Gravity is a particle that pushes!

[Dannel Roberts]

I'd like to ask this: What happens to all these gravity particles that are pushing me, my PC, my car, all the oceans of the world etc, when they get to the centre of the earth? Obviously they can't carry on in the same direction because then the particles holding me down would be pushing Australians off the world.

Hang on, I've just had an idea myself; perhaps the particles annihilate each other when the collide giving a burst of energy. That would explain why the earths core is so hot!

 

Thank you for your comment. You have answered your own question. I believe that gravity does heat the center of the earth. It's not a collision that gives off a burst of energy. The gravity particle changes it's "State" to another energy particle. In a large concentration of gravity, heat is the byproduct. I was hoping someone would figure this out. It is an obvious answer when you change gravity from a force that pull to a particle that pushes. This is just one of many answers you will get by changing the "commonly held view of gravity".

 

I just posted a new thread "Could Gravity power the sun?". It will answer many of your questions.

[jasonchild]

 

 

Don't get to huffy about the book. It's kind of like a movie. They show small clips so you will see the show. I would like to make a wager with you. If what I post between now and the end of July of 2005 has no scientific value to you, I will give you a free book, however if what I present has any scientific value to you, then you will buy a book. You will be the sole judge of the scientific value. Are you in? This is for JasonChild only!

 

 

I'm in! And quite refreshed at your dedication to your adherance to your theory. And please, dont confuse my skepticism with brash intollerance ;)

 

jCc

[Astrojan]

Gravity. Is it really a pulling force? No. :)

 

Astrojan Pushing Gravity

[EWright]

Thank you for your comment. You have answered your own question. I believe that gravity does heat the center of the earth. It's not a collision that gives off a burst of energy. The gravity particle changes it's "State" to another energy particle. In a large concentration of gravity, heat is the byproduct. I was hoping someone would figure this out. It is an obvious answer when you change gravity from a force that pull to a particle that pushes. This is just one of many answers you will get by changing the "commonly held view of gravity".

 

I just posted a new thread "Could Gravity power the sun?". It will answer many of your questions.

 

Um, can I get my free book now? I'd like to read more about the kid being sucked in by skateboarding sperm :)

 

I did not read this entire post because it's so long, so forgive me if this has been asked. But you state that one gravity has reached the atom, it then travels on to find another. If it is so inclined to reach this atom, what force is then causing it to leave the atom again? This does not make sense.

 

I do like the fact that you are trying to expand on the ideas of physics, as I hope to do myself; but I do feel that your idea falls short. And if gravity pushes, why is it not a more repulsive than attractive force? If enough sperm are hitting the skateboarder, he should be driven away from the source of the gravity sperm.

[EWright]

:) Why can't I get answers to my questions!? And where is my free book!? He skipped town with it; I just know he did! :eek:

[Torson]

:) I had a good giggle reading this "hypofantacy", but then I stopped: What if somebody bought this book?? How is physics going to be viewed by those who wants to learn - is it all a joke?

Keep it away from the public, there is enough confusion out there! This has nothing to do with reality!

[arkain101]

Is it not true, Einstiens theories were dervived from that fact that he chose to beleive that light travels at a constant to all frames of reference?

 

Everything you know that is taught about this stuff in schools is based off of a small beleif that has shaky evidence of fact. no?

 

One thing that really ticks me off is when people think they are so smart because theyve beleived everything someone else told them and choose to treat other peoples original ideas like nonsense when these "smart" know it all people cant prove their beleif.

[GAHD]

I agree with you arkain, but that's a subject best put to another, more aptly named thread, eh?

[infamous]

Why hasn't this thread been move to strange claims?

[arkain101]

I like this guys enthusiasm and creativity. Although I have a few arguments to make towards his theory.

Although this theory sparked an idea of my own for gravity. This is a completely new idea as far as I know.

I am working on the theory that gravity is not a force in itself. Ive been considering the vacume of space which we refer to as nothing to be the cause of the gravity effect.

 

As of right now it is in the very begginnings of works.. but the basics is this.

 

Matter takes up "space" in space. Any object taking up space creates an empty space in the empty space, a vacume in the vacume. If we imagine space as frictionless water for example. Then we look at how bubbles that take up the space of water, they are destined to go to the place of least pressure. so for example. If you compress water and put bubbles in the water and create an equal pressure in the water the bubbles would be planets in space. And would want to go wherever there is less pressure. Would these bubbles in pressured water be attracted to eachother?

 

space is not a vacume it is a place of less "gravity force" which contains billions of particles wipping around in all directions correct? The word vacume is the word for lack there of pressure. Like cold is a word for lack there of heat.

 

I can not explain this or back it up as of yet.. but the idea fits into the puzzle pretty well as of so far.

[Boerseun]

Arkain, although visually your analogy with water fits the bill, it's still a false analogy.

 

Stuff floating on water tends to clump together because of surface tension, which doesn't exist in space. The gravitational effect that one clump of mass floating in space has on another decreases with distance, which is a measurement of the amount of space between these two objects, but it doesn't imply anything towards the nature of the emptyness, apart from being 'curved' near mass.

 

If, what you're saying about the nature of gravity is true, then the physical size of the universe will determine the gravity experienced on Earth. If we can calculate the 'pressure' from space as you've described it, and throw 1g and the Earth's mass into the equation, we should be able to determine the exact size of the universe - which means the universe is finite and not expanding. We know through redshift that the universe is expanding, so the 'pressure' should continuously decrease, until there's zero g on the surface of Earth.

 

Apart from my rambling above, your approach also cannot explain orbits; using your view, things will just collapse and 'clump' together.

[insight]

I like this guys enthusiasm and creativity. Although I have a few arguments to make towards his theory.

Although this theory sparked an idea of my own for gravity. This is a completely new idea as far as I know.

I am working on the theory that gravity is not a force in itself. Ive been considering the vacume of space which we refer to as nothing to be the cause of the gravity effect.

 

As of right now it is in the very begginnings of works.. but the basics is this.

 

Matter takes up "space" in space. Any object taking up space creates an empty space in the empty space, a vacume in the vacume. If we imagine space as frictionless water for example. Then we look at how bubbles that take up the space of water, they are destined to go to the place of least pressure. so for example. If you compress water and put bubbles in the water and create an equal pressure in the water the bubbles would be planets in space. And would want to go wherever there is less pressure. Would these bubbles in pressured water be attracted to eachother?

 

space is not a vacume it is a place of less "gravity force" which contains billions of particles wipping around in all directions correct? The word vacume is the word for lack there of pressure. Like cold is a word for lack there of heat.

 

I can not explain this or back it up as of yet.. but the idea fits into the puzzle pretty well as of so far.

I agree with Boerseun. Since your analogy used saturated pressure, isentropically temperature would be same throughout. As we know there is no enthalpy change, there is no heat gain and heat loss and so is temperature. Since temperature has dropped from the big bang, the enthalpy change is accepted.

[arkain101]

Good thoughts guys but I beleive you got the wrong impression. It is so much more complex than that.

 

What we call the vacume of space is a infinite nothingness. (this is why it is so hard to comprehend). Even though we call this space nothing it is still a thing of "room" (forever) , and it is has a name aswell. This empty nothing could be infinite and the universe is likewise infinite in time. Theoretically it will ALWAYS be and will always expand differently and to different sizes and (if the big bang theory is right it will clump together in different places everytime. So what ever this infinite medium all matter and energy is contained whithin it can be described as the universe and all the matter that belongs to this vastness is merely a try at reality. All matter can be looked at as a pin prick inside infination(?). What happens when atoms start clumping together? It is as if they are being pushed inward by pressure in the same way they are being pulled in by pressure. In the core of atom there is a place where "Space" is taken up by material. This is a high pressure or in otherwords a strong nuclear force. In the core of a large collection of atoms like a planet. The pressure is so great that the material in the middle is most likely to be nearly solidified liquid. If gravity was a pulling force originating from the center of the planet, gravity would pull objects in the center of the earth spherically out words and create a zero G sensation. This would be using the idea atoms pull towards atoms. Performing a test of this kind can say either atoms are attracted to one another by a pulling force or are attracted to places where material has taken up room. I dont like to use the water anaolgy but. If you take a container of water and imagine a invisible marble in the water it is taking up space now all of the water wants to get back to this place where it has been seperated. Any molecule that happens to be in the vacinity will be sucked into the marble if it happens to have have atomic sized pores. Now this idea doesnt function completely like water and pressure. I am trying to think of just how this idea could allow atoms to want to collect to eachother. It can be more imagined as planets are the vacume and space is the place of pressure everything wants to go into the vacume matter takes up.

 

Thoughts are welcome, remember it is just an idea and isnt told to explain everything as of yet.

[Tormod]

What we call the vacume of space is a infinite nothingness.

 

Where do you have this from? Generally space is not cosnidered true vacuum but "near" vacuum since it always contains at least a few particles (or energy) per whatever measure one wants to use.

 

"infinite nothingness"...it's not hard to grasp, it's just an oxymoron.

[Astrojan]

Why hasn't this thread been move to strange claims? :)

I dont know why hasn't general relativity been move to strange claims? :)

[insight]

What we call the vacume of space is a infinite nothingness.

the vacuum has energy like Casimir vacuum. As like your analogy, Ideal gas "Air" also has energy that just release or absorb energy during phase change.

So what ever this infinite medium all matter and energy is contained whithin it can be described as the universe and all the matter that belongs to this vastness is merely a try at reality.

We really can't predict the total mass of the Universe since Black Matter concerns.

It is as if they are being pushed inward by pressure in the same way they are being pulled in by pressure.

:) how can the pressure is pulled inwardly? pressure should subjectively push.

In the core of a large collection of atoms like a planet. The pressure is so great that the material in the middle is most likely to be nearly solidified liquid.

The sun is not a solid ball, which makes of Plasma even in the core. you know It is so hot that even solid are melted and stay as a plasma. I think your statement is wrong (not nearly, but beyond that).

I dont like to use the water anaolgy

Here you go again :)

[arkain101]

"infinite nothingness"...it's not hard to grasp, it's just an oxymoron.

 

 

so you are saying you can imagine infinity and comprehend it? That task or even the imagination of that task is unhuman. We can get an idea but we can not experience as who we are at this time. If you know what I mean.

 

no offense but it seems like the concept is going over your heads. erase all matter in the universe and the vast nothingness is still there infinitly in size.