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.
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.
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
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.
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.
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)
Originally posted by XPLodER
ok so......................