0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Thebox on 13/10/2015 13:47:18Satellites do not spin in space and are not ripped apart. I hope you meant there are some satellites, not all. I could name quite a few which I know for a fact were spinning - I used to process the data from them.
Satellites do not spin in space and are not ripped apart.
Thebox
My theory for gravity is the speed of light is ...
I don't think I have ever read so much nonsense in a thread! Almost every statement (apart from Pmb's thoughtful comments) is evidently wrong or selfcontradictory. Does nobody stay awake in science lessons these days?
I don't think I have ever read so much nonsense in a thread! Almost every statement (apart from Pmb's thoughtful comments) is evidently wrong or selfcontradictory...
What I am talking about applies to any 2 medium's or to two solid object's,
A stone will fall through the water but not at 9.81 m/s squared.
The potential difference between the densities is akin to a Voltage in electronics. Current can only flow if it is allowed to move. The steel floor represents a infinite resistor allowing no flow. As the potential difference is there, there is a constant force trying to move the higher density object through the floor to its final destination.
I'm sure both you and I see eye to eye on a great many things as what we have in common is a love of science and a thirst of answers to things yet to be fully understood.RegardsMike KenyonManaging Director MKForce Ltd
I saw someone on here say WHY ask what causes Gravity, can't we just accept it is? Well It would certainly help a lot to find a way to create gravity on a long range spacecraft (simulating it using centrifugal force is not the same thing). OR to learn how to cancel it on earth to fly without aerodynamic forces or lighter then air craft. Most of the fuel to launch a space craft is used just to break it out of earths gravitational pull imagine if we could simply turn off the earths effect on the spacecraft at will? There are many reasons to ask What causes gravity. It seems to me most of what we know about gravity is the study of it's effects not it's cause. I am not a Expert in anyway but it does not take a expert to understand solving this question and then to make practical use from that would be a astronomically HUGE scientific breakthrough. Everything else is hypothesis until you can not only explain your hypothesis but actually prove it with practical application. I also know the way it is discussed in schools (Meaning K-12 education text books) gives the impression Newton Understood Gravity what he did was come up with mathematical formulas that explained the effects of gravity on mass and motion. (not to say that was not huge and quite brilliant especially when you consider how long ago he came up with those formulas and we still use them today) My fear it is highly likely that it is a force SO dependent on mass that to duplicate the gravity of earth in a space craft that works the same as gravity on earth would require a spacecraft that had the the same mass of the earth. In the end it may just be one of those laws of physics you just can not change even if we did fully understand it. But that does not mean we should not continue to try or ask why. Asking why is what science is all about. (To those more educated then I please be kind as I know I may be way off)
I'm sure both you and I see eye to eye on a great many things as what we have in common is a love of science and a thirst of answers to things yet to be fully understood.
Quote from: Thebox on 13/10/2015 13:47:18Satellites do not spin in space and are not ripped apart. If the earth stopped spinning it would not rip apart, it would simply become a sphere compared to the present obloid shape.Force created from spin is a Y-axis invert force to a central point. There is no inwards force of the x axis created by spin, the x axis is under constant ''centrifugal force'' trying to expand. This shows you why gravity is mass attracted to mass. In saying that you have just given my an idea and a thought to question. If we spin a ball on the ground really fast , the north and south of the Y axis compresses, and the x axis tries to expand, however the ball is on the ground, the ground is has an equal and opposing force that allows the ball to compress, so my question is what force is underneath the earth at the south pole or north pole dependent to which way we are really up, that is an equal and opposing force to the earth to make the obloid physically possible?What is interesting about the spin of the earth, is this spin generates a centrifugal force vector that goes in the opposite direction of the gravitational force vector. If the earth spun fast enough and stayed together we would be propelled into space. This is not called antigravity, but the force vector from the spin points in the same direction as would anti-gravity. What this suggests is the gravitational force, like all the other forces, gives off some form of energy, when the potential lowers, that can cause a countering action/reaction in other matter. As an analogy, if the EM force caused an electron to fall one energy level, the energy given off, can cause another electron to gain that potential. If a lot of electrons where lowering potential, but the countering re-absorption was not 100% efficient, the result would be only partial action/reaction. In the case of gravity, the lowering of gravitational potential gives off energy, but this appears to only partially go into the spin, that mathematically cancels only some of the gravity force vector.
Satellites do not spin in space and are not ripped apart. If the earth stopped spinning it would not rip apart, it would simply become a sphere compared to the present obloid shape.Force created from spin is a Y-axis invert force to a central point. There is no inwards force of the x axis created by spin, the x axis is under constant ''centrifugal force'' trying to expand. This shows you why gravity is mass attracted to mass. In saying that you have just given my an idea and a thought to question. If we spin a ball on the ground really fast , the north and south of the Y axis compresses, and the x axis tries to expand, however the ball is on the ground, the ground is has an equal and opposing force that allows the ball to compress, so my question is what force is underneath the earth at the south pole or north pole dependent to which way we are really up, that is an equal and opposing force to the earth to make the obloid physically possible?
If the Earth did not spin we would not have any time? Days on the light side would last forever and nights on the dark side would last forever.
what i mean is that is it caused by the earth's spinning motion?? or what? if not than what causes the earth to spin?? why is it spinning??
We all take for granted this as the earth stays very still due to the inertia and gyroscope effects stabling it. Just like a bicycle which stablises once it is moving due the the wheels rotating exept on a huge globe. Imagine how stable a wheel would be the size of the earths diameter, This is what keeps the Earth so beautifully still.
The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space the Earth moves through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. The aether is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
We all take for granted this as the earth stays very still due to the inertia and gyroscope effects stabling it.
Quote from: liquidspacetime on 17/10/2015 13:55:05The Michelson-Morley experiment looked for an absolutely stationary space the Earth moves through. The aether is not an absolutely stationary space. The aether is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.Not true. Any medium, moving in any direction, would have altered the null result of at least one of the hundreds of repeat experiments that are done every year in undergraduate physics classes.