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.

 

Q: Spinning reduces gravity pull between large objects?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Do you think that two large objects in space like neutron stars or black holes reduce their gravitational attraction if one or both are spinning?

Much in the manner of the curved top of an airplane wing reduces air drag.

Would the fact that a gravity wave was spinning reduce/defray its effect?

Here Earth, which is not very heavy is shown to be dragging space-time around with its spin. I might speculate that moving space might act similarly to moving air.
www.axcessnews.com...

opinions, evidence, pro or con welcome.
.




posted on Jan, 15 2005 @ 10:26 PM
link   

  1. No. Gravity has nothing to do with centrifugal force.

  2. No the curved top of an airplane wing does not "reduce drag," it reduces pressure. Totally different things.

  3. A gravity wave is an atmospheric phenomena. Muck like waves in a pond, except it is waves between different air masses.

  4. You are comparing two totally different concepts.




posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 12:42 AM
link   
.
You are correct it is pressure that is reduced on an airplane wing. But the point is pressure is reduced because the air has to travel further over the top of the wing and is unable to exert as much downward action as it speeds along.

Gravity is defined by Einstein as the warping of 3D space into the 4th dimension. If spinning objects spin space-time with them the warp of space must traverse that spinning of space [a curve]. That means the gravity wave that gets to you or some other object has had to move circuitously to get there, therefore a longer path = equals longer distance than jumping the wrinkles of space-time as the crow flies. Therefore the affect of gravity is less than its empirical distance would imply.

The faster it spins the more curved and longer the path to another object is.

Like a boat travelling over swells in the ocean, instead of a straight line path to port it travels up and down the waves making it a longer path. It zig zags its way to port instead of a straight path on a perfectly smooth lake/ocean.

If my hypothesis is correct it might imply that around spinning objects space remains flater closer to the object than a still body would. More of a sharper angle/curve than a non-spinning body would have.

With an insanely fast spinning body, space might be virtually flat right up to the object.

[Maybe the term 'wrapped up in yourself' comes into play here. (joke)]

It could allow for brilliantly articulated space-time.
You might be approaching a body, totally of your own power that 'seems' incredibly light [zero gravity effect], then KABAM! you are totally sucked into it.
.



posted on Jan, 16 2005 @ 01:46 AM
link   
Interesting thought. Personally not qualified enough to comment on your hypothesis.

Although I don't think comparing airplane drag and neutron star's gravity reduction is quite relevant.

It would be very difficult to find this kind of situation, two black holes or two neutron stars in considerable distance. Maybe this is the reason why they aren't closer together. The weakened force of gravitation perhaps enabled them to move away from each other.

Surf


E_T

posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by surfup
It would be very difficult to find this kind of situation, two black holes or two neutron stars in considerable distance. Maybe this is the reason why they aren't closer together. The weakened force of gravitation perhaps enabled them to move away from each other.

No, if two very massive and extremely dense objects orbit each others in very small orbit they shed their kinetic("orbital" energy away as gravity waves causing them to close each other and eventually collide.


[uirl]http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/blackhole_collide_020801.html[/url]
www.space.com...

www.psc.edu...



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 03:41 AM
link   
This brings up a question I have had for a long time.
Centrifugal force pushes an object away from the center right?
And gravity pulls it torwards the center.
So is centrifugal force counteracting gravity to any extent?
I mean if the earth stopped spinning would we all get heavier?
If not why not?



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 04:15 AM
link   
Centrifugal force needs a medium to transfer the angular momentum to another object, for humans that is the earth surface, between neutron stars their is just the vacume of space, however I don'tl you what effects of geodesic spacetime dragging in this case.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 04:21 AM
link   
If the earth stopped spinning NOTHING would happen(except get cold on the side not facing the sun).Gravity is based off mass NOT the spinning motion of the earth.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I understand that gravity is based on mass.
However isn't centrifugal force also pushing us outward at the same time?
I am not saying that gravity would actually increase, just that due to the fact there would no longer be a force pushing us in the opposite direction we would percieve it to be greater.
Example -
You have a five pound weight on one side of a see saw and a 2 lb weght on the other side.
If you weighed the side with the 5 pound weight it would read as 3 because the 2 lb weght on the other side is counter acting it.
However remove the 2 lb weight and it would be 5.
The weight weighs 5 no matter what but it appears to weigh 3 because of the countercting force.
Wouldn't the same thing happen if the earth stopped spinning and as a result there was no longer any centrifugal force pushing outward counterbalancing gravity?



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by slank
.
You are correct it is pressure that is reduced on an airplane wing. But the point is pressure is reduced because the air has to travel further over the top of the wing and is unable to exert as much downward action as it speeds along.


Actually, this isn't quite right. In subsonic flow, a converging flow area causes an acceleration of the flow stream (the Venturi effect). Since there can be no mass transfer across streamlines, and the streamlines of the airflow will follow the curvature of the top of the wing in the near-wing area, and as you advance upward and away from the top surface of the wing you eventually come to a streamline that is not effected by the wing, if you take the first non-effected streamline in relation to the effected streamlines you create a reduction in airflow area and hence a venturi effect. As more of the total energy represented by the atmospheric stagnation pressure of the air around the wing is converted to dynamic pressure, the less available energy in the form of static pressure. Meanwhile, the opposite of everything I just said is occurring on the bottom side of the wing.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Countermeasures
Centrifugal force needs a medium to transfer the angular momentum to another object, for humans that is the earth surface, between neutron stars their is just the vacume of space, however I don'tl you what effects of geodesic spacetime dragging in this case.


This is not correct. Centrifugal force does not require a medium. Hence the ISS does not require a rope in order to experience the centrifugal force that keeps it in its orbit and equalized against gravitational forces. Likewise, the Earth's required orbital speed is sufficient to keep it in it's location about the Sun.



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
So then Valhall in reference to my question would gravity seem to get stronger if the earth stopped spinning?
Does centrifugal force counter balance gravity to any extent?



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 05:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
So then Valhall in reference to my question would gravity seem to get stronger if the earth stopped spinning?
Does centrifugal force counter balance gravity to any extent?


You've asked the questions the correct way here - yes, it would SEEM to get stronger, but would not be stronger. The net force the body would feel toward the center of the Earth would become stronger because we would no longer be feeling the outward effect of the centrifugal force.

Luckily, we can all eat a piece of cheese cake today because the quake sped us up 3 microseconds - hence, we've got a little more gravity we can overcome.

HA!



posted on Jan, 17 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
If the earth stopped spinning NOTHING would happen(except get cold on the side not facing the sun).Gravity is based off mass NOT the spinning motion of the earth.


Sorry to be a wet blacket here but you are wrong. Gravity comes from Mass and Energy in this case the type of energy is Momentum, so in a way the spinning motion of the earth is a type of energy.

en.wikipedia.org...



new topics




 
0

log in

join