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.

 

Question about gravity.

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


Wow, there is so much wrong with that, I don't even know where to start!!!


Seriously dude??




posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I think you may have more patience than I do at the moment... enjoy!

...and I need to go to bed.

Keep up the good work!



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 

A Vacuum does not change the effect of Gravity. All a Vacuum Means is that there is no atmosphere or pressure. You can talk about BUOYANCY when talking about a Vacuum or partial Vacuum or Lack of Vacuum...as the reason a Helium Balloon Goes UP in our atmosphere is that the BUOYANCY of a Balloon filled with Helium is Greater than a Balloon filled with AIR as the balloon filled with Air will not float.

This is because the Helium displaces the same area as the Air Filled Balloon...which is about 80% Nitrogen and 19% Oxygen and 1% various other gases...but the Helium Balloon is MUCH LIGHTER...thus it obtains BUOYANCY in our Atmosphere.

The Helium Balloon still has Mass and a Weight but it is Buoyant thus it will float. I think this is what you are confusing in that Vacuum Question. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

I see you have Googled some nonsense. NASA has calculated that the Moon is moving further away from Earth every year and will eventually be lost to Earth. Look it up on the NASA site. This has already been reported in Scientific American and Discover Magazine.

As far as the Pendulum...as I listed...you are using equations that deal with a FORCE...and even though Gravity is wrongly labeled THE WEAK FORCE...it is not actually a FORCE. Gravity is an expression of SPACE/TIME GEOMETRY that has been warped via One Dimentionality or Singularity.
Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Phage
 

I see you have Googled some nonsense. NASA has calculated that the Moon is moving further away from Earth every year and will eventually be lost to Earth. Look it up on the NASA site. This has already been reported in Scientific American and Discover Magazine.

As far as the Pendulum...as I listed...you are using equations that deal with a FORCE...and even though Gravity is wrongly labeled THE WEAK FORCE...it is not actually a FORCE. Gravity is an expression of SPACE/TIME GEOMETRY that has been warped via One Dimentionality or Singularity.
Split Infinity



Let me ignore that this post is hilariously insane and focus on the real two key issues here:

Why do you think randomly capitalizing entire words and using random ...s increases readability, demonstrates your point, or is even correct grammar?

Please answer this very specific question so that the rest of this hilarious discussion can continue.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

Because I have a Terribly MASSIVE EGO have always been a poor speller as well as lack grammer skills and I LOVE CAPITAL LETTERS! LOL! Seriously though. I will ask you something.

Describe Gravity for me. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


NASA has calculated that the Moon is moving further away from Earth every year and will eventually be lost to Earth.

Yes. The Moon is moving further away. In order to do so it must acquire energy from somewhere. From where is it acquiring that energy?

No. It will not eventually be lost.

edit on 10/23/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
Describe Gravity for me. Split Infinity


Gravity is effect caused by the most general form of the interchange of massless spin-2 virtual particles between other particles. This description is equivalent to a fiberwise C^infinity SO(1,3) symmetry on the tangent bundle of a C^infinity Riemannian manifold M (with signature -+++), which is equivalent to considering diffeomorphisms of M.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

And the answer is....BZZZZZT! WRONG! What you have posted is just plain theory and Very Guesswork Theory at that! The LHC has found a some type of a Boson but no one is coming out and saying it is the advertised Higgs-Boson God Particle for sure.

Gravity as Space/Time Geometry is still the most likely culprit!
Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

The Moon is accumulating Kinetic Energy as every time it passes between the Sun and Earth in it's orbit...the Suns Gravitational Effect creates a tiny bit of a change in it's orbital vector. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Moduli
 

And the answer is....BZZZZZT! WRONG! What you have posted is just plain theory and Very Guesswork Theory at that! The LHC has found a some type of a Boson but no one is coming out and saying it is the advertised Higgs-Boson God Particle for sure.

Gravity as Space/Time Geometry is still the most likely culprit!
Split Infinity



Maybe it will make more sense if I rephrase it in a way to which you are accustomed:

Gravity...is effect CAUSED by the most GENERAL form of the....interchange of MASSLESS spin-2 virtual particles between OTHER PARTICLES....... This description is......equivalent TO A.... fiberwise C^infinity SO(1,3) ....symmetry ON THE TANGENT BUNDLE OF..... a C^infinity Riemannian MANIFOLD M (with signature -+++), which ......is equivalent to considering DIFFEOMORPHISMS...... of M. ....



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by illuminated0ne

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
No, it would cancel out FORCE that is why there is no motion.


Just because there is no motion, doesn't mean there is no force acting on it.

Just because you are sitting in a chair, not falling, doesn't mean the force of gravity is not acting upon you.


Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
It's a very easy experiment to conduct, a simple exercise in logic will give you the answer.

X force = enough force to move the object at 5mph.

Apply X Force going > < v. How fast would the object move and in what direction?

In case you have trouble the answer is 5mph moving in the v direction. The only way the other forces have any bearing is if friction is in play.
Apply


Actually, that is not logical at all...

If you apply 5mph of force to the right > and 5mph of force to the left < that is equivalent to 10mph of force locking the object in place, and it won't move up nor down. If you then apply 5mph of force down V there wouldn't be enough force to break the lock of the 10mph force that is locking it in place.


edit on 23-10-2012 by illuminated0ne because: (no reason given)


You need to rethink your position. Your basic logic concerning force and motion are in error, therefore I can not logically explain to why you are wrong. Here is a start, how does vertical force effect horizontal force?

If you apply 5mph of force in going > and 5mph of force going v, what direction does the object move?

Here is another thought experiment for you. Create the body of a car with 4 wheels, that moves in the ^ and v directions. To the frame of the car use springs that push > and < against an object to hold it in place. How much force do you need to apply to the object to make it move in the ^ and v directions. Hint. It will be the exact same needed no matter how much > and < force is applied. Feel free to build it.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Your basic logic concerning force and motion are in error

Not to mention his units.

Last time I checked (I admit it was a while ago) MPH is not a measure of force. It's a measure of speed.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

Look...so everyone who is not a Physics Major to understand...let's get to the HEART of it. Einstein came up with Gravity as any Mass...and Mass being represented by Protons and Neutrons...will Warp Space/Time and the basic example although not Geometrically accurate but good enough so most people can get a GLIMPSE or understanding is the...Use a sheet and have two people hold each end at the corners and pull it tight...this represents...Space/Time.

Now place a baseball in the center. The Ball represents a Planet. The sheet curves inward where the ball is placed thus this curved part of the sheet represents Mass Warping Space/Time. If you place a Heavier Ball as Mass is not determined by size but by quantity of Protons and Neutrons within any object thus DENSITY....the Greater the sheet will bend and Curve or WARP inwardly toward the Center of the Ball or THE GRAVITY WELL. This of course is an example that is not Geometry Correct...but it does give people a clue.

Now right now at the LHC...which is a Particle Collider...they are accelerating Protons and Smashing them together near the Speed of Light to see what is inside. The Funny thing is that even though Protons and Neutrons are the particles within an Atoms Nucleus that have MASS and thus obtain Weight...they are COMPLETELY COMPRISED OF QUANTUM PARTICLE/WAVE FORMS. What they hope to achieve is to understand what Quantum Particle within both Protons and Neutrons gives them MASS. The recent discovery which they have been looking for and although they state they have found the HIGGS-BOSON GOD PARTICLE...or the supposed specific Boson which is one of other forms of Bosons that is responsible for giving Protons and Neutrons MASS. Yet although they state they have found it...they are still unable to state for certain if it truly does as advertised.

Regardless of whether they have found it...it still does not change the reality that MASS is responsible for GRAVITATIONAL EFFECT. If Gravity were just a FORCE...it would not be able to change the angle of direction of travel of LIGHT or Photons which are a Quantum Particle and as in a Black Hole or if anyone cares to look at something astonishing...google Abell 1689 or Abell 2218 for some incredible examples of GRAVITATIONAL LENSING. Abell 1689 is an area 2.2 Billion Light Years away that has Hundreds of Galaxies so crowded that they visibly Warp Space/Time and Abell 2218 shows a very distant Galaxy by Gravitational Lensing that is 13 Billion Light Years distant.

No matter what Quantum Particle they may discover...the FACT still remains that with the exception of DARK MATTER...Protons and Neutrons which we use to determine Relative Atomic Mass...WARP SPACE/TIME and that GRAVITY is a GEOMETRIC CONCERN of the expression of ONE DIMENSIONALITY OR SINGULARITY.

You need a Minimum of 10 or 11 Dimensions for Matter to Exist and it is most likely true that Quantum Particle Existence and Exchange occur between Protons and Neutron in a Multiversal System. Quarks Blink in and Out of existence and they have a minimum and maximum number that they ALWAYS never are in greater or lessor number in within a Proton or Neutron...but in between these Minimums and Maximums...they exist numerically AT WILL! Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Here is another question for you. Since any Force must have a Generation Point or Mechanism...and I have stated that Gravity is NOT a Force...and that all forms of Force can only be generated by interaction of Elemental Potentials...as example...the total possible amount of Horse Power in any specific Vehicle is limited to the Mechanism Construct and the Fuels Energy potential...thus any increase in total Horse Power is dependent upon either changing the Mechanism or the way the Mechanism uses the generated energy or changing the Fuel....and that Kinetic Achievable Force is limited to all these concerns...why is it only Gravity has no limit by which Total Possible Kinetic Achievable Force is governed?

I know...do you? Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 02:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


I have stated that Gravity is NOT a Force...and that all forms of Force can only be generated by interaction of Elemental Potentials
You've stated a lot of things. Most of which make no sense.

For the purposes of this discussion gravity behaves as a force of attraction between masses. This behavior is the same behavior which enabled the trajectory of the Voyager spacecraft to be calculated so that they could visit the four gas giants in sequence. The source of this attraction is irrelevant to this discussion.


why is it only Gravity has no limit by which Total Possible Kinetic Achievable Force is governed?
What is "kinetic achievable force" other than another one of your oxymoronic technobabble constructs?

Have you reviewed the laws of thermodynamics yet?
edit on 10/24/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by OccamsRazor04
 


Because inside a vacuum. There is no energy, there is no working gravity to make the mass sink to the other end/down. If the mass sinks that means the " vacuum column " must have weight at the center of earth.

I think the whole clue with this problem is that earth is just a distraction to make people think that the mass outside the vacuum tunnel have any effect on the 10kg mass.


edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 

Ah...Name Calling. Wonderful. I will make the question simpler....How do you account for the fact that Gravity can have NO LIMIT on it's ability to effect Matter as well as Quantum Particles that are not an electron in orbit around a nucleus...as it pertains to distance, quantity of Matter or Photons or any other Quantum Particle...but yet continue to describe Gravity as a Force.

With the exception of Gravity and perhaps Dark Energy...all other possible forms or methods of placing an object of Matter into motion must rely and be limited to Force Generation via Elemental Interaction on all levels. Chemical, Fission, Fusion and Particle emission. Thus potential kinetic transference is limited to form of interaction and mechanism.

Gravitational effect is not limited in this way. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   
Sorry Spy, your just wrong. Horribly, horribly, demonstrably WRONG.

Atmosphere does NOT cause gravity. That is absolutely absurd.

In a vacuum gravity still exists, and still acts upon objects.FACT

You do realize we have vacuum chambers, right? If you were correct, then inside of a vacuum chamber there would be no gravity. There is. Inside a vacuum chamber there is still gravity. The same gravity as outside the vacuum chamber. We don't have to guess about this, we don't have to do any calculation, simply observe. Objects inside of vacuum chambers still are affected by gravity. You are wrong. Vacuum does not negate gravity.

Here is the most obvious problem, among many many serious problems, with your idea. If the atmosphere is what "pushes" us down causing what we call gravity, then what is pulling or pushing the atmosphere down? LOL!

The mass of the Earth is what causes the gravity we experience here on Earth. That gravity PULLS the atmosphere DOWN just like it PULLS us down, and pulls every other item on the Earth down.

I don't know how you could possibly not see the error in your wild idea. There is absolutely no truth or logic to your theory.

You say that Atmosphere causes gravity on Earth. The atmosphere is what causes us to stay planted on the ground. You are wrong. You are proven wrong in a million different ways. And, like I said, if the atmosphere is what causes things to get pushed down, then what is pushing the atmosphere down?

The only TINY TINY sliver of reason I can pull from your posts is that the atmosphere DOES in fact have weight, and push down on us. Not pushing down causing gravity, pushing down causing pressure. The pressure of the atmosphere acts upon things 360 degrees, not just in a downward force. This is why atmosphere has no effect on the weight of objects, because the pressure is being exerted evenly over the entire weight.

Think of it like water. When you go deep under water, the water is causing pressure on your body. The water, however, is NOT pushing you down, even though it's heavy and it's on top of you, because the pressure is applied equally, not just vertically.

If what you said was true, you could stand under a roof and gravity would disappear. If you are standing under a roof, all of the weight on the atmosphere is pressing down on the roof, so underneath the roof there would be nearly no pressure holding you down. Since we know it doesn't work that way, we know your wrong.

Please OP, do some critical thinking. I really worry that you are unable to see the issue with what you are proposing. It's obviously and demonstrably FALSE and to continue to push this idea shows some sort of mental issue in my opinion, no offense intended.



posted on Oct, 24 2012 @ 03:31 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 

James...although I applaud you reply...a simple question remains. You state that Gravity is pulling everything down and by all observations this would seem to be true. But to pull at something...some Force would be needed. Now Gravity is not magnetic because a wooden branch would not be pulled by magnetic field. Gravity has never found to be a form of Particle or Wave and there has never been a discovery of a Graviton.

If you adhere to Warping of Space/Time then Gravity is an effect that is changing the Geometry of Distance by being an expression of One Dimensionality or Singularity. To push or pull would require a Force...Gravity is not.
Split Infinity



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join