We refer to gravity as a force, yet gravity is not itself a force of any kind, but exists as a dynamic response to non-linear time field frequency acceleration, (ntffa), the underlying force remaining relative to our planet Earth.
In an equal manner we refer to centrifugal force existing as an inverse affect of gravity, but like gravity the centrifugal affect is not itself a force of any kind.
The field of our planet represents a dynamically balanced field, consequently the gravitational response corresponds to that of a dynamically balanced field structure, in that the gravitational response diminishes in both an outward direction and an inward direction.
This means that the Earth's greatest potential of gravity exists along the surface curve of the Earth, as the gravitational potential decreases symmetrically to the center of the Earth and isometrically into space. At the nonabsolute center of the Earth the relative potential of gravity has a non-absolute value of zero, which corresponds to the nonabsolute upper limit of (ntffa), described in terms of (c+).
In this respect the bulk of the Earth's mass, existing within the inner core, does not correspond to a gravitational potential, but exists as a relative affect of (ntffa) increasing proportionally to the center of field. In other words it is the dynamic energy potential of (ntffa) increasing to the center of field which determines the bulk of the Earth's mass to be located within the inner core.
The Earth exists as an oblate spheroid, in that the poles are somewhat flattened. Also, there is an equatorial bulge whereby there is a defined decrease in gravity extending from the poles to the equator, which has been commonly explained as an affect of centrifugal force, in that centrifugal force has been considered to be an inverse affect of gravity. But as neither the gravitational affect or the centrifugal affect represent a force of any kind, centrifugal force does not explain the equatorial bulge.
Both the flattening of the poles and the equatorial bulge correspond to the dynamic condition of the Earth's field structure. Therefore it is possible to understand that the decrease in gravity extending from the poles to the equator and the increase in gravity extending from the equator to the poles is due to an unequal but proportional distribution of dynamic force extending horizontally over the external surface curve of the Earth.
The differential in gravity existing between the poles and the equator affects an actual decrease in weight at the equator, which amounts to a decrease of 1 gram for every 190 grams of weight, which is not much of a difference, but a difference nonetheless.
It is this condition which represents a most difficult challenge in attempting to understand the dynamic structure of our planet, so it is critical to acknowledge that the exterior dynamics and the interior dynamics produce different affects. And in respect to the surface curve of the Earth this can appear a little confusing due to the non-absolute nature of the structural boundary separating the interior from the exterior. And whether we are on the surface of the Earth, Moon or Mars etc. We will find some small differential in gravity existing between the equator and the poles.
In order to understand this difference in gravity existing between the equator and the poles we must first understand that non-linear dynamics work in a unique manner, whereby an increase in (ntffa) affects a decrease in resistance to a further increase in (ntffa), whereby the higher rate of (ntffa) the lower the dynamic resistance to a further increase in (ntffa). And as (ntffa) increases to the center of the Earth, the factor of resistance decreases to the center of the Earth.
Therefore the greater resistance is found to exist across the surface curve of the Earth and as the equatorial radius of the Earth is slightly greater than the polar radius there is less dynamic energy at the equator affecting a horizontal belt of increased resistance. Therefore there is a higher proportional degree of resistance affecting the internal and external dynamic structure of the Earth at the equator than exists anywhere else on or within the Earth.
This increased potential of dynamic resistance causes a differential in the dynamic energy potential of (ntffa) existing between the equator and the poles, which causes the equator to bulge slightly and for the poles to be slightly flattened. Therefore the equatorial bulge and the flattening of the poles is an affect caused by the internal and external dynamics of the Earth's field structure.
In respect to the increased gravity existing at the poles, this is merely a proportional relationship corresponding to a differential in resistance existing between the equator and the poles, in respect to the external dynamics affecting the condition existing across the surface curve of the Earth.
There is a decrease in gravity extending from the poles to the equator, as the increased radius at the equator extends the external field of the Earth in an outwardly curved arc, in relation to the surface curve of the Earth extending horizontally from one pole across the equator to the other pole.
Also, located at the poles is the maximum dynamic energy affecting the external dynamics of the Earth's structure, which affectively contributes to the flattening in the area surrounding the poles.
I would suggest that the degree of flattening at the poles and the extent of the equatorial bulge should be viewed in terms of those existing conditions having resulted from external forces acting upon the dynamic structure of the Earth, in relation to the affects of two or more planetary bodies coming within close proximity of each other. Therefore these distortional affects of flattening and bulging cannot be attributed solely to the naturally occurring processes existing on or within the Earth itself, but may have resulted from the affects of a non-uniform potential involving at least one other planetary body.
It can be shown that vertical affects and horizontal affects cause much different responses, consequently it is important to make distinctions between vertical affects and horizontal affects.
Now we come to another aspect of gravity, as it has been determined that gravity is higher or stronger at the tops of mountains, in that there is a differential in gravity existing between sea level and the tops of mountains existing above sea level.
This circumstance is due to the internal dynamics of the Earth, as a mountain is a vertical extension of the Earth's internal field, whereby there exists a differential in dynamic potential extending from the base of the mountain to its top, with the lower dynamic potential of (ntffa) existing at the top of the mountain.
The underlying dynamic potential of (ntffa) decreases proportionally from the center of the Earth, whereby gravity increases in direct proportion to the dynamic decrease in (ntffa), which allows for the greatest gravitational potential to exist across the surface curve of the Earth. And as a mountain is a vertical extension of the surface curve, the internal dynamics of the Earth have their lowest dynamic potential of (ntffa) located at the tops of mountains existing above sea level, whereby there is more gravity existing at the top of these mountains.
And as (ntffa) is the underlying force determining the condition of field, in terms of both form and function, it is not too difficult to understand that the top of a mountain is the geographic location least capable of supporting physical structure, in relation to the physical structure of a mountain as a whole, which is why mountains tend to taper skyward, as do trees and other physical formations representing a vertical extension of the Earth's internal structure.
It is important to remember that external dynamics and internal dynamics function differently in relation to affecting inversely proportional responses, whereby allowing for a balanced field structure.
And as the rate of (ntffa) is continuously accelerating in four dimensional directions the gravity of our Earth is decreasing in proportion to the continuous increase in (ntffa). Therefore it can be speculatively assumed that the physical structuring of our planet is an ongoing process.
Now we come to free fall and in order to consider the process of free fall it is essential to acknowledge that free fall is associated with the external dynamics of the Earth's field, in that there is both an external and internal condition of field. And if this were not the case, there would be no distinction between an inside condition and an outside condition of field.
Equally the falling mass itself has both an internal condition and an external condition of field.
And in as much as the falling mass is affected by the underlying dynamic force of the field in which it is falling, the falling mass itself must respond in an equal manner to the existing conditions of field in which it exists.
This is why any unsupported mass existing in the external field of the Earth must fall to the Earth's surface, following a direct path toward the center of the Earth, at a rate of acceleration corresponding to the conditions of field, in that the falling mass is following the path of least resistance.
In this respect a free falling mass within the external field of our Earth is observed to be linearly accelerating at a rate of approximately 32.2 feet per second, per second, while the falling mass itself must be non-linearly decelerating in direct proportion the accelerating field in which it is falling.
And it is this proportional dynamic response which causes an equal rate of acceleration to affect two or more unequal bodies of mass in an equal manner.
The underlying dynamic force of (ntffa) is symmetrically accelerating from the nonabsolute outer boundary of Universe to the center of the Earth's core and it is the relative acceleration of (ntffa), existing in the external portion of the Earth's field which determines the rate of free fall to be accelerating at roughly 32.2 feet per second per second.
This is why there is a differential in gravity existing between the Earth and the Moon, with the Moon having the lower gravity. The underlying dynamic force of (ntffa) affecting the external field of the Moon is proportionally higher than the underlying dynamic force of (ntffa) affecting the external field of the Earth.
Therefore there is a proportional decrease in non-linear accelerative resistance corresponding to an increase in (ntffa) and an inversely proportional increase in the linear resistance of the falling mass itself, which in turn reduces the linear acceleration of the falling mass.
Consequently this effectively reduces the rate of free fall towards the lunar surface, but it equally affects a differential in weight, whereby a 100 grams situated on the surface of the Earth is reduced to roughly 17 grams on the surface of the Moon.
The rate of (ntffa) existing across the external surface curve of the Moon is considerably higher than the rate of (ntffa) existing across the external surface curve of the Earth. And as the lunar rate of (ntffa) is continuously accelerating at an ever increasing rate, the external space and motion corresponding to the Earth/Moon system continues to increase.
In relation to the Earth/Moon system the Moon is moving away from the Earth faster than the Earth is moving away from the Moon, due to an accelerating differential in (ntffa) affecting the condition of the Earth/Moon system.
Now we come to something quite amazing, in that the process of free fall and the process of a rocket soaring skyward are both determined by the same underlying dynamic force. The only difference between free fall and a rocket soaring skyward is a differential in the underlying dynamic energy potential existing between the falling mass and the field in which it is falling and a differential in the underlying dynamic energy potential of the rocket and the field in which it is soaring, as both the falling mass and the soaring rocket are responding to the dynamic field in which they exist.
This is why a hydrogen balloon rises skyward, as the inherent underlying dynamic energy potential of elementary hydrogen is sufficient to allow it to overcome the underlying dynamic force of (ntffa) associated with the field in which it exists.
The idea of hydrogen merely being lighter than air does not give us a clear picture of the potential possibilities, as (ntffa) can in fact be modulated in a controlled manner. Thus allowing for a modular field structure capable of modulating (ntffa) in a controlled manner to rise skyward and be returned safely to the ground.
So, a linearly accelerating mass must itself be non-linearly decelerating relative to the condition of field in which it exists, while a linearly decelerating mass must itself be non-linearly accelerating relative to the field in which it exists.
This situation corresponds to the dynamic potential of the mass itself, which allows for a proportional balance in dynamic potential corresponding to the process of flight. As without linear acceleration a rocket would not achieve it's goal, nor would a conventional aircraft fly.
And although this works , it is a very difficult method by which to achieve flight. A simpler method would involve a system affecting the underlying dynamic potential of the aircraft in a positive manner, which would prove less stressful for the aircraft and crew.
And despite the fact that it is impossible to force a stationary conventional aircraft situated on the ground to linearly decelerate it is not impossible to affect an aircraft in such a manner as to increase it's non-linear dynamic energy potential in terms of (ntffa).
To consider the possibility of affecting anti-gravity we only have to examine the dynamic process by which a tree lifts fluid from it's roots to the extremities of it's growth.
It is presently argued that this process involves a pulling action, drawing the fluid up the xylem, while some consider the process to involve a pushing action, while still others consider the process to result from both a pulling and a pushing action, but there is no real evidence to support any of these theories. Yet, despite the respective arguments put forward, the trees continue to lift fluid in an extremely efficient manner.
A tree is capable of lifting fluid as fast as 150 feet per hour and a mature tree can lift roughly 100 gallons of fluid per day, which is a lot of fluid and a lot of lifting. Yet, no one is quite sure how it is done, which is partly due to the fact that the process appears to represent an impossibility, but still the trees lift fluid. And the reason why the process seems impossible is due to the fact that the process appears to defy gravity.
The process by which trees lift fluid up the xylem involves neither a pulling or a pushing, but involves a dynamic function by which the tree is capable of affecting its internal dynamics.
This dynamic process allows the tree to affectively modulate the dynamic motion of the fluid, whereby the tree increases the dynamic energy potential of its internal field in which the fluid is to be lifted, allowing the fluid to rise up the xylem much like a hydrogen balloon would rise skyward in the external field.
The ring structure of the tree is the key to this process, in that the xylem are located along the circumference of each ring, whereby the xylem cells are stacked vertically, one on top of the other, allowing for both horizontal and vertical spacing of the individual xylem cells. Furthermore the individual xylem cells are capable of independent motion in the form of tilting from side to side and back and forth while maintaining a relatively stationary position within the context of the trees physical structure.
The tilting motion of the xylem cells allows for the modulation of the field in which the fluid is to be lifted, lowered or shifted horizontally along the branches, in respect to a focusing of the internal field relative to the external field.
What is so amazing about this process is that it requires a cooperative effort on the part of the xylem cells to focus the field in a manner determining the form and function involved. And without this cooperative effort affecting the focus of field, the process would not work. So there should be no question as to whether a tree is a living organism capable of this cooperative organization.
It must be kept in mind that a tree does not simply lift fluid in a continuous manner, but actually controls the flow of fluid whereby the flow can be reversed, slowed or increased as required.
To fully appreciate this dynamic process it must be remembered that a differential in gravity exists between the roots of the tree and the top of the trunk, in that the internal structure of the tree is an extension of the Earth's internal field , while the outside of the tree is an extension of the Earth's external field, which places the higher gravity at the top of the tree. Consequently it takes more dynamic modulation near the top of the tree than it does at the bottom to maintain a steady rate of flow.
In this respect the new growth is located at the ends of branches and at the top of the tree, which is proportionally tapered, whereby the newer growth is more flexible, which allows for a greater degree of modulation in relation to the vertical and horizontal limitations of field focus associated with trees.
This might sound like science fiction, but Project Unity had designed an (ntffa) modulator prior to discovering the identical process occurring in trees. In other words it was only after the fact that the amazing dynamics of trees was discovered. But it must be noted that the design of Project Unity developed for the sole purpose of modulating (ntffa) is dynamically identical to the naturally occurring modulation system associated with trees.
The shape of the xylem cell is similar to the disc shape of the nickel/cobalt magnets employed in an (ntffa) modulator, including a hole in the center. The hole in the center of each xylem cell allows for the passage of fluid from one cell to the next, while the hole in the center of the magnetic discs allows them to be mounted on a control arm by means of a mounting pin. And in either system, involving the xylem cells and or the magnetic discs, they can be tilted in a manner allowing for the focusing of field.
A tree remains stationary as it is designed to remain stationary in respect to the polarity of the field in which it is situated, as the tree is subject to the horizontal and vertical dynamics of the field in which it exists.
In the case of Project Unity, the (ntffa) modulator is designed for aerodynamic mobility, allowing for lift and thrust, consequently the modulator is inverted in relation to the structure of a tree. But regardless of the inverted design, the basic function remains the same, which is to allow for vertical and horizontal motion.
And as (ntffa) modulation is just as sophisticated as rocket science, it seems a little humorous that an alternative system has been readily available for such an extremely long time, yet completely missed, as the dynamics of a tree affects an anti-gravitational response.
Furthermore, an (ntffa) modulator does not run on jet fuel or any other linearly defined fuel supply, it simply modulates a dynamic differential between itself, which is the relative system of reference, and the field in which it exists, which in turn affects the condition of space and motion remaining relative to the system of reference. It's that simple.
To gain a perspective of an anti-gravitational response we only have to consider the gravitational differential existing between the Earth and the Moon, where a 100 gram weight on the surface of the Earth weighs only about 17 grams on the surface of the Moon, simply because the rate of (ntffa) associated with the lunar field is many times greater that of our Earth's field. So the modulation of field dynamics is hardly an impossible task.
In relation to the idea that gravity holds the planets in orbit around the Sun, we must realize that the gravity existing at the center of the solar mass has a non-absolute value of zero. As it is not a force of gravity which holds the planets in orbit around the Sun.
It is a differential in (ntffa) existing between the Sun and each of the planets which allows the planets to remain in orbit
And as the differential in (ntffa) existing between each of the planets and the Sun is continuously increasing, at a different rate for each of the planets, it can be assumed that the stability of the solar system is cyclical in relation to the various relationships involved.
In other words, the existing planetary orbits are not permanent, but are subject to adjustment, in relation to the various differentials in (ntffa) associated with the various planets, at different times, during their history. So it should not come as a surprise that the Earth should have been located closer to the Sun during historical times. Nor should it seem at all unreasonable to suggest that planets might at different times cross each others orbits or experience near collisions in space, as the underlying dynamics suggest this to have occurred in the past, whereby it will also occur in the future.
So, the present order of the solar field system represents the condition remaining relative to our planet Earth.