Abstractly thinking outside the box

1. Sep 28, 2011

Thal

I have very little background in physics and I only have basic calculus under my belt... but I can't seem to get this thought out of my head. There is no mathematical proofs here, no experimental evidence, not even any real evidence for theory, however I'd like to hear your thoughts on the possibility.

I've been entertaining the thought that gravity is simply a centripetal acceleration. The rotation of the earth in relation to the rotation around the sun in relation to the entire systems rotational relation to galaxies around it, and in the end, the universe; may produce a gyroscopic effect on each object (because gravity is so weak and doesn't spread out far [relatively] past the objects farthest borders, each system has its own set of gravitational principles). Because of this I figure position has a very specific relationship to time. Actually that isn't completely accurate, it has a very specific relationship to the PERCEPTION of time. This requires an extremely large number of logical leaps, that really do step outside the very essence of logic, however it seems to me that if you were at the center of the universe, gravity would be much stronger than it is on earth (as would the masses of the objects surrounding it), and time would flow much faster.

Since all galaxies rotate, which I figure factors in to the centripetal acceleration of each body at some point, I also make the leap to assume the entire universe rotates. Mine own take on the matter is that time is merely a linear relationship that we've developed because we see everything in our system happening sequentially. That is very obvious, but if gravity can bend light, what's to say that it can't bend time. I personally have been tending to the idea that at the center of the universe the perception of time is extremely different than the perception of time near the edges. Perhaps near the center time flows what we would see as "fast". To relate, a lifetime of ours would pass in mere nanoseconds, while to a human at the center their life would play out as ours would. Likewise, near the edges, a lifetime would play out normally, while to us it would last an infinitude of "time".

I simply think that due to the rotation of every large body of mass that all the commonplace principles of time, mass, energy, etc, can be explained as radii of the orbits. The principles change based on your position relative to the center of the universe.

Clearly out of my mind or food for thought? cheers ^_^

-edit- The proportion of the earths mass to the moons mass is way different than the proportion of the acceleration due to the earths gravity to the acceleration due to the moons gravity. This is because of the distance, no? But the numbers don't come out exactly even, down to the -22nd power or so. Is this due to the proportion of the rotations? Guess we need to measure a rotation of at LEAST a nearby galaxy, which is a much larger distance away, to see this number crop up to an amount which we can't ignore like we can the earth to moon distance. DEATH TO ROUNDING!

Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
2. Sep 28, 2011

Naty1

Hi Thal....

You have so many misconceptions I'd simply suggest you read about what the theory of gravity is before trying to imagine what it might be...start with Newtonian gravity. Positing hypothetical alternatives based on false premises probably won't be very helpful for you.

In the above excerpt, for example, I'd ask you to consider a simple analogy: What's the gravity pulling on you at the center of the earth...what would your acceleration be?

It's zero.....

In addition there is no "center of the universe"....which further complicates your musings.

Next, gravity is always strongest when you are closest to a mass....like sitting in your living room on the surface of the earth. The gravitational attraction from, say, the Crab Nebula, or the nearest galaxy (Andromedia) is infinitesimally small relative to that of earth.

You comment about the flow of time suggests you know a bit about general relativty. But time is a function of gravitational
potential not gravitational force as you imply...For example, time IS slower for a person at the center of the earth relative to a surface observer even though the force of ravity is weaker.

Last edited: Sep 28, 2011
3. Sep 28, 2011

Thal

That's very helpful! How can there be no center of the universe though? That seems to me like having an apple with a nonexistant core. Not that it's just not there, but that it doesn't exist. You said your acceleration at the center of the earth would be 0, however why would you not have a centripetal acceleration around the sun? Not that I'm doubting you, and I'm sure I can find the information somewhere as you suggested, but I'm too curious not to ask!

4. Sep 28, 2011

jewbinson

The universe is not in the shape of a sphere like you might think. Type "shape of the universe" into wiki to read up more about this subject

5. Sep 28, 2011

Thal

Hm I've known about how in an universal expansion model from every point in the universe it appears as though you're at the center, however not every point can be at the same point (the center) at the same time obviously -edit- unless t = 0 -/edit-, and even the model states that its only your perception of the center, not your actual physical position.

On a side note I'm watching all of the newtonian physics lessons from yale on youtube. The lorentz transformation was incredibly interesting and gives me an excited new perspective on a lot of things. After I've got a solid understanding of all the concepts and derived concepts / implications of the concepts I'll come back and post some more solid ideas!