It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ask any question you want about Physics

page: 106
74
<< 103  104  105    107  108  109 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2015 @ 01:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Phantom423

Spooky action at a distance can only exist if the universe is 'not real' as in 'a simulation by an advanced intelligence';

There is no way around this;

If the universe is fundamentally real and primal (not symbolic);

Then physical causality is king.

(I get the sense people in these fields want to make things more difficult than they need to be, because they would feel bad about themselves if what they have dedicated their lives too was so easy for the general plebeians to comprehend; I can understand why and how it would be preferable to stand on a mountain and look down on others than make what you have grasped from your trek into the heavens as simple as it might be; or maybe these physicists really have outsmarted themselves through a wormhole to new and unknown dimensions of confusion )

Does a bodies mass increase as its rotational velocity increases?

It is said as mass increases, gravity increases;

If the mass of a rotating body increases (relativistically) as its rotational velocity increases;

HOW is the force of gravity being increased?

What is happening?

Between the mass body itself, and the gravity medium, that the same object effects the same medium in a different way, when the object is rotating, how worthy of noting!


You are giving me the spiel but you are not thinking about it, all the spiels are what I am familiar with and it is they I am questioning beautifully as if I were the universe it self questioning those claiming to know and understand it and ashamed at the way their thinking is erred and lacking.

Think about what you are saying;

A sphere hard body planet without atmosphere exists away from galaxies and other masses;

Do we agree that the surface of this sphere is the physical limit of the object of the sphere?

That it is a 3d object that does not have infinite area, the surface is the end of its area?

This sphere exists in a material medium;

The way in which the sphere exists in the material medium, causes the potential for other small spheres when traveling toward the larger sphere, to travel more toward the larger sphere then they would if the material medium did not exist;

If I roll a billiard ball toward another and we can watch this event frame by frame and use lasers to determine if the trajectory of the billiard ball will contact the body of the other billiard ball, if we could pause reality and hit frame by frame play by play you would agree we would have enough data on the perfectly flat surface of the table perfectly frictionless 0 tilt, that the object put in motion will stay in motion unless acted upon by another force;

We could determine trial after trial us rolling a billiard ball at a time toward a stationary one that is say 10 feet away, and then watching and measuring and calculating and plotting the data until we got enough to know the exact direction of the balls travel in which case we can pause reality, take out a laser beam, align it with the exact linear direction of the balls travel, measure out the balls diameter to add half of it on each side of the laser beam, to determine if our rolled ball will make contact;

The only way in which after doing these measurements and determining that the ball we rolled cannot possibly hit the other, for it to hit the other;

The medium the balls are connected too would have to be altered;

Though also to side note, given this analogy, not sure if it could ever be relevant to reality (the rest could, but potentially not this point im about to make, but because I am a philosopher I consider all possibilities) the ball itself could chip or break or combust in some way to alter its what would be prior a pure linear trajectory;

But we dont think the sun is the billiard ball which is constantly breaking and chipping and combusting to alter its direction do we

So;

Sphere in a medium;

Sphere has a surface;

How is the non moving sphere consistently effecting material medium beyond its surface (




posted on May, 7 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   

edit on 7-5-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Exactly. That's why I said convert the planet and the ball into particles or a composite system. There's no way we could apply the concept to a planet and a ball. But his questions do go to gravity, regardless that he's using a planet and ball as his model. That sort of triggered an idea in my mind that maybe the gravitational interaction of two particles could be integrated into a state-space of the entanglement model. You can know everything about the system but nothing about its components - so maybe the components don't matter.

Thanks for the link.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 01:57 PM
link   

edit on 7-5-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 01:59 PM
link   
(continued because it cut, and fit, but apparently doesn, and it wont let me post for some reason)

Can I write this?
edit on 7-5-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi

(continued because it cut, and fit, but apparently doesn, and it wont let me post for some reason)

So;

Sphere in a medium;

Sphere has a surface;

How is the non moving sphere consistently effecting material medium beyond its surface (



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

To me they look like little water droplets that kind of froze into weird snowflakes. I would have guessed discharge from the shuttle septic tanks.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi

Simple answer mass effects space. Causing space to curve towards the mass. You want gravity to reach out and grab something. It doesn't work that way. If you distort space and matter has to travel through space to move than the concept is simple. Bottom line is your pool table isn't flat. Instead space time is warped and stretched and even condensed in the case of a black hole. Space time is malleable and for reasons we don't understand matter causes this. The ability to warp space is intrinsic to matter all matter does this.

Your wanting some substance to be pulling or pushing matter it's not there we looked.And it wouldn't even begin to explain what we see as reality. This was the struggle early on people like you were trying to figure out what pulls objects together. EINSTEIN came along and said well nothing space gets altered making things change their trajectories. We are well beyond figuring out gravitas effects were pretty good at it we can launch a craft and have it be in a spot when a planet arrives months later. What we don't know is simple how does mass effect space.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:05 PM
link   
So;

Sphere in a medium;

Sphere has a surface;

How is the non moving sphere consistently effecting material medium beyond its surface (



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:06 PM
link   
So;

Sphere in a medium;

Sphere has a surface;

How is the non moving sphere consistently effecting material medium beyond its surface (



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Every time I try to write this last component of the response on the top of this page, I am not allowed to write what goes beyond if you notice it keeps cutting me off at that point.

I tried copy paste, and then also re wrote it all from a copy pasted version on a document text editor. Of course there are not many possible theories as to why this is occurring.
edit on 7-5-2015 by ImaFungi because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:11 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

I am trying to comprehend the deepest fundamental essence of gravity (and all areas of fundamental physics is what I am interested in), my prodding efforts are what will lead the way to the knowledge of how to compatibilize gravity with the other theories and models, or change the other models to fit what must be so. The way in which you understand gravity is not good enough for me, I am focused on all the things you do not understand about gravity, continue to bark and be blind, if it is scary venturing into the deep and dark unknown, my questions and discussions with you is the most I can do as far as holding your hand.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Arbitrageur

Yeah;

But I remember once you said that, lets use the sun for example;

The suns (massive!) extent of gravity exists regardless of the fact the sun is moving (linearly through ultimate space) and rotating;

So I am using that concept of yours, to highlight our understanding of the nature of gravity, with the scenario of a massive body not moving linearly or rotating;

So if you were standing on a massive spherical body with no atmosphere, (and you were an invincible ball throwing robot), and the body was not moving through space or rotating;

And you threw the ball away from the surface, which we call 'up';

In order for the ball to come back to the surface;

There would have to be 'something!' which forces it to come back;

Now we can start talking about how that something physically exists, and how its nature changes from the square of the distance from the center of the body



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi






Spooky action at a distance can only exist if the universe is 'not real' as in 'a simulation by an advanced intelligence';


No, not true. Here's a paper that describes the entanglement of 3 particles. The setup is quite complex, but the results speak for themselves.





Exploiting entanglement for communications will bring a whole new meaning to all types of communication.

But back to your original question - I don't see any anomaly in your model that would suggest some other component of gravity that we're not seeing. The "non moving sphere" is the mass. The relationship between the mass of the sphere and the medium beyond the surface gives us a workable setup. Again, if there is something beyond the components of the gravitational constant that we're not seeing, then you need to describe what it is. You're suggesting that there's something else besides these components which would give a better understanding, or fuller understanding, of what gravity is. And you may be right. But we have no observed or measurable anomaly to work with.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi

Actually, this article is an easier read:

Quantum Entanglement Experiment Proves 'Non-Locality' For First Time, Will Permit Multi-Party Quantum Communication

March 28th, 2014 by Michael Ricciardi


planetsave.com...



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: ImaFungi

Actually, this article is an easier read:

Quantum Entanglement Experiment Proves 'Non-Locality' For First Time, Will Permit Multi-Party Quantum Communication

March 28th, 2014 by Michael Ricciardi


planetsave.com...



All quantum entanglement can mean is that a fundamental field exists that propagates its force carrier faster than the fundamental field of EM propagates it?

Or that the universe is not real.

I have read about the quantum entanglement experiments and interpretations;

So I dont have to read that;

But just in case it contains the one thing I never come across in any of the entanglement material;

Can you state to me, if not one theory, the leading candidate for the theory, as to how entanglement occurs?

The experiment is not a theory as to how it occurs, the experiment is an attempt to show that a phenomenon occurs; I am asking for the theory of the physics, physical systems, as to how the physical relationships are occurring;

Once again, if you say information is transfered instantly, you are saying the universe is gods computer.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phantom423

But back to your original question - I don't see any anomaly in your model that would suggest some other component of gravity that we're not seeing. The "non moving sphere" is the mass. The relationship between the mass of the sphere and the medium beyond the surface gives us a workable setup.


A sphere exists in a medium;

A little person exits on the sphere;

Away from the sphere, this little person can throw a ball away from itself and the ball will travel away from it;

While on the sphere, the little person throws the ball away from itself and the surface, and the ball comes back to itself and the surface;

Why can the ball travel through the gravity medium when the person is away from mass;

But when a person is near mass, the ball cannot penetrate the gravity medium?

These insights, and the logical extensions of them, hold all the keys to fully comprehending gravity, dark matter and dark energy



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ImaFungi

originally posted by: Phantom423

But back to your original question - I don't see any anomaly in your model that would suggest some other component of gravity that we're not seeing. The "non moving sphere" is the mass. The relationship between the mass of the sphere and the medium beyond the surface gives us a workable setup.


A sphere exists in a medium;

A little person exits on the sphere;

Away from the sphere, this little person can throw a ball away from itself and the ball will travel away from it;

While on the sphere, the little person throws the ball away from itself and the surface, and the ball comes back to itself and the surface;

Why can the ball travel through the gravity medium when the person is away from mass;

But when a person is near mass, the ball cannot penetrate the gravity medium?

These insights, and the logical extensions of them, hold all the keys to fully comprehending gravity, dark matter and dark energy



It Has To Do With force. If our little guy could throw the ball hard enough he could be hit on the back of the head with the ball. Gravity at its most basic is space being curve d and not allowing things to travel in a straight line. Everything in the universe when put in motion will always travel straight here even your ball when it's falling back to earth thinks it's only travelled in one direction.

The ball doesn't turn around if you were on the ball the whole time you would think you were going forward the entire time. This is where relativity comes in. From the balls perspective the planet was travelling away from it and then suddenly started heading towards it.It is equally valid to say our planet moved towards the ball. You could even say that your ball throwing robot raced to catch the ball from the balls perspective. Got to love ball throwing robots.

When you curve space what you are really doing is creating paths that circle back into themselves. Any object following this path has no idea and is continually moving forward through space until well it hits something.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: ImaFungi
There would have to be 'something!' which forces it to come back;
If it's traveling along a geodesic, it's going in a straight line, so nothing is changing its course from the perspective of traveling along the geodesic. Re-read the source cited here, if you ever even read it:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

What we don't know, as dragonridr correctly said, is why these geodesics form in the vicinity of mass. You can ask 100 more times and we can say "we don't know" 100 more times but I don't see how that will result in any advancement of knowledge for anybody. It's an unanswered question. There could be an answer in something like string theory, but we still seem to be quite a ways from proving that.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: ImaFungi




Away from the sphere, this little person can throw a ball away from itself and the ball will travel away from it;


Doesn't it depend on how far the little person is from the sphere? If the little person was suspended in space 10 feet above the ground and launched the ball, the ball would fall to Earth. If the little person was suspended 100 miles above the Earth, then the ball would seem to be projected into space, but in fact would assume a decaying orbit around the sphere. Gravitational radiation would contribute to orbital decay. If the little person was suspended in space 1 million miles from Earth, then wherever the nearest body in space is would exert its mass to some extent on the ball - in principle anyway. If the momentum generated by launching the ball has gone to zero and the ball is very far from a massive body, then it would appear to be suspended in space.

How do you see this scenario as contributing to darkmatter and dark energy?




top topics



 
74
<< 103  104  105    107  108  109 >>

log in

join