percentage of the mass of the atom. But since the atomic particles are less
dense than the ether, yet they occupy space in the atom, this means that the
total density within the atom will be slightly less than the density of ether
outside the atom. This imbalance will cause what can best be described as
a partial vacuum in the ether, and the ether will seek to correct the vacuum
by attempting to come to equilibrium. Here is the key: The effort to correct
the vacuum pressure is the cause of gravity. The less-dense ether within
the atom will seek to draw inward the denser ether that is outside the atom,
and this force will continue until a balance is reached, but, in fact, a
balance is never reached, and thus the force of gravity persists indefinitely.
  In Newton's case, for example, the apple falls to the Earth because the
larger the mass, the stronger the vacuum pressure. The Earth, which is the
larger mass, will create a stronger ether vacuum pressure than a smaller
mass, and thus the smaller mass (the apple) will be drawn toward the
larger mass by the force of the Earth's greater ether vacuum pressure. The
reason the Earth creates a greater ether vacuum pressure than the apple is
that the more atomic mass an object has, the less interstitial ether it will
possess in its given volume, and thus the greater the imbalance it will have
with the ether outside its mass. The Earth, having more mass than the
apple, has less interstitial ether within its particular volume and thus a
greater ether vacuum.
  By the same principle, Jupiter will have more gravitational force than
the Earth because Jupiter, having more atomic mass than Earth, will have
less interstitial ether for its given volume, and thus create a greater ether
vacuum, which then attempts to pull more forcefully the ether from outside
the planet in order to reach equilibrium.

-Sugenis, The Geocentric Universe, p.69-74.

Let Sungenis explain how the sun, 93,000,000 miles out, is IN the firmament...according to scripture.  And let him explain how the sun travels a half a billion miles in orbit around the earth EVERY SINGLE DAY.  Also, let him explain how the firmament, described in scripture as a dome/vault/tent, can cover a globe earth. 

Don't worry, whatever Sungenis comes up with will be ridiculous as he scrambles to try to hold together the model that justifies his movies and books.   

Imaginings in the sphere of Sungenis' mind is not proof that earth is a globe.  Scripture says earth is set on pillars but Sungenis says earth hangs in space.  I suppose he has an outrageous hypothesis for this, too.  Sungenis suffers from diabolical disorientation.   

Let Sungenis explain how the sun, 93,000,000 miles out, is IN the firmament...according to scripture.  And let him explain how the sun travels a half a billion miles in orbit around the earth EVERY SINGLE DAY.  Also, let him explain how the firmament, described in scripture as a dome/vault/tent, can cover a globe earth. 

Don't worry, whatever Sungenis comes up with will be ridiculous as he scrambles to try to hold together the model that justifies his movies and books.   

Imaginings in the sphere of Sungenis' mind is not proof that earth is a globe.  Scripture says earth is set on pillars but Sungenis says earth hangs in space.  I suppose he has an outrageous hypothesis for this, too.  Sungenis suffers from diabolical disorientation.   

What of the other stars? The movement of some can be observed. (Not just the "wandering stars" aka planets)

Barnard's star for example:

https://earthsky.org/upl/2017/06/barnards-star.gif

The Fourth Day has arrived and God has made additional "lights" to fill
the heavens. Although the "two great lights" are not given names, it is
obvious they are the Sun and the Moon. The other lights are called "stars."
All of these lights are said to be placed in the "firmament of the heavens."
This is an important point since neither in Genesis nor in any other book of
Scripture is the Earth said to be "in the heavens." This is because Scripture
dictates that the Earth is motionless and is therefore in the center of the
universe and not part of the heavens. Conversely, secular cosmology (e.g.,
the Big Bang) insists the Earth is as much a part of the heavens as any
other celestial object.
As noted earlier, the creation of these additional "lights" in the
Firmament is coincident with the modification of the original Light of the
First Day. In this way, the additional lights made on the Fourth Day could
take over the rhythm of the night/day sequence. If we use our reason to
determine what occurred, the secondary Light (that was separated from the
original Light as the Firmament stretched out) was then made into the Sun
and the stars on the Fourth Day.

[...]

Essentially, as the original Light from the First Day was spread out by the
stretching of the Firmament, it left many and varied bits of "light" along
the way, or what we today call "stars." These would account for all the
stars in and outside of our Milky Way galaxy, and thus make up 99% of
the universe's stars.

[...]


During the Fourth Day, God completed the “molding” of the Light of
the First Day into the Sun and stars. During this time, the Firmament has
been circling the fixed Earth once per day and it has now completed its
second revolution. During the Fourth Day, it is on its third revolution
around the Earth. Naturally, as the Firmament rotates around the Earth on
the Fourth Day, it carries the stars and the sun with it, which is the same as
we see today.

[...]


Lastly, modern science itself admits that we cannot be certain about
the distance to the stars. The only empirical method (that is, one that is not
based on a theory that lacks scientific proof) of determining the distance to
the stars is stellar parallax, but it can estimate distances only to about 300
light years.67 Even then, stellar parallax is based on the assumption that
vast distances separate the two stars being viewed in the telescope.
Although we presently work from the assumption given to us by modern
astronomy that the stars are very large and very far away, there is no proof
for that conclusion. The stars could be very close and smaller than
presently believed. Even with the finest optical instruments, the stars and
galaxies remain as mere points of light through our telescope lenses. No
one has ever obtained a finer focal point, which means either that they are
very small or very far away. 68

Sugenis, pp. 36, 37, 38, 42.