I think it's more like this
(GmM)/(r*r) = ma
cancel out the little m (say its the mas of the falling object)
and we have the gravitational constant times the mass of the earth, divided by the distance from its center, squared, as the acceleration of gravity. on most of earth, that's 9.81. :)
no i mean like something that just didn't have any s-particles, no push or pull. no desire to have them. nothing.
and it wouldn't be a wave that would emit from the black hole - just that , as the singularity formed, the would be packed so close together that it, instead of drawing more...
I see - so sad to say I am not the first to think of the idea. xD regardless - theoretically , if my exchange idea is correct - what if there were no S-particles in something - could it defy the laws of gravity, and if an exchange would be required for gravity to exist, what happens in a...
I had heard something like that, but when trying to prove it mathematically , which I prefer over experimentally, I didn't notice a correlation between the gravitational constant and the constant for the speed of light. Was it wrong to assume that a correlation would exist, or what I missing...
So I (like probably everyone else in the world) am pretty lost on the idea of gravity. I've ready plenty stating it doesn't exist, blah blah blah. Maybe I'm holding onto what i see with my eyes too firmly, but I'm under the impression it IS real.
I, however, would like a few things. I'd like a...