all scientist know about gravity is that it is a force field around an object that attracts all objects toward it(newton's theory),and Einstein's theory stated that's it's a dent in time space continuum that pulls objects toward it. they both are the same. newton states it in 3d terms, and Einstein stated it in 2d terms, but they just tell you how it works and not why.
does anyone have a theory or oppinion on why?
Noone really knows what gravity is. There are different theories.
This one looks very interesting. It's not solely about gravity but much wider.
The brief summary of Survival Physics by Ronald Pearson.
http://www.cfpf.org.uk/articles/rdp/s_rdp/summary-rdp.html
It's shown that consciousness has a potentail of being immortal.
Science explains the how. If you want to know why you should consult philsophy or religion.
-AM
sort of like a long range strong force of a proton.
Most scientists are very afraid to admit that the gravitational field is not a material object.
How one planet knows about the existence of every other celestial object ?
At all times ?
Does this information travel at an infinite speed (instantaneous) ?
Is it telepathy or a quantum entanglement ? Or both ?
Just imagine that every molecule transmits information about its weight and position to every other molecule in the universe - imagine that each signal is passed by only one elementary amount of material energy - the universe would quickly fill with its weight times its weight and explode ! :-D
So all that information can be passed only by some non material means.
My theory:
It is all about the ONENESS and LOVE !
My opinion why gravity works is because space is not an empty lack of something, but something in itself, that has a structure. Sort of (or maybe not) like the old concept of ether. So it can be bent, spindled, and mutilated.
Theres still so much uncovering to do, powerful telescopes and anayltical techniques are giving us ever increasing definition of all that surrounds us, the neutrino is still so elusive, a saying i put together to ease my own lack of understanding of today's anaylsis of the universe and all that acompanies it is
You cannot see it, only indirectly observe it.
Therefore a misrepresentation...but still a working function.
There was a recent image of the dark matter that makes up the universe developed by many physicists around the world by monitering all the radiation emmited by galaxys stars e.c.t and compiled into a nice image of the dark matter spread in the universe, it's an early attempt and one to be scrutinized and developed upon,i'll see if its on the internet somewhere.
I will conSider this with my conScious thoughts, but i'm always sceptical when someone says I KNOW WHAT IT IS.
You do know how to talk alot of mumble jumble well though.
4 i c u b 4 u b 3 4ib3b4uc ME
The force of 'Gravity' is actually 2 forces interacting with each other to produce the effect of attraction. Here's how it goes...
A planet causes space-time to curve based on the amount of mass it has. The more mass the more of a curvature it has on space-time.
So, why does mass cause space-time to curve or stretch? Simple, try this experiment. Get a bowl of milk and put 2 Cheerios in the milk and put them close togeather. Watch what happens. As you will see the 2 Cheerios attract each other mysteriously. The same is happening between massive objects such as planets, comets, and stars.
The curving of space itself is caused when mass creates a tension on space. And since space is energy too, and much-much-much less dense than matter, then space will spread this tension out a certain distance until the tension balances out with the rest of space-time.
This mysterious attraction is caused when the surrounding milk "film" has more density than the space between the Cheerios. Look closely at a cheerio in the milk. See how the film wraps around the cheerio itself and spreads out until it's balanced with the rest of the milk's film? This action 'Gravity' is no more than equilibrium in action.
Now since the space between the 2 Cheerios is less dense due to the strecthing caused by the tension on the 'film', the surrounding 'film' in the bowl will push the 2 Cheerios togeather because like a trampoline, space-time is always trying to balance itself out therefore giving the illusion of a mysterious force we interpret as gravity.
Are we clear so far?
With this information, we can build anti-gravity devices. If you'd like I can show a modified version of someone else's idea. The only downsides is that the device needs a lot of power and radiation concerns (Don't worry, no toxic waste will be used or produced while operating this AGD (Anti-Gravity Device)).
Quote from: Cincy_Joe on February 15, 2007, 00:36:00
The force of 'Gravity' is actually 2 forces interacting with each other to produce the effect of attraction. Here's how it goes...
A planet causes space-time to curve based on the amount of mass it has. The more mass the more of a curvature it has on space-time.
So, why does mass cause space-time to curve or stretch? Simple, try this experiment. Get a bowl of milk and put 2 Cheerios in the milk and put them close togeather. Watch what happens. As you will see the 2 Cheerios attract each other mysteriously. The same is happening between massive objects such as planets, comets, and stars.
The curving of space itself is caused when mass creates a tension on space. And since space is energy too, and much-much-much less dense than matter, then space will spread this tension out a certain distance until the tension balances out with the rest of space-time.
This mysterious attraction is caused when the surrounding milk "film" has more density than the space between the Cheerios. Look closely at a cheerio in the milk. See how the film wraps around the cheerio itself and spreads out until it's balanced with the rest of the milk's film? This action 'Gravity' is no more than equilibrium in action.
Now since the space between the 2 Cheerios is less dense due to the strecthing caused by the tension on the 'film', the surrounding 'film' in the bowl will push the 2 Cheerios togeather because like a trampoline, space-time is always trying to balance itself out therefore giving the illusion of a mysterious force we interpret as gravity.
Are we clear so far?
With this information, we can build anti-gravity devices. If you'd like I can show a modified version of someone else's idea. The only downsides is that the device needs a lot of power and radiation concerns (Don't worry, no toxic waste will be used or produced while operating this AGD (Anti-Gravity Device)).
This speaks to what I said before about space not being a form of 'nothingness' (for lack of a better term) and actually 'something', which brings me to the idea that the ancient term 'ether', although now obsolete (because of other connotations) was essentially correct.
exactly there is somehting there but it's not measurable or visible, the cheerio talk is neat but only a macro effect of gravity what it is at it's own base level is unknown.
electricity electon
light photon
magnetism ?????
gravity ?????
dark matter ?????
Quote from: ubiquitous on February 16, 2007, 14:46:36
exactly there is somehting there but it's not measurable or visible, the cheerio talk is neat but only a macro effect of gravity what it is at it's own base level is unknown.
electricity electron
light photon
magnetism photon
gravity gravitron (postulated)
dark matter ?????
Quote from: ubiquitous on February 16, 2007, 14:46:36
exactly there is somehting there but it's not measurable or visible, the cheerio talk is neat but only a macro effect of gravity what it is at it's own base level is unknown.
electricity electon
light photon
magnetism ?????
gravity ?????
dark matter ?????
No, No, No, Gravity is an incidental force. It's not a force by itself. Gravitons may exist, but there may be different types of gravity like there are different types of particles.
The Cherrio experiment is just a way to help visualize what happens when a film such as space-time wants to keep balancing itself out. Gravity is Micro, Gravity is Macro, Gravity is everywhere else inbetween where matter distorts space and space finds ways to balance itself out by pushing objects togeather.
If you'd like I can explain how a massive object like the earth interact with much much much smaller objects like ourselves. My idea also explains why in a vacuum a bowling ball and a feather fall at the same rate of speed.
Any more questions?
OK, I've read some ideas thrown around this (in books and elsewhere), here's my guess at what gravity is:
Instead of imagining space as "empty", and matter as "solid", try reversing the process. Imagine space is a continuous fluid, and "matter" is a disturbance in the placid, endless ocean of space, similar to air bubbles in a soda can.
Each energy disturbance, known as an "atom", pushes the space outwards. But since space is already "endless", it can't get any bigger. So it attempts to "crush" this disturbance to restore the placid order. A bigger disturbance causes a bigger reaction from the space pool. When it gets to a certain level of supernova, it reaches a point where the mass can hold back the pressure no more, forms a black hole, and shrinks into a singularity.
A gravity field can be seen as a spacial "repair zone" to restore/offset-to the placid state. It diminishes the further away one gets from the object.
Every action requires a reaction, so gravity could be seen as the reaction to the action of spacial distortion.
Quote from: CFTraveler on January 17, 2007, 11:58:07
My opinion why gravity works is because space is not an empty lack of something, but something in itself, that has a structure. Sort of (or maybe not) like the old concept of ether. So it can be bent, spindled, and mutilated.
Yes, gravity becomes much easier to explain when we treat space a connected object, not a lack of objects.
Quote from: SpiritWings on April 17, 2007, 11:58:49
OK, I've read some ideas thrown around this (in books and elsewhere), here's my guess at what gravity is:
Instead of imagining space as "empty", and matter as "solid", try reversing the process. Imagine space is a continuous fluid, and "matter" is a disturbance in the placid, endless ocean of space, similar to air bubbles in a soda can.
Each energy disturbance, known as an "atom", pushes the space outwards. But since space is already "endless", it can't get any bigger. So it attempts to "crush" this disturbance to restore the placid order. A bigger disturbance causes a bigger reaction from the space pool. When it gets to a certain level of supernova, it reaches a point where the mass can hold back the pressure no more, forms a black hole, and shrinks into a singularity.
A gravity field can be seen as a spacial "repair zone" to restore/offset-to the placid state. It diminishes the further away one gets from the object.
Every action requires a reaction, so gravity could be seen as the reaction to the action of spacial distortion.
This does sound interesting, but it doesnt account for the one property of gravity that is every object in the universe has an attraction to every other object - not just those in it's immediate area (of disturbance). So right at this instant me and you has a gravitational attraction (although it would be so minute as to be insignificant).
Quote from: MisterJingo on April 17, 2007, 13:15:58
This does sound interesting, but it doesnt account for the one property of gravity that is every object in the universe has an attraction to every other object - not just those in it's immediate area (of disturbance). So right at this instant me and you has a gravitational attraction (although it would be so minute as to be insignificant).
Why? It seems to me that any disruption or ripple would affect everything in the medium, regardless of distance. The effects would be tiny, but it still would exist. Unless I'm not understanding what you mean.
Quote from: CFTraveler on April 19, 2007, 12:58:35
Why? It seems to me that any disruption or ripple would affect everything in the medium, regardless of distance. The effects would be tiny, but it still would exist. Unless I'm not understanding what you mean.
Disturbances in a fluid take time to propagate throughout the fluid. The universe is so large that there are parts of it which we will never see even before it ends because its light will never reach us in time. Gravity instantly effects every object regardless of distance (such effects can be seen in entangled particles - that is information is instantly transmitted between such particles regardless of distance), if gravity was more the effects of a fluid space, such action would not occur.
Also, the expansion of the universe is increasing over time, if as in the post I replied to there was no empty space, this expansion would be crushing everything already (due to the significant mass of the universe pushing against itself in increasing intensity) or at the least overriding the effects of minute atoms in its substrate.
Details details.... :x Oh well back to the drawing board.
Quote from: CFTraveler on April 19, 2007, 18:11:45
Details details.... :x Oh well back to the drawing board.
There is a link that i'm meaning to post (I just have to find it again :D) that is interesting and along these lines. It concerns a possible new state of matter which has been discovered, and implications the universe might be string-net liquid ;).
Actually, here it is:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg19325954.200
So liquid might be on the right track, just but the reality might be mind-bendingly complicated. :)
OK I have an idea. What if what we call space has all the properties of 'nothingness' but is actually the antithesis of some sort of virtual something, again in the tradition of entangled particles (space is empty but anti-space is the opposite of empty) and the reason that gravity is instantaneous is because antispace exists nonlocally(therefore takes no time to propagate), but interacts with space, affecting it in the same way that virtual particles interact?
Just give me time, I'll make it make sense...
Yikes! I just tried to read your link. I'll have to read it about three more times to see if I can understand it. :-)
Quote from: CFTraveler on April 19, 2007, 18:18:45
OK I have an idea. What if what we call space has all the properties of 'nothingness' but is actually the antithesis of some sort of virtual something, again in the tradition of entangled particles (space is empty but anti-space is the opposite of empty) and the reason that gravity is instantaneous is because antispace exists nonlocally(therefore takes no time to propagate), but interacts with space, affecting it in the same way that virtual particles interact?
Just give me time, I'll make it make sense...
I think that "something" is the net the superstrings weave. Just a thought.
Imagine a 2d plane. If it is flat, there are no distortions in placement of the plane's grid. However, if you have to wrap part of the grid around a sphere, it distorts the dimensions.
Assume the sphere has a radius of r, and the coordinate system is centered at the core of the sphere.
For simplicity, I'll limit the warp to one dimension on a hemisphere model.
Every x dimension between y's r and (-r) has the following displacement applied to it:
for |y|<=r and x>=r:
x'=x-(pi/2)*r*sin(acos(y))
The grid displacement would look similar to this:
(http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/3481/sphericalgridwarppf2.png)
(green lines = distorted x-lines, white circle = sphere, white horizontal lines = y-lines)
So imagine an object going along an imaginary or real string that has the same distortion applied to it as the the x-axis lines in the image. A straight course would skew off into a tangent towards the sphere, when it reaches y=r or y=-r.
For example, look at a rollercoaster. When an object is trying to go one way, and is forced to go another, g-forces (artificial gravity) are produced.
Imagine spheres in space causing rollercoaster-like warps in superstring 'track'. Objects wanting to go 'straight' are being re-directed into another direction, thus producing gravity.
My definition of gravity is a multi-dimensional transcending force that is weak yet effective in our dimension.
If you think about gravity it is a force weaker then magnetic forces, yet strong enough to keep us grounded.
It truely is a amazing and complex force to understand, one beyond my comprehension.
I'd like to think of it as a force that seeps into our dimension,
yet its real origin stems from elsewhere and that is where its true nature and strength lyes.
In our dimension it must abide by different laws and rules of physics.
Quote from: SpiritWings on April 22, 2007, 18:27:43
Imagine a 2d plane. If it is flat, there are no distortions in placement of the plane's grid. However, if you have to wrap part of the grid around a sphere, it distorts the dimensions.
Assume the sphere has a radius of r, and the coordinate system is centered at the core of the sphere.
For simplicity, I'll limit the warp to one dimension on a hemisphere model.
Every x dimension between y's r and (-r) has the following displacement applied to it:
for |y|<=r and x>=r:
x'=x-(pi/2)*r*sin(acos(y))
The grid displacement would look similar to this:
(http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/3481/sphericalgridwarppf2.png)
(green lines = distorted x-lines, white circle = sphere, white horizontal lines = y-lines)
So imagine an object going along an imaginary or real string that has the same distortion applied to it as the the x-axis lines in the image. A straight course would skew off into a tangent towards the sphere, when it reaches y=r or y=-r.
For example, look at a rollercoaster. When an object is trying to go one way, and is forced to go another, g-forces (artificial gravity) are produced.
Imagine spheres in space causing rollercoaster-like warps in superstring 'track'. Objects wanting to go 'straight' are being re-directed into another direction, thus producing gravity.
But such a view does not indicate how gravity propagates outside the immediate area of indentation. Also, the idea of a 2D plane is more a conceptual model used to help us understand rather than a direction translation of what is occurring (like 'imaginary time' in mathematics). In truth, the 'indentation' would propagate along the 3 physical dimensions (gravity is not only evident on a plane) and into the 4th (time) and, if we follow certain ideas from M-Theory (theory attempting to unite the 5 superstring theories), it is one of the only forces which can propagate across branes (our physical universe being a brane) and the other proposed dimensions – but this is mainly theoretical as yet.
Quote from: Principle on April 22, 2007, 19:09:38
My definition of gravity is a multi-dimensional transcending force that is weak yet effective in our dimension.
If you think about gravity it is a force weaker then magnetic forces, yet strong enough to keep us grounded.
It truely is a amazing and complex force to understand, one beyond my comprehension.
I'd like to think of it as a force that seeps into our dimension,
yet its real origin stems from elsewhere and that is where its true nature and strength lyes.
In our dimension it must abide by different laws and rules of physics.
There was a theory that suggested our brane intersected (collided) with another brane (possibly causing the big bang due to the release of immense energy), and gravity itself is seeping from the other brane into our universe - which might explain gravities strange properties. But as yet, this is just one of countless ideas.
Perhaps when the LHC at CERN starts working (hopefully later this year) we will find more pieces of the puzzle.
Hopefully... the LHC has alot banking on it. Of course, if it doesn't validate our theories, then what?
Einstein generalized his theory of relativity to encorporate gravity, not as a force, but a distortion in spacetime geometry. In this theory, spacetimes is not flat, obeying the usual rules of school geometry, but curved or warped, giving rise to both spacewarps and timewarps.
I particularly like the way Einstein related gravity to spacetime phenomenon.
-AM
I had a sight in a meditation once that I felt hinted at something about the mechanisms of gravity. I saw sort of the planets imposed with something that most resembled something like a portion of the mandelbrot fractal.
What was peculiar though was the flow of the fractal I then realized was the path of flowing particles. Not the particles themselves. But it was showing me the path particles took. It was at this point that I realized that the entire formation of the universe could be simulated by merely fluid simulation. Fluid simulation of the two base particles. Bosons and fermions. Only one fermion can occupy the same space (physical matter), infinite number of bosons can occupy the same space (non-physical things like light, gravity).
Imagine an explosion in a body of water (yes relation to big bang). But imagine how an explosion underwater would work. The middle would just be all over the place. But then it would trickle out to the sides at which point the water would begin to swirl. Sort of like when you run an oar through the water and it leaves a little whirlpool. Thousands of whirlpools of this manner would form from the explosion.
But thats water. Imagine if this same thing occurred in a big body of non-descript bosons and fermions. Fermions flowing in a little whirlpool would just be a typical whirlpool (cause water is fermions), they'd have friction on themselves and stop swirling, only one fermion could occupy the exact space in the center there all flowing into, so they'd have to exit out the bottom and go somewhere else. Bosons however would operate on a completely different dynamic. Bosons would flow into the center of the whirlpool and just infinitely condense into that singular point in the center. Since they have no friction, it'd just be infinitely flowing.
Now I suppose gravity is the product of bosons flowing in a whirlpool like manner. The whirlpool structure created by the product of fluid dynamics from an explosion of some sort. The thing to note though is since bosons have no friction and would flow in this whirlpool infinitely once established. It means they would become the predominated energy that dictates the flow of the fermions. Planets are the product of fermions all following the boson flow into a whirlpool. Since only one fermion can occupy one space at a time, rather than condensing infinitely into a single point in the center like bosons. Fermions would began piling up around that bosonic center point. They would begin forming the planet.
This basically would insinuate that gravity was established first and it is gravity that dictates where matter forms. Typical science I would assume has it wrong. Physical matter doesn't create gravity, it's the other way around. Gravity is merely what causes physical matter to flow to where it is and form. Understand, this doesn't actually contradict science at all. Science merely recognized the relation between matter and gravity, it has no evidence to the causal relationship between them. There is no proof that matter creates gravity. But as I explained here, I think it's much more plausible that gravity formed matter.
Which keep in mind Quantum mechanics does now as well suppose that gravity is a particle, a graviton. Which yes, gravitons are bosons.
Also this does have implications to the concept of channelers and your 'cosmological path through the universe' Because, how the earth is formed by physical matter following the flow of an non-existent energy. We are also formed by following the flow of a non-existent energy. :wink: :-D
Oh and that bosonic center point where they infinitely condense? Thats the sun :) Yes this does provide some support for the hollow earth people. But I'm not so much sold on that yet.
Everyone in this thread is more or less right on how gravity works.
I believe, in as to why it is there and why it works is:
It's a simple law, just like temparature, light, time and space, they are all here to let everything be what it is.