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.

 

How gravity really works

page: 4
37
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: PhotonEffect

originally posted by: greenreflections
The video explains gravity using gravity. It is wrong.


How are black holes modelled using the alternative proposed by the OP?



Space-time is stretched to infinity at the singularity.


A black hole is not a singularity.

There can only be one Plank singularity in the entire universe.

A black hole is merely the next level massive object up from a star.

It's an obvious misnomer.




posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: TarzanBeta
How are black holes modelled using the alternative proposed by the OP?



Space-time is stretched to infinity at the singularity.
A black hole is simply a volume of space where gravitational attraction (or the warping of space-time, if you like) is so strong that photons of light can't escape it. What exists at the centre of that volume of space is another matter, but the mainstream physics indicate it to be a singularity (an infinitely small and infinitely dense point).

What actually happens below the event horizon, is anyone's guess. I've enterntained an idea that, as the star collapses beyond the event horizon, it literally rips a hole in the fabric of space-time and, perhaps, branches off into a parallel universe.
edit on 10-6-2017 by wildespace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 08:12 AM
link   
a reply to: TarzanBeta

Trying to grasp a singularity is difficult, the definition that best suites our needs for a singularity is:

In the center of a black hole is a gravitational singularity, a one-dimensional point which contains a huge mass in an infinitely small space, where density and gravity become infinite and space-time curves infinitely.

Though I like the idea of the quantum singularity, I see it as a particle of matter that is pure matter, not made up of any particulates. I suspect all protons, neutrons, electrons, muon's, mesons, quarks and the like are constructed of the same material, matter. I don't think our 3 dimensional existence is infinite, sub-atomic particles are made up of smaller particles, which are made up smaller particles and so on, it has to stop somewhere, it can't go on forever into the micro world. I suspect there has to be a main component or building block that makes up all matter. It seems the main component would have to be pure matter, a non particulate substance that goes beyond our science and understanding.
edit on 10-6-2017 by SeekAnswers because: More thoughts



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: wildespace

originally posted by: TarzanBeta
[Quote]
How are black holes modelled using the alternative proposed by the OP?




I don't know why you quoted me saying that. I didn't.
edit on 6/10/2017 by TarzanBeta because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: SeekAnswers
a reply to: TarzanBeta

Trying to grasp a singularity is difficult, the definition that best suites our needs for a singularity is:

In the center of a black hole is a gravitational singularity, a one-dimensional point which contains a huge mass in an infinitely small space, where density and gravity become infinite and space-time curves infinitely.

Though I like the idea of the quantum singularity, I see it as a particle of matter that is pure matter, not made up of any particulates. I suspect all protons, neutrons, electrons, muon's, mesons, quarks and the like are constructed of the same material, matter. I don't think our 3 dimensional existence is infinite, sub-atomic particles are made up of smaller particles, which are made up smaller particles and so on, it has to stop somewhere, it can't go on forever into the micro world. I suspect there has to be a main component or building block that makes up all matter. It seems the main component would have to be pure matter, a non particulate substance that goes beyond our science and understanding.


Yeah, there can be only one. An infinitely small space can only exist in an infinite universe. In a finite universe, only one can exist, and it must make up the entire universe plus anything outside of it.

It's bad physics.

The best explanation that suits our needs is to refer to them as dark stars; the next massive object up from a light star; whose difference is the ability for light to escape.

Anyone thinking there are multiple infinitely dense mass point singularities is only reading books instead of visualizing reality.



posted on Jun, 12 2017 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Cinnamon


Gravity is an expression of a conglomeration of matter whose net energy is less than that of equivalent matter existing in free space. Since falling toward a gravitational potential describes a loss of energy


If that was the case, objects would free fall to lets say, Moon's surface at different acceleration rate. Larger objects would free fall faster than lighter and smaller one. But that is not the case. All objects, regardless of the size, composition, mass, density fall toward Moon surface at the same rate..They will reach Moon's surface simultaneously. The proof was an experiment with hammer and feather done by Apollo 15 crew.
edit on 12-6-2017 by greenreflections because: (no reason given)



new topics

 
37
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join