Cory Strieby Answers : What Is Gravity?

[fr0stbyte69]

Universal Force a Unification of Astro and Quantum Physics By: Cory Strieby

 

Imagine a universe full of sub atomic particles so small they pass through most solid matter as if light passes through smoke. What are these sub atomic particles? I'm not sure probably a combination of quarks neutrons and cosmic rays emitting from trillions of sources throughout every part of the galaxy. These particles are so small that when they encounter something like the earth the chance is greater that they will pass through it completely finding the spaces between the protons and neutrons inside individual atoms. Okay, so you might ask how can a neutron be so small it misses atomic neutrons? If the traveling neutron was traveling at light speed or greater it would be stretched into a string approximately a billionth fraction of its original free standing size. Now on occasion these sub atomic particles don’t miss but instead collide transferring their energy into the matter they collide with. I call this soup of subatomic particles Universal force.

Next let us imagine two free standing objects in space, in-fact lets use the Earth and the Moon for our example both objects are constantly being bombarded with universal force from every direction in the universe. These objects begin to act like filters from the universal force they encounter minus the sub atomic particle collisions that occur. So when these objects come within any proximity of one another they cast a certain filtered shadow, if you will, from the universal force it has encountered. The moon encounters less universal force from the side facing the earth than it does from any other direction and vice-versa. The sides facing away are subject to a greater amount of sub atomic collision encounters and energy is transferred from every direction greater than what has been filtered in the direction of the opposing object. Universal force then pushes these objects closer to one another causing the apparent attraction of gravity.

Now compare this to how universal force affects an object of free standing matter in space when said object is subjected from every direction it falls into a state of equilibrium and simply floats. I also would like to state that the denser an object is the greater the chance of sub atomic collision as universal force passes through.

 

 

I am proposing this theory as a unification theory of quantum and astrophysics so let me plug this into some known conundrums. Astrophysics largest flaw was that after the big bang occurred gravity should have caused it to collapse back in on itself. Now, if universal force originates inside of the big bang then the space beyond becomes the largest vacuum of sub atomic particles known. This would have a greater attraction to matter than any matter has to other matter. Therefore universal force supports the big bang.

Next the largest problem in quantum physics is that gravity does not appear to exist. Now if we use universal force within this scenario it is evident to conclude that the smaller an object is the less likely chances of collision with another sub atomic particle. Therefore, universal force supports the anti gravity world of quantum physics more over it derives gravity from quantum physics.

Now my guess as to what these sub particles can be are only mere speculation. They could be something as simple as photons from every star in the night when trying to imagine the principle affects of universal force. I believe it to be the combination of every known smallest pieces of the universe orchestrating an affect on a grand scale.

More evidence of universal force mechanics come from the sub atomic particles colliding with one another. These collisions would result in friction heat. I believe this would happen at a certain rate which is what prevents deep space from reaching absolute zero.

[CraigD]

Welcome to hypography, fr0stybyte! :) Am I correct in assuming you are Cory Strieby?

 

Universal Force a Unification of Astro and Quantum Physics By: Cory Strieby

 

Imagine a universe full of sub atomic particles so small they pass through most solid matter as if light passes through smoke. ...

 

What you’re describing here seems to be a variation on a theory nearly as old as that of universal gravity itself, Fatio and LeSage’s kinetic theories, from the 18 and 19th centuries. Newton hinted that he thought this was the way to go in looking for a cause of gravity (he famously described gravity’s effect, not its cause), but AFAIK, never seriously worked on a kinetic theory like his contemporary, Fatio.

 

We’ve discussed these a bit, mostly in the thread “Gravity is a particle that pushes!”, linked to by this post quote:

It – the idea that gravity is caused by collisions, that is, pushing by otherwise undetected particles (Le Sage – see below – termed them “ultramundane corpuscles”) – is not only interesting, it’s among the oldest and most thoroughly studied, as is its failure to satisfactorily explain even simple gravitational phenomena.

 

Generically, this idea is known as “kinetic” or “corpuscular” gravity. The most well known such a theory is “Le Sage's theory of gravitation”, after papers from 1748 to 1784 by physicist George-Louise Le Sage, though an essentially identical theory was publically presented in 1690 by Nicolas Fatio. ...

 

Moderation note: the rest of this post and various replies to it were moved to the math and physics forum thread 23052, because this discussion is not about the original strange claim thread’s pushing gravity particle theory, but about old and present day theories about gravity carrying particles.

 

As I noted there, what’s killed LeSage’s and similar theories is the failure of anyone being able to actually get them to work. So, the challenge for anyone wanting to resurrect the idea is devising some scheme where they work – that is, successfuly using some exact theory to describe how planet and larger and smaller bodies move that even vaguely resembles how we actually observe the to. We’ve got better computers than LeSage did, so maybe some brilliant and hardworking person can manage this. If it’s possible at all, I think it’d take someone with both these qualities.

 

Personally, I’d start by just getting a program that can reasonably accurately simulate a system (in 2 or 3-D) with on the order of the huge number of colliding bodies the theories require. I’ve flirted with this a bit myself, but have yet to come up with anything even play-worthy.

[Qfwfq]

(in 2 or 3-D)

Actually, if it isn't in 3D you could hardly expect flux conservation to give the inverse square law. Then of course there is the slight non-linearity of the relativistic description, which is basically a slight self-interaction so in order to recover this you would need to postulate that the particles themselves can emit and absorb each other to some slight degree.

[fr0stbyte69]

Actually, if it isn't in 3D you could hardly expect flux conservation to give the inverse square law. Then of course there is the slight non-linearity of the relativistic description, which is basically a slight self-interaction so in order to recover this you would need to postulate that the particles themselves can emit and absorb each other to some slight degree.

Yes I am Cory Strieby I am not well educated so I have never heard of those theories quoted above. But I did derive this theory from my own observations. I don't think it would be hard at all to build a working model linear. just use a flat disc that shoots bbs in 6 or more directions.from the outer edge aimed in and place two other spheres objects on the disc. They will find each other.