Is Engineering of Gravity and Time a Groundbreaking Theory?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around a paper titled "Engineering of Gravity and Time," which proposes a theory linking gravity and time to rotation. Participants explore the implications of this theory, including its ability to address questions that existing theories do not, such as the relative weakness of gravity compared to other forces. The paper also suggests an experimental approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant finds the paper's ideas to be intriguing and believes it addresses fundamental questions about gravity.
  • Another participant strongly criticizes the theory, labeling it as "complete hogwash" and disputes a claim regarding the nature of gravitational attraction.
  • A third participant reiterates the criticism, suggesting that the claim about gravitational attraction is only true under certain conditions related to rotation and challenges its validity in the context of relativity.
  • A later reply questions the credibility of the source linked in the original post, leading to the closure of the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express significant disagreement regarding the validity of the theory presented in the paper, with some defending its potential insights while others categorically reject it. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus reached on the merits of the theory.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights differing interpretations of gravitational attraction and its relationship to rotation and relativity, but does not resolve these interpretations. The credibility of the source material is also questioned, impacting the discussion's progression.

John Luis
I have recently read a paper called "Engineering of Gravity and Time" for an undergraduate student. It contains a theory of gravity and time depending on rotation.
Well.., I think it looks quiet percussive. However, fairly, it contains some worthwhile ideas, especially it answers some elementary questions that current theories can not such as "why is gravity much weaker than other forces?". It recommends an experiment at the end too.
So.., I wish you read it and tell me what you think, please.

Available at
<< Link removed.>>

Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Complete hogwash.

"Earth attracts Newton’s apple and not vice versa." False.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude
Hornbein said:
Complete hogwash.

"Earth attracts Newton’s apple and not vice versa." False.

This is true with respect to his theory "rotation" because Earth rotates but the apple does not ( Eq. 1). However, false with respect to relativity.
 
The link given is not to an acceptable source as per PF rules.

Thread closed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: davenn

Similar threads

Graduate Does Gravity Criticism in Maxwell's Equations Apply to All Gravity-Medium Analogies?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad Is there some agreement on properties of a theory of quantum gravity?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Undergrad Witten’s paper: "A Note On The Canonical Formalism for Gravity" LQG
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
7K
Undergrad Two recent tests of loop quantum gravity theory
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
6K
Undergrad The standard model from loop quantum gravity via spinors octonions
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
6K
Undergrad Can Newtonian Gravity be Thought of as a Theory of Curved Time?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
Graduate Clarification regarding argument in EPR paper
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
5K
Undergrad Can Core Theory Be Derived From Nine Lines?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Undergrad Are there issues with Conformal Gravity as a DM solution?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Undergrad What Are the Empirical Challenges Facing Quantum Gravity Theories?
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
16K