|
Post by cpdad on Aug 21, 2011 0:03:13 GMT -5
the opposite of gravity?... now ya saying i gotta go up before i go down....geez....this stuff gets crazy ;D...kev.
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Aug 21, 2011 0:35:21 GMT -5
o these discussions do get crazy now I wondering what came first Mass or Gravity ? Ed
|
|
darstcreek77
has rocks in the head
Member since April 2011
Posts: 673
|
Post by darstcreek77 on Aug 21, 2011 6:31:43 GMT -5
hell I still wonder how we get radio !
|
|
|
Post by gr on Aug 21, 2011 14:30:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Aug 21, 2011 15:43:02 GMT -5
Mark: I’ve been thinking on your thought experiment. Its really interesting. I had never thought about the speed of gravity. I was wondering how space would be affected if these 2 planets suddenly merged ? Would space expand or contract as the masses combined ? How would this account for the gravitational pull? Do rate of exchange stay constant? A Plankian dilemma? I like to philosophize on these things-- but as Montainge said: The roof is leaking or some other mundane necessity prevents me from being a genius! Actually I just made that one up Always making light of gravity E
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Aug 21, 2011 18:28:21 GMT -5
There another interesting facet to this gravity discussion It applies to rocks! What is specific gravity? Why do certain mineral have specific weights/displacements? How does this apply to polishing?
When a surface is polished it slow down the speed of light Right? Same thing when you put the rock in water. The water slows the light down causing the rock reflect/refraction rate It represents how the rock will look like polished. The speed of light is hindered
So the theory being propagated about the Higgs field It Postulates that the universe is filled with a field -a smear of sub atomic particles- that light beams must travel thru. It as a gravitational affect of the photons of beams. They can never exceed the 186,000 mile per second limit.
Hence with a little effort you can a beautiful polished stone if you apply a little Higgs detergent Regardless of its specific gravity
You can throw rocks at me if you dislike or like what I’ve postulatED
|
|
|
Post by cpdad on Aug 21, 2011 19:38:46 GMT -5
postulates..postulated...postulating....hey i know them words ;D...didnt think i would did ya ;D.....lets not get into quantum mechanics...it could literally take up the next 900 pages ;D...like your theory ed....kev.
|
|
|
Post by Original Admin on Aug 22, 2011 9:35:17 GMT -5
Ive got to do some more reading I think. I think we deduce.... a) It originates from mass. Distance from source is proportional to its strength. as.... b) hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/forces/isq.htmlshows a nice diagram showing the depletion of strength (although not really related to my question - section 2 - Inverse Square Law for Gravity.) c) Its not magnetic d) Im not on anything - I just got bored one night and this popped in - I wish I was on drugs it may help me along a bit e) Mass bends spacetime - gravity IS (proven (General Relativity)) the curvature of spacetime (think heavy ball on trampoline as above) Thinking of the heavy ball on a trampoline - this kind of draws a circle if you look at it from the top. The size of the circumference of the circle depends on how heavy the ball is. When you place the ball on the trampoline - it takes TIME to sink. On such small scales - this time is very short - less than half a second - but if you were to film it with a high speed camera - then you would see the circle, at the top of the rubber "pit" which formed, would grow at a given speed. It would not appear instantly. So - if another ball smashed into the ball already there and merged - would the circle change instantly in size or grow according to the new mass of the newly merged ball. I think it would grow - hence the speed question. Then again - as ball 2 approached ball 1 (it is rolling along the rubber towards it - it has to be in true spacetime) we can see that the rubber is already affected by ball 2 to some degree - so when they merge the rubber will not change!!!! I know this isnt very mathematical but it gets one thinking. Doc - everyone here is fine - the kids are 5 and 2 now!! How time flies (dont mention time!!) Mark
|
|
|
Post by docone31 on Aug 22, 2011 10:11:20 GMT -5
Mark, that is great! I remember, when luke was not even out yet. 5 & 2! Wowser. Just remember, FINE
Fouled up
Insecure,
Neurotic,
Emotionally unstable!
Hehehe. I am glad they are doing ok. I like kids. They are the hope of the future. You guys take care, and definately figuire out Gravity. I sure can't
|
|
|
Post by bobby1 on Aug 22, 2011 10:42:12 GMT -5
Its easy!!!!!! It travels at the speed of dark!! Bob
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Aug 22, 2011 10:45:26 GMT -5
Interesting !!
So were saying gravity as an elasticity quality ?
When I fell the other day it didn’t feel elastic ;D But I’m sure if I looked at in slo mo I caused quite a few gentle rolling waves
I like the thoughts!!
|
|
Fossilman
Cave Dweller
Member since January 2009
Posts: 20,685
|
Post by Fossilman on Aug 22, 2011 11:38:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Original Admin on Aug 22, 2011 11:46:39 GMT -5
Fouled up Insecure, Neurotic, Emotionally unstable! Sounds like me - the rest are great!!! The speed of dark = the speed of light - I do get that!!!
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Aug 22, 2011 13:45:52 GMT -5
" The speed of dark= the speed of light"
*L* OK Mark, now that one I do not get. Dark is the absence of light. If something is absent it is not there, so dark is nothing. How can nothing have speed? Light has substance ( it is something) so it can have speed so you can measure the speed at which it comes or goes. The speed at which dark comes or goes is not really dark's speed but rather light's speed as it arrives bringing illumination or goes away leaving nothing (dark) in it's wake. And now my head hurts again....Mel
|
|
|
Post by cpdad on Aug 22, 2011 20:55:40 GMT -5
geez...the only thing im kinda good at.....and yaw go and mess me up....why couldnt it be simple ;D....i sit in on a few think tanks about quantum mechanics from time to time.....and yet yaw go and screw me up with rocks and junk ;D.
it is a genuine question that has been raised i suppose.......my head hurts also ;D
i gotta call they guys together for another session.....usually...i sit there with my mouth open...and head sideways as they explain junk ;D...or at least the theory ;D....learned a lot though ;D
i gonna ask....kev.
|
|
|
Post by docone31 on Aug 22, 2011 21:25:00 GMT -5
Curt, the Moon sucks also. That is where the tides come from. The Earth sucks more than the Moon. The Earth sucks more, the oceans stay here, and things change here and then there. That goes on, and on. I think they call that tides. I just figuired the water was needed more there than here at random times. So much to learn.
|
|
nuevomundo
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2010
Posts: 222
|
Post by nuevomundo on Aug 23, 2011 0:43:42 GMT -5
Gravity and magnetism are two separate forces and should not be conflated, as Mel said. All mass has a gravitational field. Not all mass is magnetic. But hey, gravity is just a Theory anyhow. We should probably teach both sides of the controversy
|
|
|
Post by Hard Rock Cafe on Aug 23, 2011 12:37:44 GMT -5
Thanks for posting the link Nuevo! LOL
Chuck
|
|