MRPHow does it make the centre Higher in pressurization, compared to the outer surface?
MRPAlbert Francis Birch:
Unwary readers should take warning that ordinary language undergoes modification to a high-pressure form when applied to the interior of the Earth. A few examples of equivalents follow:
High Pressure Form/Ordinary Meaning
Certain/Dubious
Undoubtedly/Perhaps
Positive proof/Vague suggestion
Unanswerable argument/Trivial objection
Pure iron/Uncertain mixture of all the elements
please refer to my post placed 03-19-2004 02:12 PMMRP...How will a push force, from space, pressurize the interior? Higher at the center, then at the outsides...
is your answer...Humm attraction to a (common) center is exactly what has been stated, so all vectors would point to the center, that proves Nothing repsective of a pushing force getting to the center and pressurizing it to such a degree, greater, that all of the surrounding matter above it...Originally posted by Des Chamberlain(SNIP)[/color]"The force caused by gravity on a non massive object points to the middle. That's why the pressaure is at the highest in the middle." (SNoP)[/color]
Please It is MRP not MRM..."to the center of the Earth with a pressure gauge" NEVER, but I do understand how seismic works, seismic studies, and (all of the?) evidence that affords all of us...Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
MRM
It's the expansion cause by trapped heat that in turn is born of elementry mollecules being bombarded by cosmic radiation that is causing the preasure.
When was the last time you journeyed to the centre of the Earth with a preasure gauge?
I'm Sorry to annoy you, I'm detecting some tension.MRP.
how does a "Push force from space" cause attraction between bodies?
if that is in reference to me...answered my questions??...not even closeOriginally posted by Gara
wow i can't believe you are unable to follow his simple post.
im not saying i agree or disagree with it, I am just saying stop going around and around, he's already asnwered your questions.
MRP.
well, see, I've read of the push from space theories and they cannot accommodate both of those needs, the need for the pressurisation of the centre higher, then the outer shell, and retain the ability to be attractive...especially since the present concepts of gravity give a metric that seems to be working just fine
So, the blue[/color] is your Non answer, as all it says it is is pressurized by 'passing cosmic energy', (actually explains about, well, nothing) the rest of the post is back to the 'pulping' gravity, without justification...Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
MRP
I apologise for not being able to state this point with the required clarity.
I’ll try once more to elucidate the 'FIRESTAR EFFECT'
As there are very high temps and liquid states at the planets core level the elements are able to have some free movement.
The more effective particle absorbers (bearing in mind that the core is uniformly bombarded being shielded to the same degree in all aspects) will congregate at the centre with progressively less efficient particle absorbers forming distinct layers around the core.
The onion analogy.
The elements at the core are reacting more with the cosmic energy that is passing through the planet and is therefore at a higher pressure or is pressed harder.[/color]
At first you could imagine that the Earth would just keep attaining higher and higher pressures but if we bear in mind that cosmic energy will be passing through the core and interacting with elements as it exits the planets mass their will be an off setting of the push force, as the push force is now pushing out but not after giving up some of it's energy on its path to the core the net effect is that there is more push in than out.
If a state arises where the core matter of a body becomes so pressurised and dense that cosmic energy cannot pass through it, then it will lose the counter outward push force and the body will collapse into a black hole.
We need a model that works at all levels unless you believe that there are different sets of rules at quantum levels which I strongly refute.
The Gravity concept is misleading and erroneous.
Gravity is dead long live the ‘FIRESTAR EFFECT’
I have offered such a model:Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
We need a model that works at all levels unless you believe that there are different sets of rules at quantum levels which I strongly refute.
The Gravity concept is misleading and erroneous.
Gravity is dead long live the ‘FIRESTAR EFFECT’
Not a chance bud, do you know what a cloud chamber is, if there was that much "particulate" activity it would have been found, by now, aside from that, you haven't explained how it occurs differentially, meaning increasing as it descends, you simply state "it pressurizes" without telling us how it pressurizes, even greater, further down...no M.O.Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
MRP
You are teasing me!
read it again.
My reasons are clear.
You have contradicted yourself, does that feel good to you too?Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
Push! Not pull.
Des Chamberlain
The Idea that I want to set out here is so beautifully simple, it just feels right it fits with how we see our physical universe, read on and you’ll see what I mean.
A mass (lump of rock) is floating in the vacuum of space far far away from any other masses. Sub-atomic particles that are moving through space pass through our mass as they are so teeny weenie that they can pass through atoms with no problem at all. But, some particles do collide with atoms occasionally and there are a lot of sub-atomic particles whizzing about so it all adds up.
Our mass is unaffected as the colliding sub-atomic particles are quite uniform at least in this part of creation. Let us give our mass a trajectory and velocity and call it an asteroid for example. As our asteroid moves through space it eventually approaches another mass, say The Earth. The Earth is bigger and so our asteroid is attracted to this much larger mass...
Hmmm. Let’s stop here for a moment and take a 180 degree conceptual shift and try again!
As our asteroid moves closer to the Earth it is shielded from the effects of sub-atomic particles that were destined to hit it but were absorbed by the mass of Earth. Our asteroid is also shielding the Earth in the same fashion but to a lesser degree as it’s not a particularly large asteroid and the Earth is much bigger. There exists a dearth of sub-atomic particles in the space that separates our asteroid from the Earth. The asteroid wants to move closer to the Earth to regain equilibrium, balance. Like a balloon being pushed through the air by a breeze.
As the distance between the asteroid and the Earth decreases the Earth grows larger on the horizon of the approaching asteroid. Its also Shields it from even more particles, the sub-atomic pressure decreases on the shielded side but remains constant on the side open to unimpeded space. They try harder to balance the forces of sub-atomic pressure acting on them. They are pushed towards each other or even sucked if you like; they both feel good to me![/color]
The asteroids initial trajectory and velocity is such that its course is changed just the right amount to move into an orbit around the Earth where the centrifugal force equals the dearth of sub-atomic pressure that exists between them. Phew that was close;
I thought it was ‘Independence Day’ for a minute!
Now as you read this imagine that the Earth beneath you is shielding you from the same amount of sub-atomic pressure as your weight! Yes! We are simply pressed to the Earth and not pulled by this stuff that we call gravity which doesn’t exists and is just an ego based concept of big attracting small.
Don’t worry it won’t change a thing apart from making more sense.
Oh by the way, Gold is a heavier than you because it has a structure that can block more sub-atomic particles and is therefore a more affective shield.
We are acted upon in the same way as in the observed physical world it’s just that the forces are too small for our bulky atom based instruments to measure. They say you weigh less at night is that the effect of the moon blocking particles?
It’s not rocket science, it’s quantum physics.
Push! Not pull.
That is just ridiculous. A few centuries ago people were executed for even suggesting that Earth is not the center of the solar system. Everyone believed the sun revolves around Earth, because that is what they were led to believe and no one could prove otherwise. Once the necessary tools were available we realized we were wrong.Originally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
it would be nice if you could refrain from 'pulping' gravity, as a theory, as it has served humanity, very well, so far...so let's just stick to the facts please...and pulping it is just a waste of space...
Why must it have a finite limit? The strength of the gravitational field, according to this theory, depends on the mass of the shielding object (and the distance from that object). The larger the mass, the more "pushing particles" it absorbs. As long as there is no finite limit to mass, there is no finite limit to the amount of such particles that can be absorbed, and therefore no finite limit to the strength of the gravitational field.Originally posted by russ_watters
Also, what is the maximum strength of a gravitational field? (unless you are saying there is an infinite density of these unobserved particles, gravity must have a finite upper limit)
Actually, even if the experiments show that your weight does decrease under Fort Knox, it wouldn't mean your theory is correct. The current theory of gravity also predicts, to the best of my knowledge, the same results. If you are beneath Fort Knox, the building will also pull you (or shield you, by your theory) with the force of G\frac{Mm}{d^2}, therefore decreasing your apparent weight.Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
Hi Buddy
The reason we don't float in a building is because the particles blocked by the matter in the building is very small compared with the particles absorbed by earth. It would be an interesting experiment to see if something wieghed less if it were placed under a large particle shild such as the fort knoxs gold reserve! experiments are being carried out in deep mines in the north of England away from interferance on the planets surface which might help support this idea
I do have a question about your proposed theory. You seem to be describing the movement of such sub-atomic particles through the mass as random - some of them go through with no problems, and some of them collide with the atoms. But this cannot be true, since the force of gravity is constant and doesn't account for such random happenings (and while on average the difference would not be enormous, it would still exist), and modern experiements support this claim.Originally posted by Des Chamberlain
A mass (lump of rock) is floating in the vacuum of space far far away from any other masses. Sub-atomic particles that are moving through space pass through our mass as they are so teeny weenie that they can pass through atoms with no problem at all. But, some particles do collide with atoms occasionally and there are a lot of sub-atomic particles whizzing about so it all adds up.
It is impossible to provide interstellar and/or intergalactic interactions with the help of gravity propagating with c, especially below c. Gravity does not propagate at all. It operates in the all volume of the universe simultaneously and synchronously. Gravity and absolute time is one thing.Originally posted by Mr. Robin Parsons
There is also the simple question of interstellar and/or galactic gravity, how do those particles travel those distances, (To push Galaxies) as they clearly MUST be traveling those distances below c, as they are particles, right? What is the source of those particulate emissions...intergalactically?
Gravity is not instantaneous. If there are two massive objects far away from each other, and suddenly one of them begins to disappear, the other object will only notice a difference in the gravitational force after some time.Originally posted by Michael F. Dmitriyev
It is impossible to provide interstellar and/or intergalactic interactions with the help of gravity propagating with c, especially below c. Gravity does not propagate at all. It operates in the all volume of the universe simultaneously and synchronously. Gravity and absolute time is one thing.
Therefore gravity cannot be provided with any particles.
What do you mean under " begins to disappear"?Originally posted by Chen
Gravity is not instantaneous. If there are two massive objects far away from each other, and suddenly one of them begins to disappear, the other object will only notice a difference in the gravitational force after some time.