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.

 

Where does Gravity come from?

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2004 @ 03:48 PM
link   
I was just reading a little on Mark McCuthcheon's new book, "The Final Theory" which was on a banner on the ATS website:

www.thefinaltheory.com...

I read the free first chapter, and he does point out that no real evidence of the origin/funcion of gravity, and that we only have models to describe the force, but no way to actually tell where the force comes from and why its there....

Take a look, could be something very new




posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 09:32 AM
link   
I had a discussion about this subject some days ago, and someone sad that ''in the end'' there will be no gravity at all because there is an other force in the universe that makes everything equel or flat, will this means at ''in the end'' there will be nothing anywhere or everything will be nowhere?? I never heart of such a thing like this, yes I knew the ''known'' universe was expending but I did not thing this was something that equalizing everything? He told me that this idea was the end of the atom theory? is this true or will this mean that the atom theory is (a bit) wrong?



posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 10:52 AM
link   
No such thing as gravity or energy or anything actually, the whole world and universe is a trick,
i cant prove it though, but then again neither can anyone else , oh and no-one can disprove it either



posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 11:59 AM
link   
Gravity is hell till you get up! I was just wondering(and that is dangerous for me) but does anyone know if anti-matter produces or repels matter or anti-matter? I have looked for some info. on this and I can't seem to find any. I also put in a call to Dr.Stephen Hawking and he was on vaction in the Cosmos area and won't be in till Monday!!



posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 12:16 PM
link   
A generally accepted description of GOD is: Omni present, omnipotent and 'always was and always will be'.

Gravity is all these things.

Gravity is simply a (the?) provable GOD.

Roma locuta est, causa finita est.
(Rome has spoken, the case is ended).



posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Senator
A generally accepted description of GOD is: Omni present, omnipotent and 'always was and always will be'.

Gravity is all these things.

Gravity is simply a (the?) provable GOD.

Roma locuta est, causa finita est.
(Rome has spoken, the case is ended).


Whahahaha A god you claim? It really seems you still live in the time of the romans right? (I like the god bacchus or something like it). But you say that that gravity is a god, explain it.......plz



posted on Jan, 1 2005 @ 04:12 PM
link   
If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

Gravity is all-powerful i.e. no one or no thing can resist it.

Gravity is everywhere in the universe.

Like any good God, it doesn't allow anyone to violate it's 'commandments'.

If it looks like a God and acts like a God, it's probably a God.




posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Right, I've seen some bad science in this thread and I will try to clear things the best I can. I'm no expert about string theory or other quantum gravity theories. I do know a bit about general relativity, though. Let's get started.


Originally posted by UofCinLA
The quantum guys are noodling on this one as everything is boiling down to pint size sub atomic particles (and or strings) being at the core of everything but we are not there yet.

Gravity Probe B should add some nifty data to the cooker so we are starting to get a handle on it....


UofCinLA is right. There is no final quantum gravity theory yet. We are quite certain that general relativity approximates the quantum gravity at macroscopic goals. However, at microscopic scales, general relativity doesn't work that well any more. A quantum gravity theory must gives the same predictions for gravity on macroscopic scales as general relativity, but it must also work on microscopic scales. The theory with the most potential is probably string theory, but more about that can be found in this paper: "How far are we from a quantum theory of gravity?".

The gravity-b probe will test two predictions from general relativity. The expectation is that the probe will confirm those predictions, since all other experiments have done that so far.


Originally posted by LadyV
I thought gravity had something to do with the magnetic pulls of the earth...like two magnets attract and detract.....


Although electromagnetism does interact with gravity (it is contained in the stress-energy tensor of general relativity), gravity doesn't have a magnetic source, according to all experiments to date. Planets without a magnetic field also have gravity.


Originally posted by CAPT PROTON
Where you have to think of a huge wash of electrons desperately trying to reduce their orbits over their super heated parent atoms. Heat something it expands, cool something it contracts.


The expansion of most materials when heated is caused by the increased motion of molecules. Heat doesn't really exist at the scale of a single electron, because it is the combination of the movement of many atoms, which are combined in many molecules. Perhaps you mean excited instead of heated. An excited electron gets more energy and goes into a higher orbit or leaves the atom.


Originally posted by CAPT PROTON
Example, heat a magnet and the field disappears or did it? The field may be weaker just simply because the force was sent further out over a larger area and can no longer be detected. Cool it off, and presto, it returns. Now, really cool it down, and the force falls in on itself and will do wierd things like superconducting.


In the current theory of permanent magnetism the magnetic domains are destabilized when the magnet is heated and the spin of the atoms are no longer all in the same direction. The magnet loses its magnetic field.

Superconduction is the disappearance of electrical resistance in some supercooled materials. I don't understand why the collapse of a field (whatever is meant by that) causes superconduction.


Originally posted by CAPT PROTON
With a 3 inch hole in its center. Not sure what their experiment was supposed to be, but one of the students put an object in that hole while the magnet was on and it went into a free fall. The object floated in the center. They put a spider and frog in there, and both became weightless while in the center of this giant magnet. Neither was harmed. I guess they blew off their main experiment to explain this new effect. Nothing was super cooled, so it wasn't like those levitation, anti-gravity experiments you see.


I think you probably saw the University of Nijmegen's diamagnetic levitation experiments. All water is somewhat diamagnetic and exposing an object with water in it, like a frog, to a large magnetic field will cause the object to be repelled. Gravity isn't shielded, but there is another force working against gravity.


Originally posted by CAPT PROTON
I don't buy the time/space warping idea proposed by most scientist. Its probably more mundane than that, which most things in nature tend to be. The spacecraft in the frame dragging experiment are being dragged along in the wash of particles zooming in and out of the core creating both the magnetic field and gravity effect. Like a leaf in a gentle stream, the satellites are being dragged along by a sheer mass of particles. Its not much, but apparently measurable. The very air is made up of large atoms dense enough to allow airflight.


The theory of general relativity, with its spacetime bending fun, is actually a very simple theory. No fields or forces have to invented, all you have to do is make mass and energy bend spacetime. This is mathematically very elegant and it allows you to make certain predictions, like the bending of light (something not predicted by Newtonian gravity). So far, the theory of general relativity has been supported by experiments. More information about the evidence in support of general relativity can be found in this article: "Observational and Experimental Evidence Bearing on General Relativity".


Originally posted by et is dead
Gravity is only caused by moving objects.

To prove my point, put water in a bucket and swing it around. The water will not fall out because of "containment/pressure", thats gravity!


There is also gravitational interaction between objects that are not moving relatively, for example between the earth and yourself. The fact that the water doesn't fall out the bucket is that there now is a new force, the centripetal force, caused by the momentum of the water (it takes energy to change the motion of the water) that cancels gravity. Gravity itself is still there, but there is a larger force working against it.


Originally posted by sardion2000
On the Macro scale Gravity appears to come from mass and momentum I believe.


Sardion is right, gravity is caused by mass and energy (momentum is a kind of energy). In Newtonian gravity, only mass contributes, but in general relativity the stress-energy tensor also contains the energy.



Originally posted by sardion2000
I don't know much about quantum mechanics, but from my observations, mass can only be measured because of gravity - a combined effort of a bunch of atoms. It is a relative measurement between zero mass and something more, because all weight is based on a local gravity pull.


First we must make the distinction between mass and weight. Weight is caused by gravity, but mass can also be detected using other methods:

  1. Using the formula for force, you can determine the mass of an object by checking how much it is accelerated by a certain force.
  2. Using the formula for kinetic energy, you can determine the mass of an object by seeing how much speed it gains when a certain amount of kinetic energy is added to it.
  3. You can use the wave/particle duality of quantum mechanics, which links momentum with wavelength, to determine the momentum and with that the mass from the wavelengtho of the particle. This is very difficult and can only be done with fundamental particles.



Originally posted by SkipShipman
Spacetime is the combination of the 3-dimensional space we live in plus time. According to Albert Einstein's theory of General Relativity spacetime can be visualized as a rubber sheet which gets deformed by any object which has mass or energy. This deformation is called curvature of spacetime. All the stars, planets, particles and things in the universe cause spacetime to curve. The amount of curvature caused by any one object is proportional to its mass and energy. Below is an example of the spacetime curvature caused by a spherical object.


Protector, Elfwood and SkipShipman all post good information about gravity. Read their posts and their links if you want to learn more about gravity.


Originally posted by FLYIN HIGH
I was just wondering(and that is dangerous for me) but does anyone know if anti-matter produces or repels matter or anti-matter?


Although there is little experimental evidence, theoretically it should fall down. This article explains the different theories and all explains the experimental evidence from supernova 1987A that antimatter falls down.



posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 04:23 PM
link   
Amantine the second quote in your reply is ben91069's quote. First is mine


[edit on 2-1-2005 by sardion2000]



posted on Jan, 2 2005 @ 05:59 PM
link   
Gravity comes from the core of a planet or star.

[edit on 2-1-2005 by Terminator363634]



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 11:30 AM
link   
If the earth (or any other planet or star) were to be made smaller but still retain all it's original mass, the gravity at it's surface would be greatly increased. As a matter of fact, if we could compact the earth down to about a radius of 5 miles, our gravity would be so intense that earth would become a 'black hole'. Of course, that would have absolutely no effect on anything else in our solar system and even our moon would just continue to rotate around the black hole just as it does now around our beautiful blue marble.



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJFiyaaBl8
Where does Gravity come from?

I was thinking about this for some days and I just cant find an aswer to it, yes I know that when there is mass there is gravity, and when there is more mass there is more gravity, but that still does not explain where it comes from? why would atoms or molucules have some power inside them that just let them all come together?


That, I cannot answer. However, I know I have heard the answer somewhere. I just can't quite remeber.


Originally posted by DJFiyaaBl8
I was thinking about light....Because I believe Einstein sad mass is a collection of enegy, and light is energy right? but light is energy that is moving in one direction, because when all the light ''particles'' move in a diffrent way it becomes heat but there was where I got stuck, and there I ask if someone knows where it comes from or maybe knows just a little more so I can try to find it out myslef


Yes, matter is trapped energy. Light doesn't always move in one direction, it moves how we make it move or how it wants to move. I don't exactly know, but i think heat is created when photons(packets of light) rub against each other.(That is just my theory, don't take my word for it.)


(I do not think that light is constructed from particles but I think it is somesort of liquid, hard to explain)


It is created from particles. Light is made up of things called photons, which are packets of light.


Oh and If someone knows how light gets it speed, I am also very interested in that aswer)


Light gets it's speed by pressure, I think(This pressure is measured in a unit called watts, I believe).

Sorry for not being sure on everything. I hope it helped



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 08:27 PM
link   
I'm not 100 percent sure about this(cause I'm still working on the math) but, I think gravity is the result of time fields of different potentials connecting to form a 4d energy current. A time field is a 'particle' of mass that is rotating at the speed of light, or rather very close to it, and is considered to be 90 degrees out of phase with matter. The same holds true for mass, as it is a time field rotating at or close to the speed of light and is considered to be 90 degrees out of phase with time. All matter has a residual time field, but it is very small(look up gravitational constant) and combines similar to the way magnetic fields will 'join'- this causes an increase in the time energy potential. For gravity to exist, there must be a potential energy difference between two time fields. One of these fields can be infinity as the time field at infinity will be zero. Earth's gravity is the result of the large time field potential of Earth compaired with the surrounding space. As the time field tries to ballance itself out(moving to infinity via 4d) matter moves inward opposite to it's flow - gravity.

I am still working on this as the math is very confusing at times not to mention the brain leveling 4d math. I hope this helps, and I'm sorry for the lack of references.



posted on Jan, 6 2005 @ 09:34 PM
link   
.
(More bad armchair theorism)

According to String theory [Elegant Universe] the graviton is a string/brane that glances mostly off the Universal [3D] 'plane' while EM radiation works directly in/on the Universe.

According to Einstein Gravity is the Warp of 3D space into a 4th dimension.
Interestingly enough removal of mass does not reach a subject object instantaneously. gravity travels at the speed of light. Therefore at least theoretically you could have gravity without mass.

*Using my Kamakazi cooking technique on physics* . . .

The graviton is a string that travels perpendicular to our 3D Universe. The warping of space allows the graviton to be caught up in our Universe for a brief period, as opposed to zero interaction with unwarped space. The steeper the warp of space the longer the graviton gets caught up in our Universe.

If this is the case it would imply that all gravity wells warp the same direction in the over-sphere of 3D space, and that gravitons either all travel into or out of the center of the 4D sphere.

If you imagine many parallel Universes stacked, either flat or concentrically in a 4D sphere that means objects from Universe to Universe tend to be in about the same place for a very large number of nearby Universes.

Interestingly enough this fits with the John Titor's description of a Universe jumping technology using gravity as a tracking method between Universes. While he called it 'time' travel when cornered he admited it was actually Universe jumping around in relative time as opposed to absolute time travel within the same Universe.
.



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 07:06 AM
link   



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by DJFiyaaBl8
 


I found this which looks like the same section of a book I have
that gravity is the result of a push from the ether.
Thus gravity is the result of ether radiation or pressure and thus is
an instant unified field theory. Perhaps not stated however is how ether
transmits light like air transmits sound and caused the terminal
velocity of light.

Aether Theory



Aether Theory

For readers who have never heard of "aether", perhaps the simplest explanation for aether physics is that of the late Dr. Hans A. Nieper (7) titled Revolution in Technology, Medicine and Society. aether could be thought of as an energy source emanating from everywhere equally at once. The universe could be considered, as often said, "a sea of energy". It forms a background of energy everywhere, and since it is everywhere all the time, it is difficult make independent measurement of it. This aether energy is in constant motion. All energy is radiant energy, according to this theory. This can easily be appreciated as to electromagnetic radiation but it is also true of that very elusive thing called gravity. Newton described the effects of gravity but he never told us exactly what it was. Dr. Niepertells us that gravity is really a push, not a pull. Gravity is acceleration and is caused by the aether field. Again, all energy is radiant energy whose fundamental basis is aether radiation.

From the aforementioned book by Dr. Nieper:

"In addition, Nieper established the axiom that all natural accelerations can be attributed to a single unified basic principle, namely, the interception (or braking) of a field energy penetrating from the outside (gravity acceleration, magnetic, electromagnetic, electrostatic and radiesthesic acceleration). "

In trying to explain aether, it might be thought of as an all pervasive liquid occupying all of space. This liquid concept is useful because a liquid can not be compressed but can only transfer the energy attempting to compress it from one location to another. This is how an automobile's brakes work. The driver pushes in the break pedal when he wants to stop. The plunger of the break pedal attempts to compress fluid in the master cylinder. The master cylinder is connected by metal tubes full of fluid to each wheel. When force is put on the master cylinder by the driver it is transmitted to each of the four wheel cylinders full of the same fluid which transmit the force, moving the break shoes or stopping the disc which stops the wheels of the car.

Likewise, aether serves to transmit energy through this "non- compressibility" quality. In a primary electric coil and secondary electric coil, for instance, induction in the secondary does not take place directly from the primary as is new held by physics, but though and between the two via the aether field. This concept, that of the stimulation of the aether field as means of energy transport, is also expressed by Davson.

Using this perspective, that all energy is radiation, the braking of aether radiation, that is the slowing down or stopping of this radiation, can cause or generate other forms of energy. This word "energy" means the entire electromagnetic spectrum. This means electric, magnetic and electrostatic fields. This means heat. This also means gravity. Again, gravity is the primary radiation of the aether field. It radiates from every point in the universe equally.

This concept seems ridiculous until it is given some thought-One might ask: How can gravity be a push when we know better? After all, things fall to earth don't they? The answer is that the effects we feel and call gravity are due to gravity shielding. aether radiation can be braked, that is slowed down and absorbed by mass. It is then re-radiated or turned into mass. It is re-emitted as slower aether radiation or even as heat. Some of it can is converted into mass inside a planet. If there is a loss of aether radiation, then there is shielding. Thus, a planet would shield from this radiation in one direction. That direction is always toward its center which is the direction of greatest mass and that is what we describe as "down". This is simply the area which contains the maximum amount of shielding. In all other directions the aether radiation continues to exert its push on us. The area of minimum shielding is directly opposite the area of maximum shielding, so things fall (or more correctly are accelerated or "pushed") to earth.

Think about this for a minute. Being in deep space is a little like being underwater. Underwater, all pressure from all points are so similar that we feel weightless. We are weightless in deep space because the aether field exerts a push on us from all directions equally. In space, the nearer one gets to a large body the stronger the push is from the opposite direction since the body shields or converts the aether radiation. The result of this thinking is a mechanism totally different from "gravity" as we know it but appearing as exactly the same observed phenomena.

The beauty of this aether theory of gravity is that gravity functions like every other form of radiation. Its underlying cause, aether radiation, can be converted to mass or, in certain circumstances, re-radiated or converted to other forms of energy. No Unified Field Theory is necessary. The aether field is the unified field. Further, there is no need to look for something separate called "anti-gravity". If gravity is a push then it is all anti-gravity. All we have to do to make a UFO is to find this particular gravity frequency and find out how to generate it.

aether physics was a lost physics. Physics was hijacked early in the 20th Century by alleged results of the Michelson-Morley experiment. The Michelson-Morley experiment assumed "aether" was matter. There is some confusion here. We know now that particles moving near the speed of light are measured as waves, that is energy, rather than as matter. Nevertheless, aether theory has been discredited among physicists who, in turn, discredit others who raise the subject. It is only through the efforts of "free energy devices" and free energy researchers that this knowledge is being returned to us. Without this aether theory, the reason these devices work cannot be explained at all. Rejection of aether theory allows these devices to be dismissed as" theoretically impossible" and so fraudulent by simple deduction. They are marginalized and dismissed as "perpetual motion devices". According to established physics, perpetual motion devices violate physical laws of conservation of energy. Without an aether theory as an explanation, they do violate laws of conservation of energy and so their detractors are able to simply dismiss them out of hand. The simple fact that some of these free energy devices actually work does not seem to bother these scientists in the least. Rather than change the theory to accommodate the observed facts, the facts are ignored and substituted by dogma. Whether we like it or not, we are living in an energy Dark Age.

Instead of aether theory, we have all been led to focus upon Einstein and his Theories of Relativity. Two or three generations of scientists have wasted themselves on "trying to prove Einstein right". This misguided thinking has resulted in stagnation. One need go no further than the many "free energy" devices which have arisen to the level of notice in spite of accepted scientific theory to see that this statement is true.

Needless to say, German scientists of the Nazi period labored under no such illusions. They never abandoned aether physics. This was the fundamental reason why field propulsion UFOs were first developed in Germany. After the Second World War two different sciences developed called "Physics". One was the relativism taught in schools. The second more esoteric type was utilized only secretly, by the secret government, for deep black projects.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by DJFiyaaBl8
 


All EM radiation or rays travel at c.

Kinetic Energy is (1/2) mass times velocity squared.
E = mc squared is a different story.

However according to Heisenberg wave energy is his constant times
the frequency of the ray.
Momentum which is mass times velocity becomes c for a massless ray.

The energy must be in the ether, thats why the free energy people want
to control it.

The ufo may be a free energy device activated by low power static
activity.


Gravity well from positive charge
Shown in this image:
www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

The Tesla devices in the UFO saucer makes charges with the single
connection coil and a second dc pulse bulb type pumps electrons
in the direction of flight.

1944 FOO fighter report in papers

Sparking away ever since, except nice and fancy if you look up
under the triangle as it flies bye overhead leaving is poisonous
trail.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Senator
If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck and it walks like a duck, it's probably a duck.

Gravity is all-powerful i.e. no one or no thing can resist it.

Gravity is everywhere in the universe.

Like any good God, it doesn't allow anyone to violate it's 'commandments'.

If it looks like a God and acts like a God, it's probably a God.



So you've made the idea of god completely meaningless by allowing any field that is nonzero everywhere to be a god?

That makes every electric field a god, and every magnet a god. Uh, by your definitions anyway. Gravity doesn't actually quite work like that.

Anyway,

Gravity is not all powerful. It's the weakest of the fundamental forces. Nothing is outside of it's reach, but all kinds of things can resist it. Gravity would have everything in the universe occupy the same space. A singularity. Obviously, gravity isn't all powerful, because as you can see, the universe is not an arbitrarilly small concentration of mass. Singularities are actually pretty rare occurrences. Most of the time, the electrostatic forces are strong enough to keep us and other things we care about, like the earth and our sun, from collapsing into a black hole.

Anything that's moving faster than escape velocity away from a source of gravity will NEVER fall back towards it, but rather continue on infinitely far away. Gravity, of course, being a field which drops off with the square of the distance is never zero anywhere, but after a while, it is negligible, and can be ignored for no consequence. Just like magnetic fields and electric fields. Every magnet, no matter how far from it you are, is affecting you. But you can pretty much ignore any magnet more than 100 feet away. (far, far less for most magnets, but some MRI machines use absurdly powerful magnets.)


Anyway, props to amantine. He's spot on. Listen to him. Best post in the thread.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Firstly, I would like to point out ( to all those who keep making this mistake) :

Gravity is NOT a force, it is a PROPERTY of matter. The force is the gravitational force.

Good question ... " Where does Gravity come from ? "

I guess one thing is clear. Matter and the gravitational force and inextricably linked. But why would mass pull towards more mass ?
By the way, what is mass ?
I believe according to Higg's field theory, mass arises as a result of a hypothetical Higg's field. I don't know much about this theory, but I think according to the theory, the Gravitational constant proposed by Newton, is not really a constant, but can vary.

A quantum mechanical way to look at the gravitational force is through exchange particles called gravitons. According to some, the force is caused by the exchange of hypothetical exchange particles called gravitons.



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:53 AM
link   
The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy

www.thefinaltheory.com...

Author: Mark McCutcheon
ISBN: 1-58112-601-8

The concept is, that the concept of gravity is based on the theory of "Expansions".

How this could be described, is the same as the centrifugal force felt when in a powerful car, such as a v12, where the power of all combined makes the energy required for smooth momentum.

Similar to a rocket and an astronaught stuck to their seats, and more specically, a 'lift', where when the lift goes upwards, you feel extra 'weight' on your feat, although when you look around, nothing has changed.

How this works on a planetary/galactic/universal level, is that ALL mass expands. Objects do not 'fall' towards the earth, both 'grow' to connect at the centre of combined 'mass' (2D co-ordinates). So you have 'earth' and then the moon, and the centre of gravity for the obects, is the distance between the far end of the moon, and far end of earth. The centre point is what is inbetween.

So now lets pretend that the moon is not orbiting, but instead its being attracted to earth directly to 'centre' between far end of moon and far end of earth. As BOTH objects expand in mass, the illusion is the appearance of the moon falling towards earth - its in relation to you, as you are on earth. If you are on the moon, you 'perceive' the earth is falling on the moon.

So the Expansion theory is simply both objects that have mass expand to meet at the constant 'centre point' of far side of moon to far side of earth'.

The constant 'new' centre point of gravity explains acceleration from 0 to current gravity velocity, to then becoming a fixed constant.

Can anyone see this? So in essence, there is no big crunch, that will never happen with this theory, the universe is at a constant state of 'expansion' except that on a quantum level, the electron/neutrons/protrons and other particles, is also growing in size. So in comparison to say 24 hours ago, you are actuall 'physically' thousands if not millions of times larger than before. You don't see it, because everything around you which is made of quantum particles has also changed.

So the reason your feet are planted into the ground, is simply because Earth is pushing you into the vastness of 'space'. You're not sinking into it, earth is actually pushing you away.

Also trying to visualise a small object 'growing' in comparison to earth. The expansion equation is not the same for all mass involved. A body at a distance, the rate of expansion is much less than that of earth. The 'perception' is simply a body accelerating to earth (new centre point of gravity).

This also explains electrical current, because 'electricity' is the simple electrons 'expanding' in size. And since an electron is next to an electron, they push at an exponential rate. And since there are 'trillions' of electrons in less than a centremetre of wiring, the current creates electrons to expand, and thus the 'movement' of current which is described as the charge.

This is the very reason for the magnetic effects on earth, and when you place a magnet under paper and see the formation of lead particles forming a nice warped shape. Its the constant expansion/contraction of electron as they pass each other on a Quantum level in 3 Dimensional space.

Orbit is explained when two objects of mass (and lets use identical mass for example), as vertically, one is higher than the other, and as they get closer, both objects increase in mass and thus illusion of 'orbit' starting. The electron transference between both objects create a constant 'orbit' around each other, and thus the reality of a Binary Star system. Trinary star system can be proven/disproven with this theory, but haven't worked on it yet as its not really that important right now.

The Final Theory: Rethinking Our Scientific Legacy

www.thefinaltheory.com...

Author: Mark McCutcheon
ISBN: 1-58112-601-8

Free Chapter 1


* Introduction showing the book's importance both to
science and to our individual understanding of the
world in which we live.
* A clear analysis of our belief in Newton's gravitational
force, showing the many flaws in this belief -- many of
which are rarely, if ever, discussed. This in-depth
analysis of Newton's ideas is only possible now from
the powerful new perspective found in the book, which
takes a giant step back from today's beliefs and
shows the true understanding of our universe.
* A deeper analysis of gravity, showing where Newton's
ideas came from, exposing their origin as little more
than educated guesswork combined with logically and
physically flawed assumptions that crumble under
serious logical and scientific scrutiny.
* A totally new concept, the Geometric Orbit Equation, is
presented and shown to be the true description of orbits
that has been overlooked for centuries, showing how
Newton disguised it in terms of his "gravitational force",
giving undue credibility to his theory of gravity.
* A big-picture overview rethinking the many observations
currently attributed to Newton's gravitational force, such
as falling objects, rainfall, beliefs in anti-gravity, shooting
cannonballs, the weight of objects in our hands, etc.
* A brief critique of Einstein's very different explanation
of gravity -- warped "space-time".
* A table of contents at the beginning, showing the many
further revelations to come in later chapters.


[edit on 23/5/2008 by Im a Marty]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join