Why we are not any the wiser on Gravity

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: InTheLight

Well once light or anything else enters into the event horizon it's not coming back out again, accept via some form of Hawking radiation emitted from the poles apparently.

As to it not being our reality, well we cannot really say for sure whats going on past a certain point, down to the classical laws of mathematics and physics breaking down where singularities are concerned.

What do you mean we have a tamer environment?

You're made of stardust and the product of suns and supernova, that's not exactly tame beginnings.

What do you mean what do I mean? Isn't is simple, our tame environment is because of Jupiter, it takes all the flack.

The major gravitational pull is looked after by Jupiter...thank you so much...kisses and so much more.

We must look into the fabric of reality, what can that be?

a reply to: InTheLight

There is somewhat of conflict with Jupiter, shes a great cosmic vacuum cleaner, but could also be responsible for some nasty effects in the past, on our Earth's climate, via gravitational tugs.

Jupiter creates both good and bad conditions regarding earthly life, its powerful gravity prevents the space rocks orbiting near it from coalescing into a planet, and that’s why our solar system today has an asteroid belt, consisting of hundreds of thousands of small flying chunks of debris that may be spurred in our direction at some point down to other celestial mechanics at play.

And when i say "small flying chunks of debris" some of them are not that small.

Reality as far as we know consists of the space-time in which we exist, but in answer to your question, Quantums your best bet.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: InTheLight

There is somewhat of conflict with Jupiter, shes a great cosmic vacuum cleaner, but could also be responsible for some nasty effects in the past, on our Earth's climate, via gravitational tugs.

Jupiter creates both good and bad conditions regarding earthly life, its powerful gravity prevents the space rocks orbiting near it from coalescing into a planet, and that’s why our solar system today has an asteroid belt, consisting of hundreds of thousands of small flying chunks of debris that may be spurred in our direction at some point down to other celestial mechanics at play.

And when i say "small flying chunks of debris" some of them are not that small.

Reality as far as we know consists of the space-time in which we exist, but in answer to your question, Quantums your best bet.

As for Jupiter's force, she rules here...and that is it.

When has a large chunk got to us, except in the far distant past? Any recent history? ..... Nope.

Has the asteroid belt settled down? Anyone looking into this?

Anyway, we are now talking about reality and that ain't easy.

SImply put, our theories are incomplete at minimum, and fairly likely to be completely wrong.

It used to be widely believed that Earth was the center of the solar system. Complex models of how the Sun and planets circled the Earth were created and used to predict the future planet alignments with great accuracy. The fundamental idea that the Earth was the center was wrong, but all the mathematic models were still incredibally accurate.

It is entirely possible that we are wrong about e=mc^2. It might be able to describe the universe close enough to fool us into believing it's correct, but ultimately may be wrong.

One thing I cant quite accept is that it takes 8 minutes for light from the sun to reach the earth, and that is as fast as anything can go. Theres no way anything can make the trip in say 5 minutes, according to e=mc^2. If you do, you can travel through time and make the trip instantaneously. Nothing really possible between 8 minutes, and instantaneous.

My personal theory is SoL is exceeded by energy that we can't yet observe. It is extremely tiny in size, and is able to aviod collisions with atoms' mass because of the same pressures that cause bugs and snowflakes to float up and over a car windshield. This is also what creates 'gravity'. The best analogy I can think of is the way air particles work over an airplane wing, except it is creating lower pressure 360 degrees around the atom. The greater the mass, the greater the negative pressure, the greater the attraction (gravity).

a reply to: SouthernForkway26

It is quite obvious, isn't it?

a reply to: InTheLight

Nope, our star rules I'm afraid, Jupiter might come a close second.

What do you think happened to the dinosaurs?

Plenty of evidence to suggest our Earth has been bombarded in the past via asteroid/comet strikes some of which may indeed have been knocked in our direction down to Jupiter.

The asteroid belt cannot settle down, because of the very existence of the planet in question, and it exists because of such.

Like everything else Jupiter has good and bad points where we are concerned.

Yes, reality does seem to be rather a complex affair, and then some, live is not easy, or so it seems sometimes. LoL

That when our world was young, don't you think chaos has settled?

a reply to: InTheLight

All energy disperses, and systems dissolve into chaos, that's just entropy.

The universe is a chaotic system that we are part of.

Settled no, simply conducive for the time being to our existence.

Our world moves in epochs, chaotic or otherwise, change is inevitable.

a reply to: andy06shake

Dinosaurs, now there is a topic that should be included with the discussion of gravity.

Is what they say true? Would today's 'gravity' only support dinosaurs at 1/2 to 1/3 of the size they were?

There are four problem areas illustrating why the largest dinosaurs and pterosaurs present a paradox to science: -Inadequate bone strength to support the largest dinosaurs
-Inadequate muscle strength to lift and move the largest dinosaurs
-Unacceptable high blood pressure and stress on the heart of the tallest dinosaurs
-Aerodynamics principles showing that the pterosaurs should not have flown

The most obvious observation about dinosaurs is that these were incredibly large animals. Kids want to know how the dinosaurs grew so large. Yet oddly enough, many paleontologists would rather avoid this subject. While paleontologists benefit from the publics’ fascination with the immense size of these large dinosaurs, these same paleontologists find it extremely problematic to give a scientifically feasible explanation of how the larger dinosaurs could have supported their own weight.

The Problem with Big Dinosaurs

Was gravity a lot less in the past which would allow these large structures? How is that possible with our current understanding?

a reply to: ClovenSky

I think its more the oxygen content and atmospheric conditions that allowed large dinosaurs to thrive and exist rather than a significant change in our planet's gravity.

If gravity was significantly less during the Mesozoic Era don't you think the geology of our planet would refect such?

a reply to: andy06shake

With our current models and theories, earths gravity is tied directly to its size. They say the large brontosaurus (estimated at 23-99 tons) wouldn't have been able to lift their head off of the ground with the gravity of today. I wonder what type of atmospheric conditions would be necessary to make that happen?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: InTheLight

All energy disperses, and systems dissolve into chaos, that's just entropy.

The universe is a chaotic system that we are part of.

Settled no, simply conducive for the time being to our existence.

Our world moves in epochs, chaotic or otherwise, change is inevitable.

Why hasn't chaos settled? Is it the universe expansion theory? What role does gravity play in that?

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: andy06shake

With our current models and theories, earths gravity is tied directly to its size. They say the large brontosaurus (estimated at 23-99 tons) wouldn't have been able to lift their head off of the ground with the gravity of today. I wonder what type of atmospheric conditions would be necessary to make that happen?

Gravity is tied to mass, size is irrelevant.

I read your link but I’m not buying the authors argument.

Carry on

originally posted by: Drunkenparrot

originally posted by: ClovenSky
a reply to: andy06shake

With our current models and theories, earths gravity is tied directly to its size. They say the large brontosaurus (estimated at 23-99 tons) wouldn't have been able to lift their head off of the ground with the gravity of today. I wonder what type of atmospheric conditions would be necessary to make that happen?

Gravity is tied to mass, size is irrelevant.

I read your link but I’m not buying the authors argument.

Carry on

Is size really irrelevant?

a reply to: InTheLight

Chaos will settle eventually when the stars burn out and the heat death of the universe takes place.

By then the universe will have evolved to a state of no thermodynamic free energy, and therefore be unable to sustain processes that increase entropy.

What role does gravity play? She causes the motions of planets, stars, and galaxies. Gravity is why the Moon orbits around the Earth, and the Earth orbits around the Sun, and the solar system orbits around the galaxy.

It's all because of gravity.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Certainly interesting.

Again, i imagine their great size was linked to the atmospheric conditions and also food supply(vegetation) which allowed there kind to thrive.

They must have been able to reach the leaves atop the trees given there shape and size.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: InTheLight

Chaos will settle eventually when the stars burn out and the heat death of the universe takes place.

By then the universe will have evolved to a state of no thermodynamic free energy, and therefore be unable to sustain processes that increase entropy.

What role does gravity play? She causes the motions of planets, stars, and galaxies. Gravity is why the Moon orbits around the Earth, and the Earth orbits around the Sun, and the solar system orbits around the galaxy.

It's all because of gravity.

But new stars are being born as we speak. We know nothing.

a reply to: Drunkenparrot

Do we really understand what mass is? Doesn't science often interchange mass and matter in error?

Oh, thats right. We now have dark matter and dark energy to make up for all of our theoretical problems in describing mass and our problems with gravity.

What is Dark Matter? Even the Best Theories Are Crumbling

Dark matter research is unsettling. Scientists were unnerved when they first noticed that galaxies don’t rotate by the same physics as a spinning plate. The stars at a galaxy’s edge rotate faster than expected. And their motion can only be explained by a lot of invisible matter that we can’t see.

So our theories of cosmology are already starting to show signs of wear and tear. How long have they survived now? 50 years? 100 years? But no problem, lets just create some invisible 'matter' that will plug the holes in our theories. Kind of like how black holes were created. To fix problems with our theories.

a reply to: ClovenSky

Applause.

a reply to: InTheLight

Aye, but they will burn out as well.

Nothing lasts forever, not even the universe.

We do indeed know nothing, and probably never will in the grand scheme of things.

The alternative though is to stagnate and descend into apathy and end up like Rome.

Then again we kind of are Rome and the dark ages were not that dark.

Nice talking with you i need to get some sleep now, kids up for school in 5 hours.

Have a good evening.