My wife prefers black...or nothing.
Reverse engineer all you want...
the universe is mine, mine!
Reverse engineer all you want...
the universe is mine, mine!
What is gravity?
- Thread starter Pablo
- Start date
- Status
Your wife digs lingere-clad asian girls?!?
Gravity is what causes bellybuttons to appear north of where we are used to seeing them as we get older
[ February 03, 2004, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: shortyb ]
[ February 03, 2004, 01:05 PM: Message edited by: shortyb ]
I have my own theories on gravity and will post them later as Dinner is almost ready and it will probably take me a while to put it into words. This posting is just to keep the topic alive and near the top.
WL - Must have been a good dinner...
Or are you still typing?
Think about a 1 foot rod approaching the speed of light in a single straight direction....the atoms in the back are still in back of the atoms in the front....but are they?....is the rod stretching or compressing? The mass is approaching infinity....or or or...is it really like the atoms compress?
Is the rod wood or aluminum? Is that a cow or a water buffalo? That's not a slide projector that's a bedsheet and a flashlight.........what is the difference?...........ah ah aaaahhhhhhh....oh sorry....we now return you to standby and wait for the regularly programmed post: "What is Gravity?"
Think about a 1 foot rod approaching the speed of light in a single straight direction....the atoms in the back are still in back of the atoms in the front....but are they?....is the rod stretching or compressing? The mass is approaching infinity....or or or...is it really like the atoms compress?
Is the rod wood or aluminum? Is that a cow or a water buffalo? That's not a slide projector that's a bedsheet and a flashlight.........what is the difference?...........ah ah aaaahhhhhhh....oh sorry....we now return you to standby and wait for the regularly programmed post: "What is Gravity?"
Albert E. talked about space/time, where we have the normal 3 dimensions in space, and time being the fourth dimension.
I postulate gravity is the fifth dimension, as both time and gravity are inexorably linked to an expanding universe. No expansion - no time, and no gravity.
Of course this would be hard to prove, as our entire universe is expanding and is pervaded by gravity. Give me a couple of days to do the math.
Dave
I postulate gravity is the fifth dimension, as both time and gravity are inexorably linked to an expanding universe. No expansion - no time, and no gravity.
Of course this would be hard to prove, as our entire universe is expanding and is pervaded by gravity. Give me a couple of days to do the math.
Dave
Just building the suspense.quote:
Originally posted by Pablo:
WL - Must have been a good dinner...Or are you still typing?
ah ah aaaahhhhhhh....oh sorry....we now return you to standby and wait for the regularly programmed post: "What is Gravity?"
I actually use to do a lot of thinking about gravity while drinking beers in the bars around Princeton NJ and N. Brunswick. I use to commute weekly from here to there. So grab a beer and follow along.
I came to the conclusion that the effects of gravity were no more than the fluid pressure differences between what we call matter and all things currently observable.
Imagine if you will a giant fish tank filled with water (the ether in the vacuum of space and between particles.) Now this tank is sealed on all sides and is under pressure. To keep things simple we will introduce a foreign substance (air, oil, whatever) to represent matter. The substance will be introduced into 2 places in the tank. Now the pressure around each bubble of air is not uniform because of the disruption cause by the other bubble. Now the pressure between the bubbles being less than the pressure exerted on the other sides causes them to be pushed towards each other. This pushing is GRAVITY. The closer two objects are, the greater the effects are felt as the angle of disruption is greater. Also, the more mass an object has the more it effects the pressure between two objects. This is because more of the push is absorbed by the greater mass. Think of the push from the sides of the universe being blocked or absorbed by an object standing between you and the ends of the universe. A denser objects absorbs more of the push.
There are limits to the elasticity of the ether. This is what limits the velocity of objects traveling through it. This limit of linear travel is defined as somewhere near the speed of light in a vacuum.
Now this ether which behaves as a liquid can be manipulated in the same way. If you swirl it as though you are rapidly stirring it then a cavitation vortex is created in which no ether exist. This vortex can be used to overcome the effects of gravity and acceleration. An object traveling through this vortice experiences no acceleration forces nor is it limited to the velocity of light.
Now is there any examples which might support what I suppose?
1. A black hole is supposed to have a gravitational force so greate that nothing can escape it. Yet, spinning black holes are known to eject material out of a top and bottom as though there is no effects of gravity at these two spots.
2. Recent experiments have shown that a rapidly spinning superconductive disk negates the effects of gravity both above and below it by a small percentage.
3. In the wave-particle duality problem in quantum mechanics a photon is shown to exhibit both qualities of a particle and a wave. A single photon is fired through one of two slits in a wall and strikes a photographic plate in the room on the other side of the wall. This is done first with one of the slits covered. Repeating the experiment causes the photon to strike the same spot over and over. Now remove the cover of the other slit and again fire into the first slit. The photon now strikes a different spot on the photographic plate or is cancelled out and does not strike anywhere. It now behaves as though it were a wave going through a jetty that collides with another wave and cancelled itself out. See The Dancing Wu Li Masters pg 58-66. Supposedly this is one of the thorniest problems in quantum mechanics but I think it is as easy to solve. The photon is generated at the light source (from where? still working on this) and travels riding along a wave in the ether at the speed of light (ether waves) along a known vector. This wave passes through the two slits and it bends at the two slits instead of just the single slit. These two waves converge and the path of the photon is changed. If the photon arrives at the trough of the two waves its movement ends. Now, does it cease to exist or does it still exist waiting for someone or something to collide into it?
This would suggest the existance of a medium like the ether which explains the wavelike behaviour of the photon. It would also show that the ether (fabric of space) can be manipulated.
4. A working antigravity device.
It's getting late and I am having trouble concentrating. I think I will pick up later with number 4 and one of my experiment called "Bubbles in space" which is used to test a theory on the constancy of gravity and how to determine the shape and our relative position in the universe. I have more but I must go and get some sleep.
Until later. Ponder on dudes.
Mike
I'm just a poor hack. If I knew what I was doing, I'd be rich - this came as a paraphrase from my father ("If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?)
I'm reminded here of Karl Marx's mother's rueful comment, "I do so wish little Karl had devoted himself to making capital rather than writing about it".
As to gravity, every science (there is no universal science, every culture starts with a "new world idea" and a foundation of myths, late in the culture's development a "science" is spun off from this founding religion - hence Nietzsche's famous observation "Science was theology's handmaid for too long...") breaks down on the question of "motion".
This breakdown is the inevitable outcome of the opposition of Time and Space. In particular, for "Western" science, the question of gravity brings into consideration "force" and "motion". Force, of course, is the foundation principle for Western science. As a skeptic once noted:
"Force is the mechanical Nature-picture of western man; what Will is to his soul-picture and infinite Godhead in his world-picture".
Today, there are those who believe science is dead, indeed, with a considerate hand they killed the miserable weakling and joyfully drove a stake through its very heart as a lesson to all who would make philosophy the handmaid to science...
[ February 06, 2004, 06:48 AM: Message edited by: ex_MGB ]
I'm reminded here of Karl Marx's mother's rueful comment, "I do so wish little Karl had devoted himself to making capital rather than writing about it".
As to gravity, every science (there is no universal science, every culture starts with a "new world idea" and a foundation of myths, late in the culture's development a "science" is spun off from this founding religion - hence Nietzsche's famous observation "Science was theology's handmaid for too long...") breaks down on the question of "motion".
This breakdown is the inevitable outcome of the opposition of Time and Space. In particular, for "Western" science, the question of gravity brings into consideration "force" and "motion". Force, of course, is the foundation principle for Western science. As a skeptic once noted:
"Force is the mechanical Nature-picture of western man; what Will is to his soul-picture and infinite Godhead in his world-picture".
Today, there are those who believe science is dead, indeed, with a considerate hand they killed the miserable weakling and joyfully drove a stake through its very heart as a lesson to all who would make philosophy the handmaid to science...
[ February 06, 2004, 06:48 AM: Message edited by: ex_MGB ]
Another interesting quote on the subject of gravity and matter;
"There is a still more remarkable possibility, which is the creation of matter from a state of zero energy. This possibility arises because energy can be both positive and negative. The energy of motion or the energy of mass is always positive, but the energy of attraction, such as that due to certain types of gravitational or electromagnetic field, is negative. Circumstances can arise in which the positive energy that goes to make up the mass of newly-created particles of matter is exactly offset by the negative energy of gravity of electromagnetism. For example, in the vicinity of an atomic nucleus the electric field is intense. If a nucleus containing 200 protons could be made (possible but difficult), then the system becomes unstable against the spontaneous production of electron-positron pairs, without any energy input at all. The reason is that the negative electric energy can exactly offset the energy of their masses.
In the gravitational case the situation is still more bizarre, for the gravitational field is only a spacewarp - curved space. The energy locked up in a spacewarp can be converted into particles of matter and antimatter. This occurs, for example, near a black hole, and was probably also the most important source of particles in the big bang. Thus, matter appears spontaneously out of empty space. The question then arises, did the primeval bang possess energy, or is the entire universe a state of zero energy, with the energy of all the material offset by negative energy of gravitational attraction?
It is possible to settle the issue by a simple calculation. Astronomers can measure the masses of galaxies, their average separation, and their speeds of recession. Putting these numbers into a formula yields a quantity which some physicists have interpreted as the total energy of the universe. The answer does indeed come out to be zero wihin the observational accuracy. The reason for this distinctive result has long been a source of puzzlement to cosmologists. Some have suggested that there is a deep cosmic principle at work which requires the universe to have exactly zero energy. If that is so the cosmos can follow the path of least resistance, coming into existence without requiring any input of matter or energy at all." (Davies, 1983, 31-32)
The theory of gravity being negative energy opposed to mass being positive energy was reinforced by the discovery of "vacuum fluctuations". This is where positve and negative "particles" would appear out of an almost perfect vacuum cooled to absolute zero (a small area of zero energy and zero matter) The coolest part of this is this could be the beginning of understanding "creation", making something (the universe) from nothing.
"There is a still more remarkable possibility, which is the creation of matter from a state of zero energy. This possibility arises because energy can be both positive and negative. The energy of motion or the energy of mass is always positive, but the energy of attraction, such as that due to certain types of gravitational or electromagnetic field, is negative. Circumstances can arise in which the positive energy that goes to make up the mass of newly-created particles of matter is exactly offset by the negative energy of gravity of electromagnetism. For example, in the vicinity of an atomic nucleus the electric field is intense. If a nucleus containing 200 protons could be made (possible but difficult), then the system becomes unstable against the spontaneous production of electron-positron pairs, without any energy input at all. The reason is that the negative electric energy can exactly offset the energy of their masses.
In the gravitational case the situation is still more bizarre, for the gravitational field is only a spacewarp - curved space. The energy locked up in a spacewarp can be converted into particles of matter and antimatter. This occurs, for example, near a black hole, and was probably also the most important source of particles in the big bang. Thus, matter appears spontaneously out of empty space. The question then arises, did the primeval bang possess energy, or is the entire universe a state of zero energy, with the energy of all the material offset by negative energy of gravitational attraction?
It is possible to settle the issue by a simple calculation. Astronomers can measure the masses of galaxies, their average separation, and their speeds of recession. Putting these numbers into a formula yields a quantity which some physicists have interpreted as the total energy of the universe. The answer does indeed come out to be zero wihin the observational accuracy. The reason for this distinctive result has long been a source of puzzlement to cosmologists. Some have suggested that there is a deep cosmic principle at work which requires the universe to have exactly zero energy. If that is so the cosmos can follow the path of least resistance, coming into existence without requiring any input of matter or energy at all." (Davies, 1983, 31-32)
The theory of gravity being negative energy opposed to mass being positive energy was reinforced by the discovery of "vacuum fluctuations". This is where positve and negative "particles" would appear out of an almost perfect vacuum cooled to absolute zero (a small area of zero energy and zero matter) The coolest part of this is this could be the beginning of understanding "creation", making something (the universe) from nothing.
Well done Gary. Maybe, given enough time, we might nail this.
Can we apply for a grant?
Dave
Can we apply for a grant?
Dave
I remembered a grade school teacher once told the class that the rotation of the earth caused gravity, and if the earth were to stop rotating, we would all fly off due to the lack of gravity.
Now, I realize that I was just a dumb little kid, but I knew that she was teaching us BS. Come to think of it, another teacher told us that we evolved from Neanderthal Man. And some schools still consider evolution as a theory.
Now, I realize that I was just a dumb little kid, but I knew that she was teaching us BS. Come to think of it, another teacher told us that we evolved from Neanderthal Man. And some schools still consider evolution as a theory.
I hope this doesn't turn into a creation/evolution
discussion.
Neanderthals were a sub species of Homo Sapiens, and it is unlikely that any genes were mixed between HSN and HSS. Although have a look in some bars on Friday night, and you sometimes wonder.
Dave
discussion.
Neanderthals were a sub species of Homo Sapiens, and it is unlikely that any genes were mixed between HSN and HSS. Although have a look in some bars on Friday night, and you sometimes wonder.
Dave
I believe gravity is what keeps you in the ground after your cadaver is buried. It's a good thing too!
- Status
