 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Car Audio / October 2009SOOOOO off the subject....
There's very little happening on this newgroup AND I happen to know there are some VERY bright guys who peruse this site. With this in mind, I am going to share with you a delima I have been engaged in for over 20 years: What EXACTLY is GRAVITY. Yes, I know, this has nothing to do with Car audio but I know there are some very bright folks who read these posts and I'm curious what some of you might think. Sir Issac Newton wrote the "owner's manual" about gravity. We can send ships to the moon, predict projectile paths, and send probes throughout the solar system and beyond. He wrote the "owner's manual", but NO ONE has deduced what gravity ACTUALLY is (the scematics of gravity ACTUALLY is). I exchanged many emails with porffessors from CalTech and UCLA. But there is no conensus. What FACINATES me about this issue is that gravity is such an important part of our life, yet we have NO IDEA the mechanics, or the medium, in which gravity operates. Enstein postulated (and this is my beliefe as well) that all matter is drawn to all other matter (falling towards it) in the fourth dimension space/time. This is why we do not percieve this accelerated motion because it is a warping of space/time and we are not able to percieve this "falling" motion b/c it is occuring in the 4th dimensions. Other physists believe all matter emitts "gravitons" that are ALWAYS atractive in nature (unlike the elctron and neutron). YET WE HAVE NEVER DETECTED A GRAVATON. That wouldn't be surprising as it's obviously not electromagnetic, invisable, and we may just plain lack the technology to detect a graviton. I feel a warping of space/time is more elegant though it is VERY hard to wrap your head around it. We are accelerating toward the earth in the fourth dimension. Again, because we can't perceive the fourth dimension, we are not aware of the accelerated motion. It's intesting to note how physisits try their best to ignore the mystery. YET IT'S SO DAMN IMPORTANT. We depend on gravity every single day, BUT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL IT IS!!! Instead, physisits focus on mathatical propertise of gravity itself, and call that good enough. The fact that gravity PERFECTLY duplicates accelerated motion again makes me believe it is a falling (all matter to all other matter) that occurs in the fourth dimension, space/time. But I have spent countless hours reading about this, exchanging Emails with physisits, but again in our modern age it's absolutely INCEDIBLE we don't understand one of the most important forces in the universe. Anyway, if anybody has thoughts on this, I'd LOVE to hear them. This has been a pet project for me for going on 20 years. Take Care, MOSFET >There's very little happening on this newgroup AND I happen to know there >are some VERY bright guys who peruse this site. > >With this in mind, I am going to share with you a delima I have been engaged >in for over 20 years: What EXACTLY is GRAVITY. I don't know but back in the 80's there was an electronic magazine that had an article about making a detector. I had doubt, but I was recording something that fit the description in the article. I was recording symetrical waveforms to a stripchart. The time interval varied from several minuites on up. I never did it again. Here is that info.... http://amasci.com/freenrg/grav3.html greg >Yes, I know, this has nothing to do with Car audio but I know there are some >very bright folks who read these posts and I'm curious what some of you [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >Take Care, >MOSFET This issue has confused and dumbfounded physists for decades now. Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity as I mentioned before states that gravity is a warping of space/time causing all matter to "fall" towards other matter. The "classic" third dimensional representation of this is a the taut rubber sheet with basketballs and so on that "fall" towards one-another. However, this is, of course, is a poor model as there must be "ordinary" gravity at work to make the model work. Since the model represents gravity, the introduction of gravity itself TO MAKE IT WORK makes it a poor model, HOWEVER, it is perhaps the best way to get your head around it. You have to imagine the same model however it is the warping of space/time that draws matter (like planets and suns) together. Experiments have proven that gravity can "bend" light, therefore it's safe to postulate that gravity DOES effect electromagnetic waves, but I tend to believe this effect is very small as it takes a whole lot of gravity (light traveling close to an enormous body or black hole) to effect light which is, of course, a type of electromagnetic wave. There have been many studies, primarily conducted at Caltech, to actually detect gravitational waves or the "graviton", yet results remain tangential at best. Obviously, if there is a gravitational wave or graviton that all matter projects and is ALWAYS attractive, it is going to be a VERY weak force, unlike electromagnetism and the strong nuclear force. Perhaps we lack the technology to detect such a weak force. Again, I tend to always go back to the warping of spacetime as the cause of gravity. For instance, we know clocks run slower when close to the earth. Yes, gravitational waves "might" (because we have yet to detect a gravitational wave or graviton) cause the same effect but as I stated before, the theory of a warping of space/time seems more elegant. But to your piece, Greg, having researched this, physists have yet to find ANY connection between electromagnatism and gravity, other than very strong gravitational effects can "bend" light. That's it. Gravity is something completely different and as yet not fully understood. MOSFET > >There's very little happening on this newgroup AND I happen to know there > >are some VERY bright guys who peruse this site. [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > >Take Care, > >MOSFET It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous post, no connection has yet been found. However, in his Special Theory of Relativity he postulated that gravity could be a warping of space/time. Obviously, this was a VERY difficult concept for other physists to grasp or perform experiments on. A more "simple" explanation (i.e. gravitational waves or the graviton) was sought that could be more easily understood and, more importantly, DETECTED. Again, there are physists teaching RIGHT NOW at Calteach who still believe in the Graviton or gravitational wave theory. Experiments in space are still being conducted in an effort to detect gravitational waves. But again, with all of our high technology, it astounds me there is yet a consenus regarding this issue. AS it is clear, if gravitons or gravitational waves exist, we may simply lack the technology or simply lack the knowledge as far as WHAT THE HECK TO LOOK FOR. Again, for the last 100 years, intersteller waves have ALWAYS been electromagnetic in nature. Now we are looking for a wave that is not, how the hell do we start? And the relationship between accelerated motion and gravity is much too similar to ignore. There MUST be a relationship. An "acceleration" in the fourth dimension (and hence undetectable) would elegantly solve the riddle. I am no genius. I am NOT going to solve this problem on my own. HOWEVER, one of my many hopes is that we can solve this before I die. Perhaps a Unified Theory of the Universe (beyond String theory) might shed light on this issue. But if what I believe is true, we may never be able to perform experiments to PROVE a warping of space/time is responsible for gravity. I don't know. It hurts my brain. But as I said before, with all our modern science, to understand so very little about a force that effects US ALL everyday, every minute, is incredible to me. These obscure experiments we perform using multi-billion dollar particle accelerators make me laugh. It's like, well, we can't understand this HUGE, ENORMOUS mystery in the universe, so let's study something virtually no one can understand nor will have ANY effect on Joe Average's day to day life (unlike gravity). But hey, research money has to be spent on SOMETHING that might yeild a result, right? MOSFET >It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that >gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >in the Graviton or gravitational wave theory. Experiments in space are >still being conducted in an effort to detect gravitational waves. I was just thinking about magnetism. Back on track, its usually explained being attracted to large objects, but could very well be, being pushed toward. Maybe its backwards ? We are pushed into a black hole. Maybe there is a test for this thats been allready been done.. greg >>It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that >>gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >We are pushed into a black hole. Maybe there is a test for >this thats been allready been done.. Thats right. In the mass of the earth, it takes up space that dark energy would be, and the dark energy, which makes up 74% of the Universe, pushes you down. The really amazing thing is the size of matter. An atom is 99% empty space. greg >>>It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that >>>gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > >The really amazing thing is the size of matter. An atom is 99% empty space. Why are galaxies and solar systems mostly flat, and what gets them spinning, and do they all go the same direction. They say everything is moving away from each other, but why are we going to crash into another galaxy ? There is a Usenet group I found some time ago with a lot of experts. I should go there to try and answer some of my stuff.!! One of the Physics I believe. Some far out stuff there. FAR OUT. greg >>>>It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that >>>>gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] >I should go there to try and answer some of my stuff.!! >One of the Physics I believe. Some far out stuff there. FAR OUT. Here is an amazing thing. It would take 100 billion peas to fill a stadium representing the number of galaxies. It would take 100 billion stadiums filled with 100 billion peas representing stars. it would take 500 billion stadiums filled with 100 billion peas possibly representing the number of planets. greg That's......ah......a lot of peas. MOSFET > >>>>It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that > >>>>gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > greg Now that's a new approach to this mystery. Whenever I have thought of gravity, I have always imagined objects being DRAWN together, whether by a warping of space time or an emitting of an always-attractive-graviton creating a gravitational wave. I have never approached the subject from the perspective of objects being "pushed" together, again, I always imagine objects being attracted to one another. Wow, that's thinking out of the box. Perhaps the warping of spacetime creates a condition where all objects are being pushed towards all other objects. But as I said before, accelerated motion is the key. Eample: if I were to build a rocket ship ala 2001 that was circular and spun to create artificial gravity, the artificial gravity created would follow ALL of Newton's laws perfectly (as long as it was spnning at exactly the right speed to emulate the same gravity effects we feel on earth). THIS IS SIGNIFICANT. I can't emphasize this point enough. I know it may seem basic (the "duh" factor), but ALL his mathamatical equations regarding gravity would hold true on just such a ship. This is an ENORMOUS clue regarding the nature of gravity. Why is this so significant IMHO? If gravity is created by gravitational fields, by creating gravity in a COMPLETLY different way, we would expect to see at least some subtle variations on gravities effects. But we don't. Gravity PERFECTLY mimics accelerated motion in space. Accelerated motion is the key to this riddle, I really believe it is. As I said before, you, myself and the earth all create a warping of spacetime in the fourth dimension and this warping creates this accelerated motion effect. We don't percieve this accelerated motion because we don't percieve the fourth dimension (space/time). But we do perceive the results which are, of cource, gravity. Again, it is tough to get your head around this and so a more tangible explanation has been sought for over 80 years now. It would be MUCH easier to understand gravity if it were a wave or particle that all matter emitted and was always attractive. Again, I know physists teaching at Caltech RIGHT NOW who still believe in the graviton theory. For a physist, this is a much more attractive theory as it is A) easier to understand and B) there is a hope that we may someday detect the graviton. MOSFET > >It's true, Einstein originally postulated via his Unified Field Theory that > >gravity SHOULD be a form of electromagnatism. But as stated in my previous [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > greg >Now that's a new approach to this mystery. Whenever I have thought of >gravity, I have always imagined objects being DRAWN together, whether by a [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > >MOSFET Very good point. I thought my push theory was pretty cool. We don't know anything about dark energy. Perhaps when they start that thing going in Europe we will know more. greg >> In article <m8-dnaZ27KurykPXnZ2dnUVZ_uOdnZ2d@wavecable.com>, "MOSFET" ><ntanner@wavecable.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >> greg I haven't done a whole lot of research regarding the nature of dark matter. I DO know that a major proportion of all matter in the universe is composed of dark matter. The existance of dark matter, from what I understand, is necessary when postulating the size, age, lifespan, gravitational effects, ect. of the universe. In other words, in order for the universe to exist in it's present size and context (expanding, but the expansion slowing), the existance of an ENORMOUS amount of dark matter MUST be present. That is how we KNOW it must exist. HOWEVER, as I've often pointed out to friends of mine when this subject comes up (and with my middle-age nerdy friends, you'd be surprised how often this subject actually DOES come up), if too much dark matter existed in the universe, how would we be able to see EXTREMELLY distant objects? I mean, from everything I have read about dark matter, most of the matter in the universe is composed of dark matter. Again, physists base this on observations dark matter seems to have on the gravitational effects on galaxies AND the need for dark matter to exist in order to explain the beginning, middle, and end of the universe. MOSFET > >Now that's a new approach to this mystery. Whenever I have thought of > >gravity, I have always imagined objects being DRAWN together, whether by a [quoted text clipped - 77 lines] > >> > >> greg |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.