TIDUSGIYA Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 Gravity Is All About Pushing And Pulling. Gravity Is Not An Attraction.???? Atoms All Pull Towards The Centre Of The Earth. The Atoms On The Earth Theat We Walk On With Our Feet Push Us Back So We Dont Fall Beyond Them. Atoms May Have An Attraction As Long As They Do It Where It Cant Be Seen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 You might be interested in this thread: 2897 And please remember that this is a science forum - please observe our rules on how to present an argument. Your post lacks the very basics of discussion - ie, what are you trying to argue, why, and what are the implications? How can it be tested and falsified? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abstruce Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 You might be interested in this thread: 2897 And please remember that this is a science forum - please observe our rules on how to present an argument. Your post lacks the very basics of discussion - ie, what are you trying to argue, why, and what are the implications? How can it be tested and falsified? Tormod, I am surprised that you would reference this post as it contains mostly speculation. The truth is we do not understand Gravity. We are able to observe the effects of Gravity yet we do not know the mechanics. The post you have referenced is total gibberish. You might as well go to this link and see how Gravity is the result of God pushing everything down. http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512 If you wish to understand Gravity you have to first understand that the greatest minds of this planet have been trying to understand it for years. That is what we call GUT (Grand Unification Theory) and UFT (Unified Field Theory) to put it in simple terms the link between Quantum Mechanics and Relativity. Understanding Gravity is the Key. This link is getting close to the answer. http://www.allanstime.com/UnifiedFieldTheory/gravity.htm Before we can go further we need to understand Hydroelectric dynamics and how energy fields are responsible for the observation of mass. Gravity on the macro scale is a residual effect of Gravity on the micro scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GAHD Posted January 4, 2006 Report Share Posted January 4, 2006 You might also like looking at this thread too. Gravity isn't something we understand enough to controll yet, but 'brane (short for membrane) theory looks promising. This article (PDF) will give you a basic idea of it. If you're still thirsty for more on this theory you can check out what google has to say about Gravity being a 4d particle or 'brane theory in general. Of course, if you have any questions about that you can post them here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted January 5, 2006 Report Share Posted January 5, 2006 The post you have referenced is total gibberish. Bingo. Why do you think we moved it to the Strange Claims forums? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIDUSGIYA Posted January 10, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 [science Does not explain rational Behavious with the universal equilibriaum. there is no real way to abserb the way energy balences itself, thus knowone will ever be able to find a rational scientific explanation for the creation of the universe....thus how can any form of scientific expinations be completly accuate when evidence can not be found for those rational explinations of science. every one can have there own input for the ideas of another person but in end we would all critasise the ideas anyway, just like people did to newton and ienstine and any other scientist....know one is really right about thier explinations really, so why do we judge those that explain their ideas. knowone has the right to make someone else feel inadiquate for the beliefs od ideas. this is my free will to bring up this topic. do i expect appolagies from people, No. i expect nothing, not even critism. my ideas and quotes are just as important as yours and if you critasise them then is just they way you should treat you own ideas too. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 my ideas and quotes are just as important as yours and if you critasise them then is just they way you should treat you own ideas too. :rolleyes: Please read our rules on behaviour in our forum. By posting ideas here you agree to have them criticised. If you can't stand that, then you shouldn't be posting here. http://hypography.com/forums/?page=rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIDUSGIYA Posted January 10, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Then I Guess Your Ideas Are Lame Also Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted January 10, 2006 Report Share Posted January 10, 2006 Then I Guess Your Ideas Are Lame AlsoWhat's With The Capitalization? Besides That, This Was A Particularly Stupid Post Of Yours That Will Have A Footprint On Your *** As The Logical, Inevitable Result. Tormod 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questor Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 back to the discussion of gravity. if gravity travels in waves, where is it going? what propels it? when it gets there does it return? if gravity exists thruout the universe, why does it travel? are not all areas of the universe under the same physical laws with similar content to our galaxy? if gravity is the attraction between two bodies of mass, what exists in the vast inter-mass areas of the universe where there are no bodies of mass? does gravity observe objects approaching each other and rush over to provide attraction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khan N. Singh Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 the Graviton is a theoretical particle is it not? don't forget that guy Wilhelm Reich i believe (i may have the name wrong), who tried to apply Sigmund Freud's type of 'bullshit science' to physics (no offense to psychologists :rolleyes: sometimes the mind needs only that kind of approach). All the modern equivalents of 'ether'-believers all jump on the idea of the graviton as the base of their theories. (if you look up Reich on wikipedia, it should give you references to the guys who tried to continue his 'studies' in the last few years. as well they document an encounter between him and Einstein. imho, i think Reich's crazy, and should've been kept far away from Einstein.) Whatever the eventual unified theory will be, it will definitely center around the existence of this particle (or lack thereof). Why did Gravity have to be the final major hurdle in physics? :| Fate wants to keep us out of flying cars. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questor Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 we don't know if a graviton exists. if bodies attract each other, at what level does this attraction occur? is it at the atomic level, or smaller or larger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
questor Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 and how does nothing--gravity, no mass, no particle, attract something: the moon to the earth? we know it is mass, but what part of the mass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armofreek Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 i find it strange how mostly EVERYTHING is centered on positive and negitave fields... kind of like how there is both a male and female species of most creatures, and that they are designed to fit perfectly together, like a jigsaw, and reproduce. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khan N. Singh Posted January 11, 2006 Report Share Posted January 11, 2006 i find it strange how mostly EVERYTHING is centered on positive and negitave fields... kind of like how there is both a male and female species of most creatures, and that they are designed to fit perfectly together, like a jigsaw, and reproduce. except perhaps gravity? maybe gravity by nature is not a + or - thing. it seems to be a function of mass, no? dense objects = more gravitational force exerted on surrounding objects in a widening gravitational 'field' ? superdense things collapse in upon themselves and become black holes. so what then? how are wormholes explained by Einstein's physics? i just remember reading they fit into his equations. anyway. nothing in nature so far has shown you can repel gravitational forces with an inverse. things always get sucked in to the more dense things. and so much so to the fact that they create black holes. what are black holes? are they rips in space/time? wtf is a singularity really? i dunno if any of these questions are answered (if they have please link/explain :rolleyes:) but i think this is the macro approach to a unified theory, while others are looking on the quantum level to wind up at the same theory. personally, quantum physics seems a lot more interesting :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drip Curl Magic Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 anyway. nothing in nature so far has shown you can repel gravitational forces with an inverse. Aren't two magnets repelling eachother kind of like a gravitational inverse? I don't really understand the dynamics of magnets so, I have no idea if this statement is legit...:( Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abstruce Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 back to the discussion of gravity. if gravity travels in waves, where is it going? what propels it? when it gets there does it return? if gravity exists thruout the universe, why does it travel? are not all areas of the universe under the same physical laws with similar content to our galaxy? if gravity is the attraction between two bodies of mass, what exists in the vast inter-mass areas of the universe where there are no bodies of mass? does gravity observe objects approaching each other and rush over to provide attraction? Maybe this link will help you to understand the current theory.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.