Redefining Gravity: A conversation with Fiona Blake

 

By Luke Masters, Editor at WeAlwaysKnew.com

​

Luke Masters: Today, I am honored to welcome Professor Fiona Blake, a distinguished physicist known for her unconventional theories that challenge our basic understanding of physics. Professor Blake, thank you for joining us.

Professor Fiona Blake:  Thank you, Luke. It's a pleasure to be here and discuss these important topics.

LM: Professor Blake, your theory on what you call "the gravity error" has sparked considerable interest. Could you explain this concept for our audience?

FB: Certainly. The traditional understanding of gravity, as proposed by Newton and later expanded by Einstein, suggests that it's a force pulling objects towards the center of a mass, like the Earth. However, my research proposes a different perspective, especially in the context of a flat Earth. Instead of objects being attracted towards the center of the Earth, I argue that what we perceive as gravity is actually the result of the Earth's disc constantly ascending upwards.

LM: That's a fascinating concept. How does this upward motion of the Earth's disc create the effects of gravity?

FB: Imagine the Earth as a flat disc moving uniformly upwards in space. According to the laws of physics, specifically Newton's laws of motion, an object in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force. In this model, when objects are not tethered to the Earth's surface, they are left behind by the ascending Earth, creating the illusion that they are falling downwards.

LM: Intriguing. So, how does this theory align with observations like objects falling to the ground or the behavior of tides?

FB: This is where the concept becomes even more interesting. When an object falls, it's not moving towards the Earth; it's merely not moving with the Earth as it ascends. As for tides, they can be explained by the Earth's disc's undulating movement, creating a kind of wave that affects the oceans.

LM: What led you to propose this radical reinterpretation of gravity?

FB: It started with inconsistencies and unexplained phenomena within the standard model of gravity. The more I researched, the more I realized that an ascending Earth model could provide answers to these anomalies. It's a perspective that requires us to rethink not just gravity, but our entire understanding of the universe's mechanics.

LM: This theory certainly challenges the mainstream scientific narrative. How has the scientific community responded to your ideas?

FB: As expected, there's been a range of reactions – from outright dismissal to intrigued curiosity. However, science thrives on challenging and reevaluating existing theories. I believe it's crucial for the scientific community to explore all possibilities, no matter how unconventional they may seem.

​

LM: Professor Blake, for our more scientifically inclined readers, could you delve deeper into the mechanics of this alternative gravity model? Perhaps introduce us to the new terminology and the formulas that underpin your theory.

FB: Certainly, Luke. In my research, I refer to this alternative gravity concept as "Dynamics Ascension Theory" or DAT. This theory posits that the Earth's disc is in a state of constant upward acceleration in a vacuum, an idea that derives from Einstein's principle of equivalence.

LM: Could you elaborate on the principle of equivalence in this context?

FB: Einstein's principle of equivalence states that the gravitational force felt by an object in a gravitational field is indistinguishable from the pseudo-force felt by an observer in a non-inertial (accelerating) frame of reference. In DAT, we postulate that the Earth's disc accelerates upwards at a rate 'a', which is equivalent to the gravitational acceleration 'g' we experience, approximately 9.81 m/s².

LM: Fascinating. How does this translate into formulas or mathematical models?

FB: Let's consider an object in free fall. In conventional physics, its downward acceleration due to gravity is represented by 'g'. However, in DAT, the object is not accelerating downwards; instead, the Earth's disc is accelerating upwards towards the object. If we let 'a' represent the upward acceleration of the Earth's disc, the equation of motion for the object relative to the Earth's surface becomes:




 

 

Here, 's' is the displacement of the Earth's disc relative to the object, and 't' is the time. This equation mirrors the conventional equation for objects in free fall, but it's interpreted through the lens of the Earth's disc accelerating upwards.

LM: That’s a profound reinterpretation. How does DAT explain more complex gravitational phenomena, like orbital mechanics?

FB: In the context of DAT, orbital mechanics require a reimagining of celestial dynamics. Instead of bodies orbiting due to gravitational pull, we consider a system of synchronized movements in a flat plane. This requires an extension of classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory to account for the observed motions of celestial bodies. For instance, the motion of the Moon around the Earth can be described by a combination of the Earth's disc's upward motion and the Moon's lateral motion in a coordinated, cyclic pattern.

LM: This theory appears to challenge the very foundations of astrophysics. How do you reconcile DAT with the observed effects that are traditionally attributed to gravity, such as the bending of light or the redshift observed in distant galaxies?

FB: Indeed, these are complex phenomena. Let's take gravitational lensing, the bending of light in a gravitational field. In DAT, this can be explained by the interaction of light with the electromagnetic fields generated by the disc's upward acceleration and its inherent material properties. As for the cosmological redshift, traditionally attributed to the expansion of the universe, in DAT, this is interpreted as an effect of the interaction between the cosmic microwave background radiation and the boundary of the Earth's disc atmosphere, altering the wavelength of light.

LM: That’s a radically different interpretation. How do you address the criticisms that such a theory cannot be empirically tested or falsified?

FB: Scientific progress relies on the ability to question and test. DAT can be empirically tested through advanced observational techniques, particularly in high-altitude physics and astrophysics. For instance, measuring variations in the cosmic microwave background radiation at different altitudes and locations can provide insights into the Earth's disc motion. Additionally, experiments to detect variations in electromagnetic fields at extreme altitudes could offer evidence for or against DAT. These are challenging experiments, but they are within the realm of possibility with current technological advancements.

LM: Finally, Professor Blake, what implications does your theory have for our understanding of the universe?

FB: If DAT is proven correct, it would require a complete overhaul of our current understanding of physics and cosmology. It suggests that the universe may be fundamentally different from what is currently believed. This could open up new avenues of research in physics, leading to potentially revolutionary technological and philosophical advancements. It's a reminder that in science, we must always be open to new ideas and ready to question even our most deeply-held beliefs.
 

LM: Professor Blake, your insights and theories are indeed thought-provoking. Thank you for sharing your groundbreaking work with us.

​

​