I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be
thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

Where gravity is higher, the water "piles up" and is higher and the
converse.

One NOAA link where such is discussed without huge piles of global
warming distraction:

https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_geodesy/geo07_gravity.html

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 10/25/2023 6:41 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

If water is still, i.e. in a hydrostatic system, its surface must be equipotential, otherwise water would flow. Where gravity force is
higher, same potential is maintained by water surface going farther away
from center of gravity. So water surface to some extent mimics the sea
bed surface, not mirroring it.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 6:41:58 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

youtuber clicken

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

Sylvia, you have been in physics long enough to realize the answer to your question. You should not even ask this question. But what I am surprised with your relative out of touch with the chart of Force Strength. -- It is in the first few pages of
Feynman Lectures-- EM is 10^40 stronger than gravity.

You seem to dwell only in gravity force strength.

So the rocks in the ocean floor and water in the oceans follow Coulomb EM force 10^40 stronger than gravity.

So, no gravity influence is detectable when EM is the predominant force all all around.

Sylvia, you can make-up for this blunder by setting up a Water Electrolysis at Berkeley and finish the experiment by actually weighing the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen. No-one at Berkeley has ever gone beyond looking at volume-- twice as much hydrogen,
but we need a full scientist in a full electrolysis experiment.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 26-Oct-23 2:27 pm, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 6:41:58 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

youtuber clicken

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be
thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

Sylvia, you have been in physics long enough to realize the answer to your question. You should not even ask this question. But what I am surprised with your relative out of touch with the chart of Force Strength. -- It is in the first few pages of

Feynman Lectures-- EM is 10^40 stronger than gravity.

You seem to dwell only in gravity force strength.

So the rocks in the ocean floor and water in the oceans follow Coulomb EM force 10^40 stronger than gravity.

So, no gravity influence is detectable when EM is the predominant force all all around.

Sylvia, you can make-up for this blunder by setting up a Water Electrolysis at Berkeley and finish the experiment by actually weighing the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen. No-one at Berkeley has ever gone beyond looking at volume-- twice as much

hydrogen, but we need a full scientist in a full electrolysis experiment.

Pretty sure water is usually electrically neutral. So is rock.

Sylvia.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, October 26, 2023 at 12:09:13 AM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote:

Sylvia, you can make-up for this blunder by setting up a Water Electrolysis at Berkeley and finish the experiment by actually weighing the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen. No-one at Berkeley has ever gone beyond looking at volume-- twice as much

hydrogen, but we need a full scientist in a full electrolysis experiment.

Pretty sure water is usually electrically neutral. So is rock.

Sylvia.

Neutrality is not at issue. What holds earth together is EM force, 10^40 stronger. What keeps water together is EM force. When you have a neighborhood of EM force and gravity force, we forget the gravity for it makes no difference.

Gravity comes into play when EM is not in the neighborhood.

Sylvia must have studied and grown up in the era of gravity this gravity that and Einstein this and that. When the wise person ditches gravity and center focus on everything explained in terms of EM.

In my unification of 4 forces (actually 3) since atoms have no nucleus. In that unification, gravity is the weakest EM interaction. The Sun pull on Earth is Earth revolves in a magnetic field track of the Sun which shoots photons aft into Earth pushing
it in that field track, and pulling Earth in that field track from "fore" with electromotive force. The fore and aft photons connected.

So, Sylvia, I do not mean to preach to you, but, you need to drop gravity out of your vocabulary and start thinking EM explains all situations. Gravity, nowadays, is as dumb as Lamarckian biology in the 1900s.

Make up for your blunder, Sylvia, by doing a full and complete Water Electrolysis. You do not stop at looking at volume of hydrogen is 2x more than oxygen. But go ahead and weigh the hydrogen, for I bet that the end result is 1/4 the mass of oxygen is
the hydrogen. Mainstream believes it is 1/8 the mass, I say it is 1/4 the mass and will prove that the true formula of water is H4O no H2O.

Why am I so sure of this? For I do risk the possibility of being wrong. I am of the correctness because a proton + muon inside proton cannot be an Atom. An Atom requires at minimum a proton a muon inside to do the Faraday law and a capacitor such as a
neutron. An atom cannot exist as a proton + muon alone. It must have a neutron to storage the produced electricity in Faraday law of proton with muon inside. So H2 is not a molecule but an atom. H by itself is not an atom but a subatomic particle.

O can be alone for it has neutrons. In H2, one of the protons acts and behaves as a neutron to storage the electricity produced in Faraday law.

Berkeley has great weighing balances and can weigh Water Electrolysis.

So, Sylvia, and Berkeley, make yourselves famous by discovering the true formula of Water = H4O, not H2O.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

The shape of the valley bed is formed by 'rocks' not the wet earth on
it.

It is the river that created an ocean.


Now, before the river existed...thats a frame 'level of understanding' i
will not get into now.


it's all rocks.






--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, October 31, 2023 at 4:41:04 PM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote:

Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

The shape of the valley bed is formed by 'rocks' not the wet earth on
it.

It is the river that created an ocean.

Now, before the river existed...thats a frame 'level of understanding' i will not get into now.

it's all rocks.

Leave Sylvia alone in her stumbling mistake of thinking EM force is neutralized by magnetic monopoles (charge is for fools). And that gravity is the force shaper of much of the World. Why I bet Sylvia even thinks like most astronomers, that the roundness
of Earth and other planets is due to gravity. When the "real physicist" knows the shape of planets and stars is due to Electromagnetic Force since it is 10^40 stronger.

No, let Sylvia be a moron physicist for the rest of her tenure in physics.

Although I did say that Sylvia could recuperate some of her prestige by doing a Water Electrolysis measuring the mass of hydrogen versus oxygen.

Do they even teach Logic at Berkeley??? So that a scientist can think straight and clear?

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Starmaker wrote:

Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

The shape of the valley bed is formed by 'rocks' not the wet earth on
it.

It is the river that created an ocean.

Now, before the river existed...thats a frame 'level of understanding' i
will not get into now.

it's all rocks.

In other words, when the water flows down the river..it either goes
around the rocks or over the rock...gravity has nothing to do with it
making it
go up and down.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable,
and challenge the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 7:41:58 PM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

The surface of the ocean is measured by satellites.
The gravity pulls down in the surface level where it has more radius of rock from the center of the Earth. See the Smith/Sandwell report.
Deep ocean has less rock, so the surface is closer to the satellites. https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/1127/ss.html

Scripps Institution of Oceanography contributed the Smith/Sandwell report that used satellite radar altimetry to record gravity anomolies. This covers the oceans, except for the polar seas. Their grid was 2 minutes. It was published in 1978. The
Institution is part of the University of California.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Wednesday, October 25, 2023 at 7:41:58 PM UTC-4, Sylvia Else wrote:

I came across this video:

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gyToi1T0zM&lc=UgyaS1P_2_6nnLrOynZ4AaABAg>

It seems to me that the ocean surface should mirror the sea bed
slightly, rather than copying it slightly. I posted a comment on the
video about this, but there's been no response.

My reasoning is that if there's a valley on the sea bed, then it can be thought of as having replaced dense rock by less dense water, which
should reduce the gravitational field above it, and result in a slight
peak in the ocean surface. But perhaps I'm missing something.

Thoughts?

Sylvia.

I looked at the video and I am also surprised. The ocean surface rises up higher, towards
an orbiting satellite instrument when an undersea mountain is there. Apparently, the
shallow sea over the submerged mountain gets is attracted to the massive rocks.
The sea surface rises up over the thick mountain rock because gravity attracts the
mobile water closer to the mountain. That makes shallow water. The satellite measures
the risen water over the shallow ocean. The satellite measures the depressed salt water
over the deep ocean trench because the gravity is less there, with less rock.

It is counter-intuitive. Shallow areas have more gravity, so the water rises up, attracted to
the high gravity. The satellite altimeter measures that upward bulge over the shallow,
massive areas. The satellite altimeter measures that downward depression of the
water's surface over the deep, low mass areas, where there is low gravity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)