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.

 

3D Gravity "Thought experiment" (bubble gravity)

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2011 @ 07:27 PM
link   
first thing to note is this a thought experiment to try to define gravity in a three dimentional context
using the 2D teaching imagary as a base.
all are welcome and all ideas are appreciated.

The idea that space is “dented” by mass in space has been used for generations to teach the observed fact that mass attracts mass. The image used is usually a flexible sheet stretched over a frame with a heavy object placed on the sheet. This “mass” is actually weight affected by the gravity we are trying to explain. So when i looked at the imagery used i though this is a single “plane” demonstration to show the mathematical curvature that represents gravity, like a 2D way to visualize gravity using gravity as the source to give the weight “mass” on a plane of up down while in gravity. So as visualization goes the concept is really easy to understand.
But what would the same experiment look like if there was no gravity in the location that the experiment was performed in?
Would the mass “dent” the sheet without the help of gravity? (i know its a visualization)
If we were to return to gravity and try and represent the 2D experiment in three dimensions of space, we would be required to have an infinite number of “planes” to allow gravity to work from any direction.
So .............what would a 3D experiment look like that could represent the effects encountered but in a 3D space?
A Bubble? skip to 1.06mins to see the bubble experiment.




If we had a bubble around our object of mass and the bubble wall had a thickness, we could then use the bubble to show that another object or mass bubble would be affected by the outer bubble surface and cause an orbit around the first bubble.
This is because the two bubble surfaces would contact and a “rolling” of bubble edges would occur allowing for a “relationship” between the two masses.
“If both bubbles are spinning on an axis” one large bubble and one small bubble surfaces were to come into contact the smaller bubble would be forced to revolve around the larger bubble. The surface tension of the two bubbles “attracts” them together and as the larger bubble rotates the smaller bubble must also rotate against the larger bubble. In this case the angular momentium is converted from the larger bubble into the smaller bubble. Because the diameter of the bubbles is different, the smaller bubble is required to “roam” around the larger bubble (orbit) because of the transferred angular momentum. The two bubbles act like gears and a ratio of bubble size vs angular momentum decides the orbit speed.
If the angular momentum is greater than the “surface tension attraction” between the two bubbles the smaller mass is “thrown free” from the bubble surface.
If the “surface tension attraction” is larger than the angular momentum the two bubble surfaces “overlap”and take up the same area in the bubble surface, when the outer layer rotates through the larger bubble, the larger surface area of the outer surface of the bubble travels a longer distance than the inner surface of the bubble surface and angular momentum forces the bubble to redirect the angular momentum from surface contact to the inner bubble edge. This causes the orbit to decline or for the smaller object to be attracted through the larger bubble.
So if the ratios are correct a bubble (surface tension/angular momentum) surface to bubble surface interaction allows for an steady orbit.
If the angular momentum is larger, the smaller object is “thrown” from the bubble surface.
If the surface tension is larger than the angular momentum, the larger bubble will redirect the bubbles to overlap and “draw” together.
Now imagine there are infinite bubbles inside bubbles, starting at the mass and going outwards, each bubble is less dense than the last and is imparting less and less angular momentum and less and less adhesion to the surface tension of the bubble.
So instead of a 2D flat “plane” we can now visualize a 3D infinite plane visualization of gravity.

copywrite Above Top Secret please link to this site all material used externally
lol

xploder

edit on 9-5-2011 by XPLodER because: spelling

edit on 9-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add smart arse comments lol




posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
First a comment about the video. At the end there, it almost seems like science is showing us the fate of the one world government. Finally it comes down to two large bubbles absorbing all the smaller ones, then a final giant bubble, that pops under it's own pressure, leaving a homogenous field of small bubbles.

So that means the dream of world domination will succeed, but be very short lived.


Originally posted by XPLodER
“If both bubbles are spinning on an axis” one large bubble and one small bubble surfaces were to come into contact [color=gold]the smaller bubble would be forced to revolve around the larger bubble. The surface tension of the two bubbles “attracts” them together and as the larger bubble rotates the smaller bubble must also rotate against the larger bubble. In this case the angular momentum is converted from the larger bubble into the smaller bubble.


This suggests that gravity is like a spherical surface tension. Let's compare this to the MSM vs. conspiracy theorists. For years conspiracy theories were revolving around the news and TV stories. But lately it seems the news is revolving around conspiracy theorists. Does this mean that conspiracy theorists are the larger bubble now, and the MSM is being forced to revolve around us? They certainly do seem to be getting their angular momentum from us these days.


David Grouchy


edit on 9-5-2011 by davidgrouchy because: spelling



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


I'm still enjoying all your bubble theories and especially this one. It at least sort of begins to explain what I never understood about orbits - how the pull of gravity and centrifugal force can possibly work together. Never made sense to me.

But if you're right then there's a kind of invisible friction taking place between large masses



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


thank you for your observations
it really does seem like the msm is watching us lol
xploder



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
you wont be able to do what you're trying to do because gravity involves a 4D space, not a 3D space.
time is the fourth dimension.
but what did Einstein know? There's a great quote about how very few people can understand what Einstein meant. I need to find it..


edit on 9-5-2011 by Ghost375 because: einstein source



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawking
reply to post by XPLodER
 


I'm still enjoying all your bubble theories and especially this one. It at least sort of begins to explain what I never understood about orbits - how the pull of gravity and centrifugal force can possibly work together. Never made sense to me.

But if you're right then there's a kind of invisible friction taking place between large masses


yes i like the idea that some kind of adheasion or friction is present, the findings recently about grav probe B shows there is a the very least a space warping angular momentum imparting force
this is like a series of bubbles from the center of the earth going outwards, each one has a less and less "surface tension" and less and less angular momentum
this is like an anology of the "twisted" space time that probe B found, with distence less angular momentum and less adheasion occours, an inverse square law is shown that circumferential distence is relevent to energy imparted to the secondary mass at a ratio of mass/distence.

xploder



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghost375
you wont be able to do what you're trying to do because gravity involves a 4D space, not a 3D space.
time is the fourth dimension.



i have come to think that space is not 3D with the fourth dimention time
i have come to the conclusion that time is not a dimention
IMHO time is a mathmatical representation of numerical change in a system in a homogeneous manner against the "clock speed" we record the change in.
it is not an extra dimention
but that is for another thread

xploder
i have been known to be wrong so feel free to explain why time is a dimention and not a mathmatical construct.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Hawking
 

its because centrifugal force isn't a real force.



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER

Originally posted by Ghost375
you wont be able to do what you're trying to do because gravity involves a 4D space, not a 3D space.
time is the fourth dimension.




i have been known to be wrong so feel free to explain why time is a dimention and not a mathmatical construct.


Lol, Einstein was barely able to explain it. I have a worse chance than an ice cube in hell.
But there have been quite a few experiments that have shown it to be correct.
edit on 9-5-2011 by Ghost375 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 



Lol, Einstein was barely able to explain it. I have a worse chance than an ice cube in hell.
But there have been quite a few experiments that have shown it to be correct.


well i am wrong then but the centrifugal force thing is interesting
if there is a mecanism of adhesion to a surface or a friction of sorts it would explain the gravity/cetrifugal force interaction.

mmmmmmmm.............thinking

xploder



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost375
 


time is change in a system / revolution
day= 1 revolution of the earth
year=1 revolution of the earth around the sun

so time is revolutions aroud a point
like the bubbles around each other

time is each bubbles angular momentum in a ratio to distence from center of mass to the suface tension adheasion, this gives a "rolling radius" or revolutional speed. the larger the mass bubble the slower the bubble revolution and the slower the passage of time.


lol try saying that 10 times fast lol
time is an effect of rotational forces translated into angular momentum

time is a side effect lol

xploder

edit on 9-5-2011 by XPLodER because: add more words



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


ok so......................
the further out from the center you get the larger the diameter of the bubble surface,
and the further out from the center the less the bubble surface has tension,
which means that as the cercumference increases so to does the angular mometum because of the distence the smaller bubble must travel in relation to the larger bubble.
but the adheasion is less and the angular momentum is less

xploder



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:29 PM
link   
here is a picture that got me thinking on this subject




xploder



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Hey xploder, sorry to go off-topic here...but with your perspective on time, would you think that time would exist in a complete vacuum? And if it does would it be measurable?

So for instance if you have a 10ft x 10ft room completely devoid of all matter, can you prove that time exists within it? Or is time's existence dependent on matter?
edit on 9-5-2011 by Hawking because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hawking
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Hey xploder, sorry to go off-topic here...but with your perspective on time, would you think that time would exist in a complete vacuum? And if it does would it be measurable?

So for instance if you have a 10ft x 10ft room completely devoid of all matter, can you prove that time exists within it? Or is time's existence dependent on matter?
edit on 9-5-2011 by Hawking because: (no reason given)


there are more factors
ok even in a vacum time exists if under the observence of gravity, with out gravity time has no reference.
what i mean by that is that if the room was no mass and the room was filled with a vacum,
and the room was not in gravity then time would not pass.

energy = mass
mass = energy
mass = gravity
gravity = energy

no mass and no gravity and no energy = no passage of what we OBSERVE as time.

i think gravity can be explained in terms of induced energy
i will use a closed loop system for ease of explination

filiment energy enters the galaxy travels through the galaxy and "induces" or generates energy into the galaxy.
the induced galaxy energy travels through the galaxy and shorts at a star.
the star recombines the energy into mass and in doing so releases an electro-static feild in all directions.

this electro-static feild blows a bubble in the density of space (solar system)
anything inside the electrostatic feild is imparted with energy to its center (planet) and induces energy from the center outwards.

this energy again induces a seconary feild effect in the planet and the planet expresses energy, the difference between the potential energy of primary electrostatic discharge and the seconary effect are opposite feild effects so they attract each other.

on the suject of time,
if we travel away from the earth time passes more slowly,
but what happens if we travel away from the sun?
does time dialation change depending on our reference frame for what we are moving away from?
so if we travel away from the earth but towards the sun what would happen to time?
faster or slower?

in short the room of no mass in no gravity with no energy would be timeless
IMHO

xploder

edit on 9-5-2011 by XPLodER because: correction



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Yeah I should have mentioned that I pictured this "room" floating in space and wasn't considering any gravitational influence. But your conclusion is the same as mine either way and says a lot about the nature of time and in what situations you can and cannot identify it.

I suppose tossing anything in to the "vacuum room" however, would instantly create a timeline for whatever objects entered, whether it be a few molecules or a pocket watch



posted on May, 9 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by XPLodER

ok so......................





Part 1: The value of a 3D gravity map

Here is a magnetic deviation map for the earth. Pilots have known about this for almost a century now. Some areas of the earth are fairly smooth and have little deviation, while others are going to make a compass deviate pretty far from true north or south.

One pilot/lawyer I worked with flew the old bomber style plane that NOAA used to take readings from inside of hurricanes. He, being a vet, told me something very interesting once. He said the middle east had very little magnetic deviation and made it an ideal place to conduct air operations. Better than most of the rest of the world. He said he wouldn't be surprised if the next round of fighting took place there. Prescient words.



As we can see the entire middle east all the way from North Africa to the edge of India is ideal for testing and developing autonomous predator drones.

Now why am I mentioning all of this magnetic deviation along the surface of this sphere we call earth.

Because Gravity does not show such deviation. At least not such a large deviation. A 1.000 kg block weights the same all over the earth with the only deviation being directly related to it's altitude where it is measured. We have to go to micrograms to notice any variation.

Here is a gravity map of the moon. It is measured in mili Galileo's. A very very tiny almost neglible unit. Whereas magnetic deviation is in full degrees.




This brings me to point one.
1) a three dimensional map of gravity anomaly is almost useless. It's not like the detected deviation is going to affect the path of anything like magnetic deviation does.


On top of all of this is the strange case that the strength of the earths magnetic field has decreased by about 10% over the last 150 years. It's weakening. So when I watch the NASA zero G water bubble experiments I find myself considering the future of the earths magnetic field, not gravity.


David Grouchy

edit on 9-5-2011 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 12:11 AM
link   
From following your posts I'm under the impression that the underlying thesis is that our optical perception of the universe may be greatly distorted by the lensing effect of gravity around various star systems.

On a galactic scale gravity anomalies may have a profoundly huge cumulative effect.

Some earlier posts showed the bowshock around earth, the space bubble pattern around some stars, and the magnification of light depending on path by passing through such events.





bowshock around earth





space bubble pattern around some stars





magnification of light depending on path


So I'm a little thrown off by the desire for a 3D model of gravity. I watched the video and a couple of problems come to mind. The viscosity of the liquid would have to increase slightly the closer to the center it was. The surface tensions should be almost zero with the greatest tension being the very center. So I don't find the zero-g bubble to be particularly useful in this regard.

This brings me to point two.
2) A bubble in zero-g is the inverse of a useful model of a gravity field.


David Grouchy

edit on 10-5-2011 by davidgrouchy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 12:27 AM
link   
reply to post by davidgrouchy
 


very well put together information thank you
i beleive the seconary effect of the electrostatic energy released is to effect the magnetic potential of elements,
that is to say that when the suns electrostatic energy is going from the sun to earth (primary) the energy is inducing a seconary effect in the core of the earth.
the seconary effect coming from the earths core travels outwards in all directions in even amounts, when the ground is ferro magnetic the seconary electrostatic effect induces the magnetic flux in the elements found in the crust propotional to the amounts encountered.
in this way an even gravatational feild (bubble) can be inducing uneven amounts of ferro magnitism into the crust.

the primary electrostatic feild from the sun imparts energy into mass, the mass consentrates and expresses the seconary electrostatic feild in the oposite direction to the primary.

the difference in expressed energy levels creates an oposite attractive force propotional to the mass encountered

the magnetosphere is an example of the seconary electrostatic feild energizing the elements with flux at the point where the primary and seconary feilds are strongest=the core of the earth

these ideas are not backed by science at all and are only
My Humble Opinion

so in conclusion if the gravatational feild is spherical the theoretical framework is relevent
the inverse square law would be represented by the radi of the bubble from the center of mass

thank you again
what do you think the source of gravity is?
or do you have a model refinment to add to the thought experiment?

your imput is more than welcome

xploder



posted on May, 10 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
On the other hand, though, if what we are talking about is the combination of light passing through a gravity field of a stellar object you may be onto something.

The optical distortion of the zero-g bubble in the videos are worth noting. The background is distorted as its light passes through the bubble. The ripples having a profound effect on this distortion.

And with that I leave our dear readers with a picture of Clayton Anderson in zero g.


David Grouchy




new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join