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.

 

A Scientist Takes On Gravity

page: 1
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 05:20 PM
link   
www.nytimes.com...


It’s hard to imagine a more fundamental and ubiquitous aspect of life on the Earth than gravity, from the moment you first took a step and fell on your diapered bottom to the slow terminal sagging of flesh and dreams. But what if it’s all an illusion, a sort of cosmic frill, or a side effect of something else going on at deeper levels of reality?





Hum? This is a very interesting theory. I wonder if this guy is correct about this issue. What do you guys think about this?




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Wow. Way too deep for me. Gravity is not a force or a field by itself but it is a byproduct/projection of ,ehhh, something else (if i am getting it right and i doubt it).
Could be. One thing i surely know is that we know very little and it is great that there are bright people who always try to push the envelope a bit further. Some are more correct then wrong, some are more wrong then correct but it is a loooong way to really know how universe works.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Ive never believed in Gravity as it is explained by scientists, teachers ect. simply because i have never had a satisfactory explanation between two of them. No one seems to be able to explain it fully. some say it is only about mass, which for now we dont know where mass comes from. according to the standard model it is the Higgs boson that gives mass to an object. We dont know if a higgs particle exists, so we spend billions of dollars building machines trying to find it. allegedly fermi-lab has found evidence of it recently, (i gave up on cern after they had successful full power beams and released absolutely no information for about 2 months around easter time) Maybe i should hop over there to get an update.

some believe that gravity only occurs between 2 objects with mass.

i believe gravity is a weak magnetic field on a large scale. i believe it is caused by the spinning mass of an object. I believe everything is magnetically charged even a little bit. But unlike every scientist on the planet, i am pretty sure im wrong.

i am no physicist, but newton "figured out" gravity almost 300 years ago. what other scientific facts have been corrected since then.

Gravity is the chains that bind our species to this prison planet. as long as they cant explain it, and we cant understand it, and the average curious person cant afford their own research, (ie Dr. Kaku building an atom smasher in his garage as a kid) we must hang our heads and go to work until "they" feel it is time for disclosure. I am so happy that someone smarter than i is looking into explaining gravity in a different way.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 06:18 PM
link   
I must say, that was a really interesting read. Well, I don't understand it and apparently very few but the good Dr. does.

I believe science is wrong about their traditional views of gravity.. but this is just a gut feeling based on nothing scientific.


Think of the universe as a box of scrabble letters. There is only one way to have the letters arranged to spell out the Gettysburg Address, but an astronomical number of ways to have them spell nonsense. Shake the box and it will tend toward nonsense, disorder will increase and information will be lost as the letters shuffle toward their most probable configurations. Could this be gravity?


Whatever the above means.. and remember.. this guy invented a type of Algebra that is a must for use in string theory so we know he's not a Nut Job.

I believe gravity is more related to electricity. A magnetic field is a type of electrical field since magnetic fields can produce electric charges. I believe anti-gravity occurs when you negate this electric charge from the magnetic field. This would be how people like Edward Leedskalnin at Coral Castle moved huge blocks quickly by himself with no machines.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by JohnPhoenix]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I don't know about this scientist's theories, but they seem slightly unorthodox to say the least. Mind you, what I am about to propose is equally out there, but it is what I believe.

From my point of view, what are the two major forces that affect us here on Earth?

The rotation of the Earth, and its magnetic field.

Therefore, my thoughts are moving more towards the idea that gravity is a combination of spin and magnetism.

To extend this theory, I feel it would be possible, if you rotated a magnetic field in the right direction and with the correct frequency, to counteract the effects of gravity altogether.

Run it in reverse, and you would potentially have artificial gravity to use in space.

I have no qualifications in science to back up this idea, just a conviction that it should be viewed as a possible answer to gravitational pull on an object.

If someone would like to shoot my ideas down in flames, then so be it, but at least think about the possibility first before firing all weapons!


Roy.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_Denali
Ive never believed in Gravity as it is explained by scientists, teachers ect. simply because i have never had a satisfactory explanation between two of them. No one seems to be able to explain it fully. some say it is only about mass, which for now we dont know where mass comes from. according to the standard model it is the Higgs boson that gives mass to an object. We dont know if a higgs particle exists, so we spend billions of dollars building machines trying to find it. allegedly fermi-lab has found evidence of it recently, (i gave up on cern after they had successful full power beams and released absolutely no information for about 2 months around easter time) Maybe i should hop over there to get an update.

some believe that gravity only occurs between 2 objects with mass.

i believe gravity is a weak magnetic field on a large scale. i believe it is caused by the spinning mass of an object. I believe everything is magnetically charged even a little bit. But unlike every scientist on the planet, i am pretty sure im wrong.

i am no physicist, but newton "figured out" gravity almost 300 years ago. what other scientific facts have been corrected since then.

Gravity is the chains that bind our species to this prison planet. as long as they cant explain it, and we cant understand it, and the average curious person cant afford their own research, (ie Dr. Kaku building an atom smasher in his garage as a kid) we must hang our heads and go to work until "they" feel it is time for disclosure. I am so happy that someone smarter than i is looking into explaining gravity in a different way.


I totally agree with you, I believe that govt. know more about gravity than what they are letting on. And how they hide it is right in plain site by using flashy terms to explain things that goes against established theory like precession for how a think spinning can go against gravity like a gyroscope etc.. Have any of you held a spinning disk drive (Had to replace a bad one, got the data off though), while it's spinning move it about. Don't you notice the weird feeling of it having mass and not having mass, that has alot ot do with angular momentum. The Nazi Bell may have been just a conspiracy, but it had something in common with the supposedly new spy craft called the Aurora and also what some said about UFO's. And that was it had spinning around the object and plane a mercury substance that enabled it to lower the mass of the object inside the rotation. I believe that the govt. knows and have studied it and don't want this technology known. Because if you have it you can for one get a craft or crafts into orbit with little or no fuel and have said craft move in ways that goes against all aerodynamics. Two, you could produced sufficient power without burning fossil fuels/anerobic oil by taking advantage of the lowered mass to mass conversion in the field making a continous inductor to say the least.

Gravity will be the key to space travel and interstellar travel, mark my words.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
Bob lazar says in an interview that Gravity, Time and Space are linked. Alter one and the others will compensate. He also said that gravity has 2 parts. 1.the force that holds galaxy's together and 2. the force that holds molecules together.

But this has never been proven, I just thought it was an interesting concept.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:35 PM
link   
He is thinking outside the box. While it may be correct or not, I dont know but this is the kind of stuff I love to find in science. People challenging other point of views.

(edit for grammar)

[edit on 7/13/2010 by The Endtime Warrior]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by royspeed
To extend this theory, I feel it would be possible, if you rotated a magnetic field in the right direction and with the correct frequency, to counteract the effects of gravity altogether.


Who knows... sounds kind of like the Hutchison effect.

There are lots of threads here I'm sure related to that topic. Another interesting theory is that gravity is a pushing force as opposed to an attractive force:
astrojan.hostei.com...



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_Denali
i believe gravity is a weak magnetic field on a large scale. i believe it is caused by the spinning mass of an object. I believe everything is magnetically charged even a little bit. But unlike every scientist on the planet, i am pretty sure im wrong.


Yes you are. Your beliefs are utter crap, I'm afraid. Peace. Education.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Yes you are. Your beliefs are utter crap, I'm afraid. Peace. Education.



Then by all means, enlighten us with your point of view. Not just a snide remark. I enjoy reading the different point of views.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:57 PM
link   
Hi, science fans.

What about: Gravity is a **flow**.

Read 'The divine cosmos", David Wilcock.
(No religion here).

The "flow" is not a bad idea. B-)

Blue skies.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:00 PM
link   
You are right. how silly of me to try to explain gravity in 2 sentences. Please allow me to clarify these 2 sentences.

Electromagnetism is the force responsible for practically all the phenomena encountered in daily life (with the exception of gravity). Ordinary matter takes its form as a result of intermolecular forces between individual molecules in matter. Electromagnetism is also the force which holds electrons and protons together inside atoms, which are the building blocks of molecules. This governs the processes involved in chemistry, which arise from interactions between the electrons orbiting atoms.

so chemistry is basically linking, with electromagnetism, the electrons (orbiting protons and neutrons) in atoms together. (i think that is what they mean, this is wikipedia after all.) so i guess every single atom is at least a little bit magnetically charged.

The force of electromagnetism is manifested both in electric fields and magnetic fields; both are simply different aspects of electromagnetism, and hence are intrinsically related to each other. Thus, a changing electric field generates a magnetic field; conversely a changing magnetic field generates an electric field. This effect is called electromagnetic induction, and is the basis of operation for electrical generators, induction motors, and transformers.

Remember, we as human beings are full of electricity. its how our entire nervous system works. Ironically with electrochemical waves called action potentials. So if electricity and magnetism are intrinsically related to each other, i can start to visualize the "ant-gravity" waves Bob Lazar is always talking about. Sweet home Terra is also a kind of motor it creates a magnetic field around the planet. But enough with 5th grade science class.

in an effort to help shorten this response, give Lorentz Ether Theory a look over. and remember, parts of this theory were allowed to be incorporated into special relativity, when he incorporated non-electromagnetic forces (Gravitation) within the theory, which he called "The New Mechanics"

we are constantly surrounded by magnetism, literally swimming in it. But you can only see it with devices. Gravity is like time, and like God. its a word mankind has used to explain a concept they cant begin to understand. Time is nothing more than a meter stick.

And im not a physicist, just someone willing to read and figure things out for myself. and sometimes i need clarification. I dont care if i crack the mystery of gravity. i just dont care. i joined this board because of people like this. those who arent afraid to put their careers (or lives for that matter) on the line to help push the entire species forward, not just the rich or included. now we are out of excuses. we have the internet and with it the collective knowledge and conscience of our species. find the pieces, put them together. So kudos to you Professor Erik Verlinde, and to Romantic_Rebel for the find.

So yeah like you said Peace. Education.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:44 PM
link   
reply to post by BluePillOrRedPill
 


I have tried to get something of worth out of Buddhasystem for days...

But alas - it was to no avail!

I agree with many of the ideas in posts on this thread, some great conjecture here in one spot.



Anyone interested in investigating further, I will repeat what I just posted in another thread:

am trying to make sense of it all right now.

Resources that I am starting with so far:
Introduction to Quantum Fields in Curved
Spacetime and the Hawking Effect
by Ted Jacobson

The NYT article is about Erik Verlinde and this paper I believe:
On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton

----

A related paper(I think):
Zero Point Energy: Thermodynamic
Equilibrium and Planck Radiation Law


Entropy in the context of Zero Point energy would appear, IMO, to be the next stage of investigation regarding Verlinde's ideas.

So far I have just come across all of this... I haven't delved into any of it yet, but will be in the coming hours/days.

The NYT article is really where it starts.




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 10:53 PM
link   
My impression on all of this is that it's just another example of a phenomenon that is unique to scientists. Instead of simply redefining gravity, they assign the word "Gravity" to something that they now say "doesn't exist" and then come up with an entirely new set of phrases that are part of their new theory that will be shot down by another bunch of self-satisfied nerds in fifty or a hundred years. If you say to me that there is no such thing as gravity, my quite obvious and reasonable question is then "So, why am I not flying off into space, huh?"



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent_Denali
so chemistry is basically linking, with electromagnetism, the electrons (orbiting protons and neutrons) in atoms together.


Chemistry is a science. A science doesn't bind electrons to nuclei.


so i guess every single atom is at least a little bit magnetically charged
.

Wow. So "every atom" has some kind of "magnetic charge"? Fascinating.



Remember, we as human beings are full of electricity.


Some humans are full of it.


we are constantly surrounded by magnetism, literally swimming in it. But you can only see it with devices.


Not necessarily. Step out of a window. Observe.


Gravity is like time, and like God.


My hovercraft is full of eels.



Time is nothing more than a meter stick.


I'm not buying this record. It is scratched.


I dont care if i crack the mystery of gravity. i just dont care.


Careful cracking gravity!


now we are out of excuses


Indeed!



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   
someone posted in the other thread that was closed....

"nobody must mock my ignorance.

was the article inferring that gravity could be looked at as the trend towards order (i.e., straight hair vs. frazzled, curly hair)? but then it says "the force we call gravity is simply a byproduct of nature’s propensity to maximize disorder." why would gravity be considered a mechanism of disorderliness?"

it didnt receive an answer so im re-uping b/c i have the same question. thnx.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 05:42 AM
link   
totally and utterly BRILLIANT!!

This man is a genius!!!

This is exactly what I've been saying for years, Gravity is a by-product of space-time density felt differently depending on the total surface area of space-time.

Everything you see, touch, feel, hear is in fact an illusion. Non of it exists, it is all constructed from space-time itself.

This leads to only one conclusion.... We are truly living in some kind of simulated reality.

I suspect that the consciousness that gave rise to this simulated reality is in fact leaving clues for us to discover... For surely if this is a simulated reality and the creator did not ever want us to know of the simulation they would have made sure it was impossible for us to contemplate right??

I feel special to be aware of the fact I am not real...

Who am I??

Korg.


[edit on 14-7-2010 by Korg Trinity]



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 06:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Korg Trinity
Everything you see, touch, feel, hear is in fact an illusion. Non of it exists, it is all constructed from space-time itself.


Please explain how you "construct" stuff from space-time.


I feel special to be aware of the fact I am not real...

Who am I??


You said it yourself. You are special.



posted on Jul, 14 2010 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem
Please explain how you "construct" stuff from space-time.


O.k. I'll Bite....

Firstly you have to think very small.... very very very small in fact...10 to the minus 35 meters or if you like the Planck length.

This is the boundary where the coherence of matter breaks down, this is the smallest level possible.

At this level the universe is not smooth and predictable, it is where chaos reigns and quantum foam exists..

Quantum Foam is derived from the Heisenberg uncertainty principle which states that until a particle or quanta is measured it has the potential to be in anyplace at any time. That is to say that all particles have the potential to exist as we observe them but until that point they are random.

At the Planck length Space-Time is a sea of boiling froth... A bit hard to visualise so here are a couple of well known images to highlight my point.




Now...

As you should be very well aware... from chaos comes order. This is a natural law that is observed within nature and is what gives rise to ever increasing complexity within our observable universe...

So we have a quantum chaos at the Planck level of Space-Time that as you can image gives rise to order... the order appears as loops of space-time.

Such as...



Now....

A recent discovery, a theory known as Loop Quantum Gravity or LQG for short (a derivative of String theory) has found that there are some configurations of loops at the Planck length or braids as they are called that concur to the properties we observe in particles...

In other words the particles we observe are not matter within a Space-Time substrate but are in fact made of space-time itself...

Like this...




And since all you can see, smell, taste, feel and hear are made up of particles, this leads me to the conclusion that everything is made at the fundamental level of space-time itself.

So in other words if you could somehow flatten out the Planck level across the universe and unravel all the braids you would have an absolute zero figure.

A Zero figure means that we do not actually in the classical sense exist. We are simply projections of pure potentiality.

Do you see??


You said it yourself. You are special.


I maybe more special than you realise...

Korg.

[edit on 14-7-2010 by Korg Trinity]



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join