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.

 

What is gravity....exactly?

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Education is a very good thing. And it doesn't only create Communistic Liberals.


But back to gravity.

Gravity - Is a force generated by the size(radius) and weight(mass) of a moving(spinning) object that draws bodies together.

This is why smaller bodies are attracted to larger ones.

A stationary bicycle will fall down due to gravity but a rolling one will not.

What is happening is that The centrifugal force generated by the spinning wheels , now exceeds that of the gravitational force that is trying to pull you down to the ground.

As soon as you slow down though, the bike begins to wobble due to the effects of gravity superceding the effects of the force of the spinning wheels as they begin to slow down.

The SUN rotates and due to it's massive size in comparison to the planets in our solar system, it's gravitational pull attracts our entire solar system comprised of a number of planets that are smaller in size and mass.

The same reason why the Earth's gravitational pull keeps the Moon in orbit.

The same reason why the space shuttle must reach a speed of 17,000.+ mph to break the pull of the earth's gravity.

Getting back to the force concept, it is analogous to a radio transmitter, one with more electrical power or Force will transmit further than one with less power.

Power is a form of Force which is defined by F = ma , where m = mass and a = acceleration.

As for The example the poster who used the water on a rotating wheel flying off.

Simply put, the force created by the momentum of the spinning wheel upon the water, exceeded that of the gravity holding the water on the rim of the wheel. That is why it flys off.

An everyday life example:

I can lean my motorcycle to frightening levels of lean through a corner without falling. My momentum generated by the force of my engine is overcoming the gravitational forces that want to pull me over to the ground.
Hence why we motorcycyclists stay on the throttle through corners.
Not full throttle of course, but enough to maintain our momentum.

Since everything is comprised of atoms, this can be proven on an atomic level as well as everything in our existence, has mass and associative resulting force.

May the FORCE Be With You !!



[edit on 21-4-2010 by nh_ee]




posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Everyone has been explaining the effects of gravity, from GR to Newton to space-time curvature.

I am pretty sure OP knows about that.

But I don't think that is what the OP is asking.

He is not asking about the effects, but the cause or source.

It's like asking why is there any movement at all. Why are there pushes and pulls?

It is possible that it has a lot to do with time. Hence space-time curvatures.

Space is a 3-D snapshot in time.

But still even that doesn't answer the OP's question.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Here is an interesting thought about gravity and space: if gravity bends space, then space consists of a material that is bendable by gravity. If space was truly void, then gravity would not bend it.
In the classic rubber sheet analogy, the rubber sheet that plays the role of space is bent by gravity. If the rubber sheet did not exist, gravity would not bend the sheet.
Not only that, but the rubber sheet appears like a grid of squares, which allows the measurement of space independent of any reference frame. If the ball that bends the rubber sheet is removed, the distance on the sheet is still measurable using an arbitrary square as a coordinates origin.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 07:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Time doesn't exist my friend. Never had and never will. We've never once measured time nor can we even point at a source of time. The closest thing we can use to describe time is entropy, and that is far removed from any silly concept of 'space-time'. What the universe is composed of is a void filled with matter. What that void is and what matter is is still unknown, especially why it all exists.

Certainly is not akin to a ginormous rubber sheet.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 07:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


A billion light years seems like a quarter inch when your clock freezes.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bordon81
reply to post by sirnex
 


A billion light years seems like a quarter inch when your clock freezes.


On paper, but I prefer practical applications myself.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


Yeah I understand.

But....

What is movement? That isn't an illusion.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bordon81
Here is a good place to start.

en.wikipedia.org...

They were having problems with accuracy and stopped in 2008, but there may be some algorithm they can use to cancel out the errors and still get some meaningful data.

My personal belief is that someday they will be able to explain gravity as a geometric aspect of space time with a model simple enough for grade school kids to understand.

[edit on 20-4-2010 by Bordon81]


Haha, yeah ok that's probably the worst place to start. The mainstream has absolutely no clue what's going on.

Space/Time does not even exist, so believing that the mathematicians who deal in pure fantasy and speculation will someday come up with a simple model for children is ridiculous.

Gravity is most likely an electric dipole effect force between subatomic particles.
www.holoscience.com...



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Riposte
 


We perceive movements, correct? We perceive the motion in a passage in something called time, correct?

That isn't an illusion. Maybe time is an illusion, but motion isn't.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
We perceive movements, correct? We perceive the motion in a passage in something called time, correct?

That isn't an illusion. Maybe time is an illusion, but motion isn't.


Yes, it is our perception of motion that creates the illusion of time.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Riposte
 




Yes, it is our perception of motion that creates the illusion of time.


But we perceive motion and changes, yes? We measure the motion with time and distance.

So that gives us space-time.

However, motion is not an illusion, or you wouldn't be seeing them, correct?



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
But we perceive motion and changes, yes? We measure the motion with time and distance.

So that gives us space-time.

However, motion is not an illusion, or you wouldn't be seeing them, correct?


Motion is also an illusion. Measurements are not giving you anything. They are just mental constructs that the mind creates to sustain the illusion.

All of this can be seen by oneself. This isn't just speculation. It does require a very still mind though, that can probably only be achieved through dedicated meditation.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Riposte
 


From the electric gravity article.



There is a universal clock so time travel and variable aging is impossible—something that commonsense has always told us.


This hasn't been true since the age of satellites. We have to compensate the clocks for relativity between the satellites and the ground stations in order to communicate..



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 09:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bordon81
This hasn't been true since the age of satellites. We have to compensate the clocks for relativity between the satellites and the ground stations in order to communicate..


Don't be so quick to the throw the baby out with the bath water. Time is simply the illusory perception of motion. There is no time, only this eternal moment.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
reply to post by sirnex
 


Yeah I understand.

But....

What is movement? That isn't an illusion.


There is a lot we don't know, but pretending a cycle of something else is a unit of another concept is plainly ridiculous, is it not?

While it's an excellent question, I honestly don't have the answer to it nor have I ever seen the answer to it.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bordon81
reply to post by Riposte
 


From the electric gravity article.



There is a universal clock so time travel and variable aging is impossible—something that commonsense has always told us.


This hasn't been true since the age of satellites. We have to compensate the clocks for relativity between the satellites and the ground stations in order to communicate..


No, they compensate for the slight variable gravitational tug that effects their orbits. Time has nothing to do with really. When a satellite in space is constantly flying between strong gravitationally dense Earth to weak gravitationally dense Earth, it's orbit get's perturbed so rather than flying between timezones at the same rate, that rate is slowed down and sped up constantly, thus the need to compensate. Time dilation doesn't exist at all.



posted on Apr, 21 2010 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Deaf Alien
 


Time doesn't exist my friend. Never had and never will. We've never once measured time nor can we even point at a source of time. The closest thing we can use to describe time is entropy, and that is far removed from any silly concept of 'space-time'. What the universe is composed of is a void filled with matter. What that void is and what matter is is still unknown, especially why it all exists.

Certainly is not akin to a ginormous rubber sheet.


What am I measuring when I calculate the difference between now and later?



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


You are measuring a series of change of states, quantified.

To say there is no such thing as time, or that it is illusory is silly. No one knows for sure, and there are many assumptions.

But, perceptively, time exists without a doubt. What we have to ask ourselves is what time is, and how would it be measure universally, given the principles of time dilation. Imagine how fast time would pass for you in the farthest depths of intergalactic space. The absence of matter would certainly have an effect on how time is percieved relative to the outside universe. It would be funny to think that you could literally be sucked into a "time black hole" where you never emerge before the universe ends because of the limitless passage of time in the absence of matter.

When considered like this, is time real? Could it be a real phenomenon, if the principles of time dilation muck up the conceptualization of it? I guess that is the question, huh?



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by K J Gunderson
 


You are measuring a series of change of states, quantified.


That is kind of what I thought. As far as I knew, that quantity was referred to as time because saying I will meet in you in 3 hours series of change of states seems kind of silly.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 12:43 AM
link   
My thoughts about gravity go along this line of thinking. Early on in the expansion of the universe there was nothing but a uniform energy and no matter. Imperfections developed. Energy transformed into matter by looping around which warped the uniform space time onto itself in the loop. With greater concentrations of matter space time has a greater tendency to loop onto itself. We observe gravity as an effect of this warped space.

Further I see the possibility of warped space in other dimensions or some may call them membranes interacting with warped space in our dimension. That would mean we might be able to observe gravity effects of unseen material. I'm a bit fuzzy myself on this thought.

I was wondering if matter is just energy and space time looped onto itself, is anti-matter simply the same type of energy looped around itself but rotating in the opposite direction from normal matter? In a way I can imagine that two looping blobs of energy (normal matter) could merge into something bigger but a piece of matter and anti-matter would annihilate each other due to the opposite rotation. I don't know if any of this is true or not.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join