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: 18
6
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Moduli
 

Although Gravity has been defined as the Weak Force...


Those are totally different things that have nothing whatsoever to do with each other.


we simply do not have the proper vocabulary for it's


How ironic...


Well then by all means...explain what Momentum is being changed as LIGHT or PHOTONS travel the Space/Time Curvature into a Black Hole?


This question is totally incoherent (Like putting too much air in a balloon!). You can't just slap together some sciency sounding words and hope that makes up a real question.

At any rate, gravity is very well understood, including its interactions with light. Black holes are also well understood, including their interactions with light, matter, etc. I'm sorry if it's too hard for you, but every graduate student in physics understands all the details of it and there is nothing wrong with our description of it.




posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 


Look...I am aware that my goading you on by my last post is the reason you HAD to reply. I am also aware as is everyone else that you set forth the definition of what constitutes a FORCE and I presented an example that clearly shows that Gravitational Effect does not fit your definition as a Force.

I am sorry I goaded you on...as I broke my own rule not to be rude...but you have to admit that Gravity effects Matter and Energy such as Quantum Particle/Wave Forms in a manner no other Force can effect in such a matter.

This is the Heart of what I have been trying to get across. No matter what you THINK you know...Reality is FAR stranger. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Moduli
 
I presented an example that clearly shows that Gravitational Effect does not fit your definition as a Force.


No, you presented technobabble.


you have to admit that Gravity effects Matter and Energy such as Quantum Particle/Wave Forms in a manner no other Force can effect in such a matter.


No, I don't, because that's not true. It's barely even a sentence.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

M...what you have said here is simply not true...AND YOU KNOW IT! You can settle this once and for all by answering my question.

You outlined the definition of what constitutes a FORCE. I provided you with an example that shows that Gravitational Effect cannot be defined by your definition of what a Force is...yet you still cling on to it.

Just answer where is the change in momentum and this will be settled. If you cannot....then you can at the very least admit that it does not fit your definition. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


It would have to fall eventually coming to rest in the center of the earth if the earth was perfectly spherical and what not. Space is a vacuum and gravity is still very real there. A vacuum means there is no atmosphere not that there is no gravity. Nothing that we know of can negate gravity, of course we can negate atmosphere through creating a vacuum but still nothing gets past gravity. My thoughts.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinityJust answer where is the change in momentum and this will be settled.


This question doesn't make any sense. You can't ask nonsense questions and proclaim victory when people point out they're nonsense.

But the full, complete description of how energy couples to gravity is given by general relativity.

This:
www.amazon.com...
is an introductory, high-school calculus level textbook on relativity. It contains the simplified explanation of the full answer. At least attempt to work through it before claiming your nonsense questions prove anything.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 

Of course the question doesn't make any sense...the reason being that you keep stating that Gravity is a Force. You then outlined the definition of Force as changing the Momentum of a thing and then used that to describe your Flawed Logic that because of the effect of Changing Momentum you DECLARED THAT WAS WHY GRAVITY WAS A FORCE.

I then asked you where the momentum was changing as Light or Photons traveled into a Black Hole as they traveled into it along the Curvature of Space/Time. This question is based upon YOUR FLAWED LOGIC thus the question itself is FLAWED.

I presented PROOF....you presented an incorrect assumption. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by SpearMint

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by SpearMint
 

What exactly are you saying here? It is a Vacuum Tunnel...thus no air friction. It would fall and achieve a certain speed which would allow it to fall past the center of the Gravity well for some time and distance...until it finally would reverse it's course and fall back.

This would go on for a while as it would keep falling to a shorter and shorter distance from Dead Center where it would eventually come to a rest. Split Infinity



There would be no energy loss since there is no friction. The speed increases until it reaches the centre, then decreases from there until it reaches 0, at that point it would be at the surface on the other side. It wouldn't come to a rest if it's in a vacuum.


Good point. It might never stop. Has anyone ever tested this? I'm thinking that force of gravity would trump the momentum of object moving through the vacuum slowly bringing it to a stop kind of like a bouncy ball but the ball is metal and the ground is a magnet. If not this is a great idea for perpetual motion generator. Drop a magnet through rings of copper in a vacuum and remove the energy created as it falls back and forth.

"free energy" you mad big oil?

like those flashlights you shake to charge up.
edit on 31-10-2012 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
Of course the question doesn't make any sense...


You don't understand any of the words you are using, your question makes no syntactic sense, which is why I suggest you read at least one physics book before continuing this discussion.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Moduli
 


Your attempt to cover your ignorance of what Gravity truly is is transparent. You statements that I should pick up a Physics book is a feeble attack of desperation in attempt to redirect your inability to have the mental flexibility to either understand or postulate upon complex issues that are beyond your vision.

I will not continue to waste time in attempt to help you understand as you seem to wish to remain in the dark. My advice...BUY A LOT OF BATTERIES FOR A FLASHLIGHT! Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
I will not continue to waste time in attempt to help you understand as you seem to wish to remain in the dark.


Evidently you won't waste your time reading any physics books either.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Moduli
 


Your attempt to cover your ignorance of what Gravity truly is is transparent. You statements that I should pick up a Physics book is a feeble attack of desperation in attempt to redirect your inability to have the mental flexibility to either understand or postulate upon complex issues that are beyond your vision.

I will not continue to waste time in attempt to help you understand as you seem to wish to remain in the dark. My advice...BUY A LOT OF BATTERIES FOR A FLASHLIGHT! Split Infinity

\

or get one of those that you just have to shake...



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 12:40 AM
link   
reply to post by marbles87
 


LOL! GOOD ONE!

Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by PurpleChiten

Originally posted by renegadeloser
reply to post by moebius
 


Interestingly, Michael Faraday, one of the most important physicists ever, had almost no knowledge of, or ability in math. Being considered one of the best experimental physicist of all time. He discovered the faraday cage, the transformer, the electric generator. He discovered that a charge in motion gives rise to a magnetic field at 90 degrees to that motion. He was the first to postulate an electric or magnetic field, and the first to describe all of the lines of force around a magnet.

Couldn't do math, not even simple trigonometry.

Btw this is coming from a man who has passed math courses in calculus, discrete mathematics, and differential equations.
edit on 28-10-2012 by renegadeloser because: (no reason given)


That is false. Although he didn't have a formal eduation in mathematics, that doesn't mean he had no knowledge of mathematics. They are two VERY different things. He did have mathematical ability and knowledge, just no "degree" in it.
He was very capable of doing mathematics, as is any scientist, especially one involved with physics and chemistry where it is used often.
You have taken the fact he didn't have a formal education in mathematics and extrapolated it into thinking he couldn't do math. That is not the case. (or read an article that extrapolated it, either way, it's still false)


"Faraday did not have a background in sophisticated mathematics consequently he does not articulate his discovery through a complex equation. Faraday describes his discovery to us as a visual image of "Lines of force" which create "an Electro magnetic field" or "fields of gravity". "
source
This is from columbia university. It would appear that you are the one who is wrong.

This is why none of the other scientists during Faraday's time took him serious. It wasn't until after his death, that James Maxwell was able to describe his findings mathematically. Only then were they taken seriously by academia.

It's is important to note, however, that Faraday was right before Maxwell convinced the world. Not only that, but his experiments proved that he was right. Maxwell didn't make Faraday right, he just convinced Academia.
edit on 31-10-2012 by renegadeloser because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by hellobruce
 


What gravity effects the 10kg mass?

There is no gravity inside the tunnel. Earths gravity is isolated by the tunnel. It does not effect the 10kg mass.







this demonstrates that there is in fact gravity acting on the ball despite the vacuum. Gravity propagates through space regardless of the medium. Gravity acts on a straight line between to objects. Thus, the mass of the earth does not have to be directly under the ball to act on it.

The Black circle is the weight. The large green circle is the earth. The little black boxes each represents a little piece of the earth. Each red line is the line of force between each little piece, and the weight. You can think of the whole earth as being made up of little pieces, each pulling along a similar line. The net effect due to all of the lines will result in a downward force.
edit on 31-10-2012 by renegadeloser because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 01:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by PurpleChiten
 

NOW WHO IS RAISING THE WHITE FLAG!?

You state Gravity is a FORCE. You state that I am wrong and what is being discussed here is a simple question answered by Physics and Math yet you cannot PROVE what you state. Instead you DEFLECT by answering that to PROVE what you post would take a lengthy dissertation?

Sounds like a COP OUT! The REALITY is that it is you who have ignored Maxwell's statement. How unfortunate for you that you used it. Split Infinity


This has already been done by me. A force is defined as anything which causes a body to accelerate. Two objects in the presence of one another accelerate towards one another, thus gravity is a force. Even if the objects aren't in actuality accelerating, and are just traveling inertially on curved space time, they still appear to be accelerating from our perspective. Thus from our perspective gravity acts as a force.

Gravity can be though of as two, two dimensional objects traveling in a straight line across the surface of a sphere. Eventually their paths will cross, and it will seem to them like some force is pulling them together. From their perspective, the curvature of the substrate they are moving across will act as a force from their perspective. Despite the fact that a 3d being will see that there is, in fact, no such force.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by Moduli
 

Although Gravity has been defined as the Weak Force...and you have provided a definition as to what constitutes a Force...Gravity is described as such because we simply do not have the proper vocabulary for it's TRUE DESCRIPTION.

You state that Gravity is a Force because a Force is described as anything that provides a Change in Momentum. Well then by all means...explain what Momentum is being changed as LIGHT or PHOTONS travel the Space/Time Curvature into a Black Hole?

Where is your CHANGE IN MOMENTUM? Split Infinity


A force is not, in fact, defined as something which causes a change in momentum. A force is defined as something which causes a change in velocity (velocity has direction, momentum does not). The lights direction has changed, thus it's velocity has changed. Therefore, from our perspective, gravity is a force. (A 4 or 5 dimensional being that exists outside our "space" would not perceive it that way. But we are not that, we are 3 dimensional beings within our "space, thus we perceive it as a force)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 01:57 AM
link   
reply to post by renegadeloser
 


Unfortunately your example of Two Dimensional Objects can only be an example and not reality as we need a Minimum of 10 or 11 Dimensions for Matter to even EXIST.

And as you have stated...Gravity is PERCEIVED to be a Force...but it is not an actual Force as there are no other forms of Force that are able to effect Photons in the manner that Gravity does.

Since the rules of Physics break down within a Black Hole...it is logical to state that Gravity has Specialized Effects that exist in Celestial Bodies of Great Mass. Split Infinity



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by marbles87



There would be no energy loss since there is no friction. The speed increases until it reaches the centre, then decreases from there until it reaches 0, at that point it would be at the surface on the other side. It wouldn't come to a rest if it's in a vacuum.


Good point. It might never stop. Has anyone ever tested this? I'm thinking that force of gravity would trump the momentum of object moving through the vacuum slowly bringing it to a stop kind of like a bouncy ball but the ball is metal and the ground is a magnet. If not this is a great idea for perpetual motion generator. Drop a magnet through rings of copper in a vacuum and remove the energy created as it falls back and forth.

"free energy" you mad big oil?

like those flashlights you shake to charge up.
edit on 31-10-2012 by marbles87 because: (no reason given)

Your rings of copper would introduce a magnetic force, opposing the motion of the magnet. This would eventually cause the magnet to come to a stand still. You have effectively introduced resistance to the system, by trying to tap the energy of the "perpetual motion". It only moves perpetually because there is no energy being drained.

edit on 31-10-2012 by renegadeloser because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   
reply to post by renegadeloser
 


Ok. Fine

What gravity force would act on the mass inside the vacuum? Can you specify the actual force that makes the mass travel through the tunnel?

I also have to add. Gravity on earth always works straight down towards the center. How would that fit in with your explanation?


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




top topics



 
6
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join