Is gravity a result of composition and temperature? Share your thoughts!

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a theory proposing that gravitation results from the right composition and amount of elements, combined with temperature, suggesting the potential for creating gravity and anti-gravity. Participants challenge the validity of this theory, emphasizing that gravity, according to Newton's work, is generated by mass and that arbitrary collections of elements produce gravity independently of temperature. Critics argue that the original idea lacks specificity and quantitative testable predictions, labeling it as a collection of scientific-sounding phrases rather than a legitimate theory. They stress the importance of providing proof and adhering to scientific standards for theories, suggesting that without substantial evidence, the ideas presented are more suited for science fiction. The conversation highlights the necessity of a solid educational foundation in physics to engage meaningfully in such discussions. Ultimately, the thread indicates that personal speculation is not appropriate for the forum, leading to a recommendation for closure.
itallcomestoenergy
Messages
47
Reaction score
4
I have this theory; gravitation is a result of the right composition and amount of elements, combined with the right temperature with a flux of course. This means there are many possibilities to create gravity, and anti-gravity if switched 180 degrees. Am I far out? what's your thoughts?
 
  • Haha
Likes strangerep and davenn
Physics news on Phys.org
You are going to have to be a lot more specific than that. Per Newton's work, gravity is something that is "generated" by bodies that have mass.
 
nuuskur said:
You are going to have to be a lot more specific than that. Per Newton's work, gravity is something that is generated by bodies that have mass.
Atoms have mass
 
Well, arbitrary collection of elements produces gravity independently of temperature. I don't see how the initial idea is plausible.

Yes atoms have mass. What is the purpose of that statement?
 
itallcomestoenergy said:
I have this theory; gravitation is a result of the right composition and amount of elements, combined with the right temperature with a flux of course. This means there are many possibilities to create gravity, and anti-gravity if switched 180 degrees. Am I far out? what's your thoughts?

Please read PF rules regarding personal/non-mainstream theories. In short, they aren't generally allowed.
 
Apparently we're going to discuss this one.

itallcomestoenergy said:
I have this theory

No you don't. You have a collection of scientific-sounding words strung together. If you have a theory, make some quantitative testable predictions.
 
  • Like
Likes Wrichik Basu, CalcNerd and itallcomestoenergy
Vanadium 50 said:
Apparently we're going to discuss this one.
No you don't. You have a collection of scientific-sounding words strung together. If you have a theory, make some quantitative testable predictions.
How is it possible to prove this theory?
 
nuuskur said:
Well, arbitrary collection of elements produces gravity independently of temperature. I don't see how the initial idea is plausible.

Yes atoms have mass. What is the purpose of that statement?
The sun, Earth and our moon
 
Your theory requires YOUR proof. Until then it should be moved to the Science fiction section.
 
  • #10
Are you not listening to me? You don't have a theory. You have a collection of scientific-sounding words strung together. If you have a theory, make some quantitative testable predictions.
 
  • Informative
Likes Klystron
  • #11
CalcNerd said:
Your theory requires YOUR proof. Until then it should be moved to the Science fiction section.
But doesn't it start with a thought? I really need inspiration and help to figure this out!
 
  • #12
Vanadium 50 said:
Are you not listening to me? You don't have a theory. You have a collection of scientific-sounding words strung together. If you have a theory, make some quantitative testable predictions.
I understand, but I don't have the background or knowledge to know where to begin...
 
  • #13
itallcomestoenergy said:
I understand, but I don't have the background or knowledge to know where to begin...

Then go to school and get a physics degree. Or spend a few thousand hours learning modern physics on your own. There is no other way if you want to be taken seriously.
 
  • Like
Likes davenn
  • #14
Sure. But if you are proposing something that is to be taken seriously (not science fiction), then you need to be prepared to offer proof. And that proof needs to hold up to tests.

Offer some proof to your ideas or the ideas are merely ideas for short science fiction novels (at best). As[U] Vanadium 50[/U] stated, you simply strung together some technobabble.
 
  • #15
Just as a note to everyone, he posted EXACTLY this same nonsense previously and that post was deleted. Why this one was not deleted as well is beyond me.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes CalcNerd and itallcomestoenergy
  • #16
CalcNerd said:
Sure. But if you are proposing something that is to be taken seriously (not science fiction), then you need to be prepared to offer proof. And that proof needs to hold up to tests.

To clarify to the OP, theories in science are a collection of rules, methods, and math that are consistent and make useful and observable predictions about the real world.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
 
  • #17
Drakkith said:
To clarify to the OP, theories in science are a collection of rules, methods, and math that are consistent and make useful and observable predictions about the real world.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
First: How can you prove me wrong? Arent you a scientist trying to figure out whatever is on your mind?

Second: Who are you to say that this is nonsense? I am here to find out where to go from here? ISnt this a general discussion forum?
 
  • #18
Since we do not discuss such personal speculation, this thread will be closed.
 
  • Like
Likes strangerep and jbriggs444
Back
Top