Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is gravity being the place that is empty?

  1. Dec 16, 2003 #1
    Is gravity being the place that is empty?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 16, 2003 #2

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    Could you clarify your question?
     
  4. Dec 17, 2003 #3
    Gravity

    Could gravity be like fire in zero gravity? Fire in zero gravity will pull YOU into its sphere or be pulled to you. It actually creates a suction as it consumes fuel. It will chase down objects that share cabin atmosphere and glom onto it. It actually creates a sort of vacuum that the surrounding environment collapsed into dragging everything else with it.
    Unable to expel exhaust until it is almost pure energy, fire in zero gravity seems like a model for gravitational effects on many levels. It burns with a blue flame and advances toward a breeze that unbalances it, stays away from walls and is attracted to mass that is isolated in the same cabin atmosphere with it.
    It would seem that gravity is a collection of components that vary depending on where the “event” occurs and what that event co-operates with. What if mathematical models that work for gravitational efforts accurately mimic a totally different but unseen scheme that is happening. Could mass excite a driving force that causes an outside pressure to collect toward itself. Is there any chance that we are pinned to the earth and not pulled to it?
    Jeff Savage
     
  5. Dec 17, 2003 #4
    Ask yourself the question, Where does any attractive force come from? What causes any attractive force to work?

    Repulsive forces are easy. You throw particles at an object and push it away. You have a toy boat stuck in the middle of a pool. You throw things at it that land just short of the boat (try not to hit it and break it) and the waves you create push it the other side of the pool. But now stand on one side of the pool and throw things at it to create an attractive force pulling it to you. You can’t! Okay, if you threw a string over the boat with a grappling hook, you could pull it to you. Strings create the attractive force.

    What creates the attractive force in strings? It is the vacuum, exactly like you described it. Two pieces of matter are separated and they want to come back together because of the vacuum pressing them together from the outside. The vacuum is nothing. Nothing doesn’t contain the concept of space. If you separate two pieces of matter but there is no space to separate them into, they will be pressed back together.

    It is harder to answer, "Where does ANY attractive force come from?" Than to answer, "What is gravity?"

    Once we realize how the attractive force, like the strong force, and electromagnetic ATTRACTION are created... Unfortunately, we take attractive force for granted. A proton attracts an electron. Why? What is attraction?

    It is due to matter being pressed into nothingness. Nothingness is a concept that doesn't even contain the idea of space. Matter contains the idea that it is. If you try to move it, it resists, because it is. If you cut matter in half, and separate the two halves you are separating what is, which are the two pieces of matter when they are together, into what is not, which is the space necessary to accomodate two pieces of matter separated by a distance. When you try to separate the two pieces of matter into no space, the idea of no space resists being encroached upon, just like the idea of inertia (what is) resists being moved.

    But I can't clearly explain the type of matter I am talking about. It is the dark matter that makes up all space. Light matter is dark matter that is being energized. There is a huge attraction between the points of dark matter. There is a strong attractive force thoughout the whole universe. It makes space like a quivering Slinky that can carry waves. Gravity is also an attractive force throughout the whole universe. It would have to come from that other attractive force, since they both act in the same direction. We don't think of the strong force in molecules as being the result of a strong attractive force throughout space, but there is no inherent attractive force in particles, there is only inertia. Inertia comes from the concept of what is, which is the only idea inherent in matter. The strong force in strings comes from separating dark matter into what is not.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2003
  6. Dec 18, 2003 #5
    to freq or not to freq

    in my make believe world

    maybe its not frequencies that need to match but sub particulates. perhaps there is a base frequency that resonates to a buffet of particulates that differ in size/weight/thickness in near countless numbers. how they resonate from a base harmonic and then from one to each other in a descretly tuned harmonic may predicate much of how foundation energy/mass may form (again in near countless variations). this would imply (if any of it survives any critical tought) that there would be at least 2 frequencies. one base and a resonance harmonic of like particulates and perhaps a third from outside proximity influences that could be generated from just about anything from other partial/complete elements to quasars.
    I suggest that resonate particulates would rack up in likeness and cause ponds of attraction to other but different collections that vary only in their fundamental size/weight/thickness (maybe shape should be included) may attract or repel in their discrete quantum mass. Perhaps these pools are dark energy/mass that cause pressurization between and amoung astral entities..
    in your pool model, consider draining the pool at one side, or even in the middle. The current effects the model boat and considers the boat (for a moment) as part of itself as a component of the water that is now a current. For a while the boat is as far as the water is concerned, just a strange part of the water. Perhaps we are like that boat as we are pinned to the earth, asteroids as they crash to another body or even solar winds as they lay upon our world.
    it appears to me that what is called gravity to us (as we see it from here) is a incoming force that bridges to us and everything else that cascades onto our planet. that in fact this incoming force is a thing that is excited by many factors that cause an incoming attration to it toward an object. perhaps it works at varying force depending on factors as: a molten core fired by an excited atmosphere by solar winds, lit by a rotating magnetic planet and statored by a moon. perhaps other entities that have no atmosphere, a cold core, no moon and are far away from an active solar system have a much less attractive invitation to this incoming force: ie a smaller gravitational signature.
    it is because of this model I have encouraged into my mind that I believe that space flight at faster than light speeds may be possible including folding space (pinching space is more like it). It is because I feel that the ponding of such potential is out there that focused excitation may in fact be possible.
    for instance, it has been observed (if I understand it correctly) that deep space constillations have been spotted far away with better clarity than closer ones. I feel that these things have been observed from the other side of such ponds of potential. Photonic excitation (or almost any intruding particle) would cause "lensing" through such lakes and bring such an image at a faster and deeper range to the observer. Only with a blurring of the edges as a potential objection. we forcast that before we heard that this was observed. just lucky I know but none the less.....
    even such things as intruding missiles or man made vehicles should cause a bow wave and drag if entering such a pooling place....at high speeds like asteroids, excitation of such potential should create just about anything from a massive potential...creating unique harmonics all of its own, who knows what compounds could spark into existance...even maybe water that would follow behind it or like barnicles stay within its effect zone for who knows how long as it left those collection zones. those zones could also be the pressurization of spaces between star clusters or even in near empty space...
    the question is where may this lake be fillilng up from? I feel it is from black holes but there are many who do not think so...but then from where?
    anyway, its just my thoughts on the subject that a more diciplined mind can tear into but there it is...what the hell...=)
    jeff savage
     
  7. Dec 24, 2003 #6
    I rewrote my post before this one. See if you think it makes any sense. I believe the idea that you are expressing is true: the idea that something is pressing into us, but it isn't gravity. It is another attractive force that creates gravity. And it creates every attractive force there is.
     
    Last edited: Dec 24, 2003
  8. Dec 26, 2003 #7
    John..
    what do you mean you "rewrote" the post before this one? where is it?
    are you talking about the 1st one?
    jeff
     
  9. Dec 26, 2003 #8
    John
    say...if the universe, or for that matter any local part of it, was like one pole of a magnet and you had the magnetic reference of the other pole (as a free floating entity in miniature) you would be thrown toward the opposite of your reference that was the strongest or the closest or a combination of both. This is not to imply that we are talking about gravitatonic forces as solely magnetic but in the comparative reference of the subject of attractive forces acting on subordinate mass to mass relationships. The idea that one mass may be a reactive subject to a greater directional wind of attraction that is predicated on many events and that the target of action of link up is this mass we are interested in (a small astral body working with a larger one). That without this participant there is no recognizable force since the event is so vast that no reference can be made to scale it.
    Only speed and force based scaling up of what can be measured. Since these measurements can be calibrated in local terms and from what can be perceived by the actions of other bodies may indeed be an accurate predication or explanation of what is happening, they may still be in fact wrong as to what is really happening. There is the possibility that what is indeed happening is exactly the opposite of what we perceive. If we want to play with what will work (defying gravitational attraction) we are probably not going to get off of this rock unless we try to create a model will. So far, there is no way that we will ever defy the laws of physics that we are working with today unless we try thinking out of the box. With the model I prefer to play with there may be a way out of here and infect the rest of the universe with our kind.
    In my model the desired tool to do this would be doing the work of “shielding” against this “wind” or pressure or gravity wave and NOT creating an anti-gravity thrust like force. Creating an anti-gravity force would not be the same thing everywhere anyway. A dilation of the pressure from above is what is needed here and in this realm that may not be that hard an event to create and this “shield” would work anywhere the “effects” of ahem…gravity exist. It would not work, however, in say deep space away from planetary gravitational attraction. For that another device would be necessary to conduct a motive force. Of course a motive device in deep space would not be that effective anyway.
    Now, if we were to assume that MY universe is composed of incoming reactive pressure (a generated force that reacts to the very existence of such entities as planets etc.) then this pool of potential is something that can be harnessed to perform in a variety of conditions that we might be able to exploit/conduct for ourselves.
    If you find this part interesting or if you would like to add to or destroy any part of it please do. There are other chapters available for ridicule after this one.

    jeff savage

    John,
    I have not seen your rewrite. Please post it below this one. I would like to read it. Thanks
     
  10. Dec 27, 2003 #9
    Your "wind" is my vacuum. The vacuum, nothingness is an idea that doesn't contain the concept of space.

    Matter contains the idea that it is. So if you try to move it, it resists. It resists because it is something. If it was nothing, it wouldn’t resist. So matter has inertia inherent in it, because it is something. Understanding that, we assume that we can encroach into nothing and it won't resist: that nothing is full of empty space. But it isn’t. Nothing is not even empty space. So we can’t encroach into nothing; yet, if you cut raw matter in half, and separate the two pieces, you are separating what is into what is not. What is not has to find the space necessary to accommodate two pieces of matter separated by a distance. When you try to find space in nothing, there is resistance. The two pieces of matter want to come back together, because there is really no space for them to separate into.

    If space itself is being created by taking bits of matter and expanding them into the vacuum, then there is a huge attraction between the bits of matter because they all want to come back together. This looks just like gravity, as all matter is apparently attracted to all other matter. But really matter is being pressed into matter by the resistance of expanding into nothing.

    The matter that defines this expanding space is dark matter. Your computer screen is made up of pixels arranged in a triangular pattern. Each pixel is a point on the screen. Space is made up of points of dark matter. Each bit of dark matter is a point in space. Those points are expanding into the vacuum, and the vacuum wants to push them back together. There is a strong attractive force between all of the bits of expanding dark matter throughout the whole universe. That attraction is just like gravity, but the attractive force is the strong force. It makes space like a quivering Slinky that can carry waves. Gravity is also an attractive force throughout the whole universe. Since the expansion of dark matter into nothingness has the same look as gravity, of being matter attracted to matter, then this more basic force that we are not aware of creates the conditions for gravity. Gravity would come from that other attractive force, since they both act in the same direction.

    We assume there is an inherent attractive force in magnetism, but there is no inherent attractive force. The strong force in strings, which is string tension, comes from separating dark matter into what is not.

    There is no way to shield against this force, but there is a way to create a machine that can generate momentum, once we understand this force.
     
  11. Dec 27, 2003 #10
    John..
    shielding has already been done...
    jeff
     
  12. Dec 27, 2003 #11
    There is no equation that can get you to gravity. Gravity is a mechanical process in the molecule, the same way the wind drives a sailboat. The workings of the sailboat cause the wind to drive it, but you can't explain that mathematically. The inner workings of the molecule cause the effect. The electrons go different speeds on one side of the energy shell and the other, depending on how the energy shell is warped by the neutron. The neutron takes its cues from the shape of space, which is shaped by massive objects. The molecule responds to the shape of space in its inner workings and powers itself toward the massive object because electrons go faster on one side of the molecule than the other, due to how strings work. When we learn to artifically use the neutron to warp the energy shell, we can create movement, and it won't be that hard.
     
  13. Dec 28, 2003 #12

    selfAdjoint

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I think this thread belongs on Theory Development.
     
  14. Dec 29, 2003 #13
    ADjoined...its so cold I can't feel my fingers ...geeze...say...does this mean banishment or something? why moved?
     
  15. Dec 30, 2003 #14
    Yes, there is. Gravity is a relativistic effect. the second term in d(vr)

    Use Bohrs atommodel (and coulomb's law?).

    (r = relativistic)
     
  16. Dec 30, 2003 #15
    Right, relativity was able to include gravity. Then string theory solved the problems between Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.

    But gravity was hard to gleen out of the other three forces: strong force, weak force, and electromagnetism in straight forward equations. I could say that gravity works relative to the mechanism that makes it work, but then ask, What is the mechanism?

    Sting theory opens up the possibility that all of space is made of strings. And Loop Quantum Gravity suggests the same thing in a different way. We are looking for a more accurate picture or mechanical model for how gravity works.
     
  17. Jan 3, 2004 #16
    is dark matter un-biased energy at speed....say in string level: is the only difference between each its own size in length/thickness...resonating to the same base harmonic?
    and then to each other on second hand harmonic....almost like self sorting out of strings....by how they are alike or differ due to their inherant tuning....to perhaps form up on harmonic similarities based solely on their own reaction to external and communial excitation....
    this would lead me to believe that there are 3 resonances or harmonic waves...base, tuned and structural or community...
    in other words collective association of alike string component would respond in mass to a higher association of non conforming base communities...in short, they would self sort out, then rack up and eventually negociate with other colonies for attraction or repulsion responces....sub base radio chemestry kinda...
    js
     
  18. Jan 9, 2004 #17
    Jeff -
    are you getting terms like "resonating base frequencies" from string theory, or something else?
     
  19. Jan 9, 2004 #18
    hi
    each domain/reality has to have its own base harmonic to which its tuned to...
    js
     
  20. Jan 9, 2004 #19
    is this formula part of "string theory"?

    frequency = 1/length x sq.root of tension/mass per unit length ?

    (replace mass w/ potential energy)
     
  21. Jan 14, 2004 #20
    Gravitation and other forces acts as the certain essence aspiring to change the size of the channel of interaction (a string) between objects.
    Gravitation always appears as the essence reducing this size. Reduction of space between objects has show as their interaction (attraction). Force of gravity exists in a “particle – particle” channels. Gravity interaction between macroobjects this the sum of interactions between all particles.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?