Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Gravity

Old 20th Jan 2009, 01:40
  #1 (permalink)  
Location, Location, Location
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If it moves, watch it like a hawk: If it doesn't, hit it with a hammer until it does...
Age: 56
Posts: 142
Gravity

Come on then; how DOES it work.

Is it bounded by common electro-magnetic theorems or is it a force apart.

Does its' effect get transferred at the speed-of-light or is it unbounded.

Is there a particle that transmits 'Gravity'.

Can there be a theory-of-everything without an understanding of gravity.

All rhetorical, but valid, questions; Serious answers only....nah only joking.

Thoughts?
mocoman is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 01:43
  #2 (permalink)  
Lupus Domesticus
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
No-one knows, yet.

If we did, we'd have devised something with which to counter it.


....but imagine if we did invent anti-gravity, and then the atmosphere and the oceans all fell off...maybe that's what happened to the Martians
BlueWolf is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 01:47
  #3 (permalink)  
Location, Location, Location
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: If it moves, watch it like a hawk: If it doesn't, hit it with a hammer until it does...
Age: 56
Posts: 142
have devised something with which to counter it
<tinfoilhat>
what makes you think we haven't?
</tinfoilhat>

mocoman is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 02:36
  #4 (permalink)  
Drain Bamaged
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Earth
Age: 52
Posts: 415
ehwatezedoing is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 02:40
  #5 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 72
Posts: 2,394
Wot, you lot not figured out how to get around this gravity thing?

I'll let you know how to do that, for a small fee.



(Course, may not work for everyone. )
con-pilot is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 03:36
  #6 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 80
Posts: 4,697
Oh goodness. He's doing it on purpose isn't he. It's torture not talking about gravity when all about me are.

Forty years ago I wondered why matter might be of a constant size. We couldn't tell if it changed scale. After all, the Earth for just one example, is decelerating in all directions relative to the 'fixed stars'. What relativistic effect would this have on our local matter? see Lorentz.

I wondered if the Earth might be expanding. Not just the space between particles, but the very parts that we perceive as the fabric of matter; the components that go towards making an atom.

Now, since rulers would also be expanding, only God would be able to see such a change of scale. All very well, but the surface of a planet or sun would soon be exceeding the speed of light...or not, more likely, but you know what I mean.

The next bit requires one to believe in an aether that has substance. Perhaps the only substance...let's see what comes out of CERN. Decades have gone by with people teaching us that there is no need for a substance for waves to travel in. James Clarke Maxwell, formulated so well, the concept of EM waves being a perfectly balanced act: electrical and magnetic fields doing their thing without the support of a medium. But now, the concept of spacetime being 'something', is stimulating a steady flow of papers and publications.

What I wondered all those years ago, was whether spacetime flowed into matter to pay for the change of scale. That's it. In a nutshell.

However, I have come to doubt if we will ever detect gravity waves. Whatever we use to measure them with will be modified by the wave. Yes, it is traveling at c.

General Relativity predicted gravity waves. Last I heard, none had been detected.

It seems that my ideas are not too far-fetched. A couple of years ago I was directed -via a physics forum - to an American uni where a professor had published on Gravitational Inflow. We exchange e-mails a couple of times, then I received the most bewildering, outlandish, childish, puerile, series of comments from him that I have ever been on the receiving end of. This from a supposed intellectual. I thought I'd heard everything after a career in aviation, but this took the biscuit and I've kept witnessed records of the 'communication.' because he'd clearly stated in one paper that he didn't know where all this spacetime was going, and I'd suggested an answer. I watch his work like a hawk. Nowt so queer as folk.
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 04:32
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: It wasn't me, I wasn't there, wrong country ;-)
Age: 74
Posts: 1,757
Why does gravity increase with the increase in intake of alcohol ?
merlinxx is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 05:36
  #8 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,009
Is it bounded by common electro-magnetic theorems or is it a force apart. A force apart

Does its' effect get transferred at the speed-of-light or is it unbounded. Speed of light

Is there a particle that transmits 'Gravity'. Yes

Can there be a theory-of-everything without an understanding of gravity. No
ORAC is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 05:52
  #9 (permalink)  
Lupus Domesticus
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Intrigued by your middle two answers, ORAC.

Speed of light I disagree with, and that comes from the wearing of my metaphysicist's hat. I do believe gravity to be a timeless constant, distance relevant, time not so - a bit like permanent magnetic fields. I would be genuinely intrigued to read through your reasoning or references thereto, because I am still looking for answers, all of which I don't pretend to have.

Likewise a gravity transmitting particle; yes, I can understand how such could be so, but it isn't the model I favour, therefore ditto above.

Cheers

RP
BlueWolf is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 06:27
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwixt and between
Posts: 666
Is there a particle that transmits 'Gravity'. Yes
That reads as real physical knowledge. I thought the Graviton was merely a device to keep quantum theory on the right track and that there is no actual knowledge of such a particle in reality.

Does its' effect get transferred at the speed-of-light or is it unbounded. Speed of light
Surely not if they do exist and have mass. What then? Given the apparent ability of some particles, namely polarised photons, to perform transactions in space and not time, then speed maybe a bit of a curve ball (pardon the pun )
Sciolistes is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 06:57
  #11 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,009
The speed of gravity as being the speed of light is predicted in the Theory of Relativity.

You don't have to believe it, any more than you have to believe Einstein was correct.

Yes, the graviton is currently a hypothetical particle, but so is the Higgs boson. The design of gravity wave detectors is based on it's existence, so it's on a pretty secure theoretical footing.
ORAC is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 06:57
  #12 (permalink)  
Psychophysiological entity
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Tweet Rob_Benham Famous author. Well, slightly famous.
Age: 80
Posts: 4,697
First and foremost, despite the term nearly always being used, Gravity is not a force. Gravity is the result of matter distorting the 'Fabric of Space' or a term often used now, Spacetime.

Bertrand Russel likened the description to the 'Sun set' and other natural phenomenon that described the scene, but certainly did not describe the true action of the sun for example. Force was just a handy term.

The Graviton is widely accepted as a carrier of the 'force', and is sitting well with string theory. It does not sit well with me, I feel there is no need for such a 'device.' Something else is happening.

This is also not too far fetched. When Monsignor Georges Henri Joseph Édouard Lemaître tried to convince Einstein that the universe was expanding, poor old Lemaître was sent away with a flea in his ear. Albert's biggest blunder. The point of this being that if such a fabulous mind could make such a mistake...really just miss such a huge point, then missing the fact that matter is altering scale - with the expansion of the universe, is not such a ridiculous hypothesis. The flow of spacetime into this 'growth' is nothing, if not simple in concept.

Think of the problems that it takes away. No need to make up a particle to do the job. No need for an opposite force/particle. Just a steady* flow into matter.




Imagine the sun being snatched away by God. Poof! it's gone as said above.

The distortion of spacetime that is normal round a mass, would...well, un-distort, but the bending back to 'normal' would happen in a wave. That wave would travel at the speed of light in a vacuum.

The thing about modern thinking is that 'Nothing (Space) weighs something.' After all, we have long been able to attribute an equivalent capacity and inductance to the supposed non-existent aether. We talk of mass distorting or curving the aether and now it seems that Dark Energy might just be a kind of unpacking force natural to the fabric of space. This would account perhaps for the increasing rate of expansion. Someone suggested it was a form of Repulsive Gravity, but I think that clouds the issue.

I've also wondered if the 'Missing matter' is not missing at all. Maybe it's composed of 'Space'. Perhaps the energy contained within this fabric, gives it all the characteristics of the missing component.


General Relativity has been tested to unprecedented levels. I mean that, unrepresented levels of testing, which are standing up to the trial of time. All this with better and better kit becoming available. Are not the gyro-spheres destined or now in space, going to be used to test GR yet further? These balls of metal, are accurate spheres...accurate to 4 molecules of their material.

Nobody really expects to break the theory, but seeing deeper into the problem might help to marry GR with Quantum theory. Might, if it's possible to do at all. But just supposing...that feint chance, that they may not be fitting because they're just missing a vital point.

Something is wrong. GR is near to perfect. Quantum theory is an almost perfect predictor in one experiment after another. Why don't they fit? Something huge is wrong.

looking into 11 dimensions in something for mathematicians to do. I've a feeling that the universe will turn out to be rather more mechanical than expected.








*an observation at CERN I think it was, had me very excited. Observing particles while curving in their characteristic spirals, it was noted that at incredible magnification, the curve was stepped. If this could be confirmed, it would possibly be showing the very fabric structure that I'm postulating. It happens that I conceive of a photon traveling across one graticule unit in the same time, even if matter has distorted the graticule size. see gravitational lensing. If this were true, an incredible step could be taken in re-structuring the model.

Last edited by Loose rivets; 20th Jan 2009 at 07:15.
Loose rivets is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 07:19
  #13 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,009
Rivet, you want graininess? Read the latest New Scientist.
ORAC is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 07:20
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: in a ditch
Posts: 25
For decades, the attempt to resolve quantum mechanics, the theory of small things, with relativity, have failed.

A key sticking point seems to be the nature of time.

According to general relativity, clocks run faster when the pull of gravity is weaker. But in the quantum world, asking how long a particle is in a certain region of space may have thousands or even an infinite number of different answers.

Perhaps we should think the unthinkable, and abolish the notion of time altogether. This could be the road forward to the 'theory of everything'.
indiscipline_girl is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 07:54
  #15 (permalink)  
Lupus Domesticus
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Yes, time, and the measurement of same, are relative. I believe gravity to be likewise relative.

I believe gravity to be a force experienced relative to the attraction between masses, distance relevant, time not so.

The nature and construct of that attraction, I do not pretend to understand. I do believe it to be related to mass in itself.

'Tis a fascinating time in which we live.
BlueWolf is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 08:41
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at the edge of nowhere, dogleg England
Age: 36
Posts: 229
GRAVITY IS A LIE!
BombayDuck is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 08:44
  #17 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,009
GRAVITY IS A LIE!
The Earth sucks!!
ORAC is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 08:50
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Originally Posted by Loose rivets

The Graviton is widely accepted as a carrier of the 'force', and is sitting well with string theory. It does not sit well with me, I feel there is no need for such a 'device.' Something else is happening.
Isn’t the Graviton analogous to the old notion of the Photon?
GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 08:54
  #19 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,009
Isn’t the Graviton analogous to the old notion of the Photon?
What's old about the photon? T'is a good old fashioned wavicle is the photon.....
ORAC is offline  
Old 20th Jan 2009, 09:28
  #20 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 72
Posts: 3,107
The undetected and fanciful 'graviton' is a prime example of the foolishness of particle physics.

Since these things vanish a few seconds after their appearance, they are demonstrably not able to exist in isolation and therefore cannot be fundamental particles.
Blacksheep is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.