Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: redrooster on 23/09/2013 04:24:05
-
I got interested in science years ago from reading newspaper accounts of Dr David Blairs endeavors to discover gravity waves. Einstein had predicted them 100 years previous and people have been looking for them ever since with no result,so the question must be asked. Do they exist? So far,as far as I know, the answer is a resounding NO. Obviously the weight of the atmosphere on earth holds everything down. On the moon,mars ect... with little or no atmosphere it would be mostly natural magnetism that holds you down,otherwise if you jumped up you would keep going.Everything in nature seems to be in a spin/vortex type of thing from photons, electrons, atoms,solar systems,galaxies to black holes? How magnetism or some form of it can be overlooked as the prime mover for gravity is puzzling to me. Ive tried to upload an attachment to show in part were Ive got my ideas from but it was too large 2.57mb.You may be able to google and download it,if not PM me and Ill email the PDF to you.Its called; The secret world of magnets,by Howard Johnson. The father of Spintronics.
-
I think this should go to the weird theories section (or the trash bin!)
-
Did you bother to to look it up and read it before you came to your conclusion? No because you wouldn't have had the time.If you cant offer any positive ideas or any details on the hows and whys of the discussion you should keep quite instead of broadcasting your ignorance.
-
the weight of the atmosphere on earth holds everything down
Actually, it is Earth's gravity that holds the Earth's atmosphere down (and Earth's gravity holds you & me down, too).
Earth's atmosphere actually buoys us up, slightly. If you were weighed in a vacuum, a 75kg person would be about 80g heavier (ignoring minor details such as death). This is most obvious in the case of a helium balloon, where the atmosphere buoys it up more strongly than gravity pulls it down.
It is true that at this time, there has been no direct detection of gravitational waves reported.
However, the 1993 Nobel Prize was awarded for discovery and analysis of the orbit of a binary pulsar system which behaves as if it is radiating gravity waves - this is indirect evidence for gravitational waves. Unfortunately, at a distance of many light years, the steady gravitational waves from orbiting pulsars are too weak to detect with current Earth-based equipment.
Astronomers expect that more violent events in our stellar neighbourhood would generate detectable gravitational waves, eg actual colission of two pulsars, or two black holes, or an asymmetric supernova. Unfortunately, nearby examples of these spectaculat events are rather rare (or fortunately, depending on how you view the stability of our environment on Earth).
Astronomers are continuing to improve the sensitivity of their gravity wave detectors - one proposal for a gravity wave detctor in space would be very sensitive (but also very expensive).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave
-
The problem with detecting gravity wave is due to the very low power that they carry, Jupiter system with its four large moons only radiates a few Watts.
Redrooster
I am of course ignorant in many fields but for you to convince be that we are held down by atmospheric pressure and not gravity you have as much chance as my friends in Indianapolis have of convincing me the world was created in 6 days.
-
This relates to something that should be in the new theories area.
I have downloaded the pamphlet redrooster mentions in his first post from "the free information society" website
http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/pdf/3935.pdf
Howard appears to be fascinated by some of the quirky effects of multipole magnets and is looking to create a perpetual motion machine but he says little or nothing about gravity which is a totally different force from magnetism for many obvious reasons.
So it is perfectly clear that red rooster is; either a troll wishing to have a verbal fight with someone as his second post appears to show, or someone inexperienced in the topic who has completely misunderstood what the author and paper he quotes is talking about.
-
the weight of the atmosphere on earth holds everything down
Actually, it is Earth's gravity that holds the Earth's atmosphere down (and Earth's gravity holds you & me down, too).
Earth's atmosphere actually buoys us up, slightly. If you were weighed in a vacuum, a 75kg person would be about 80g heavier (ignoring minor details such as death). This is most obvious in the case of a helium balloon, where the atmosphere buoys it up more strongly than gravity pulls it down.
It is true that at this time, there has been no direct detection of gravitational waves reported.
the 1993 Nobel Prize was awarded for discovery and analysis of the orbit of a binary pulsar system which behaves as if it is radiating gravity waves - this is indirect evidence for gravitational waves. Unfortunately, at a distance of many light years, the steady gravitational waves from orbiting pulsars are too weak to detect with current Earth-based equipment.
Astronomers expect that more violent events in our stellar neighbourhood would generate detectable gravitational waves, eg actual colission of two pulsars, or two black holes, or an asymmetric supernova. Unfortunately, nearby examples of these spectaculat events are rather rare (or fortunately, depending on how you view the stability of our environment on Earth).
Astronomers are continuing to improve the sensitivity of their gravity wave detectors - one proposal for a gravity wave detctor in space would be very sensitive (but also very expensive).
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_wave
It seems that the detection of gravity waves are always just around the corner! I remember probably 30 years ago Dr Blair had the biggest bar of niobium on earth to use as a detector and was on the brink of discovery and it seems that its always like that (its just around the corner) what I'm saying is what if its not there? What if we are looking at this from the wrong angle for the last 100 years.Why couldn't it be magnetic fields that cause gravity? I suppose that its agreed that mass causes gravity or attraction but so would a lot of magnetic moments in that same mass of particles interacting with another mass. I know that a magnetic field gets weaker by its distance inversely squared whatever but what research has gone into this. Just an idea I thought Id throw out there and see what happens?
-
This relates to something that should be in the new theories area.
I have downloaded the pamphlet redrooster mentions in his first post from "the free information society" website
http://www.freeinfosociety.com/media/pdf/3935.pdf
Howard appears to be fascinated by some of the quirky effects of multipole magnets and is looking to create a perpetual motion machine but he says little or nothing about gravity which is a totally different force from magnetism for many obvious reasons.
So it is perfectly clear that red rooster is; either a troll wishing to have a verbal fight with someone as his second post appears to show, or someone inexperienced in the topic who has completely misunderstood what the author and paper he quotes is talking about.
You haven't read it at all! If you had you would have seen It says nothing about any perpetual motion machine,if you had of read it you would have learnt that its about and only about Howard Johnsons discovery of spintronics that gave us the hard drive, MRI machines ect...and how he did it. So to the contrary its you who is doing the trolling here by misrepresenting me and telling outright lies,You have been caught red handed. I just hope a moderator reads it and can see what your up to.
-
It is my experience that ideas that seem to run contrary to general belief are tolerated and discussed fairly on TNS, provided all sides maintain a respectful stance.
Hopefully, ad hominem attacks will not creep into our discussions, and if they do, will not be tolerated.
-
Redrooster, although I am a non-scientist, I am particularly interested in time. You seem to have put quite a lot into the study of this subject, so perhaps you can explain the following extract for me.
“According to Zocher and Torok, the circularity of conductivity is a time-asymmetric property. Processes of conduction are not only lime-asymmetric, they are irreversible. One direction of time corresponds to the probable course, the other is improbable according to the second law of thermodynamics. Potential differences are timesymmetric. The circular asymmetry consists in the difference of resistance against the clockwise and counterclockwise currents, being probable or not. These currents are naturally time-asymmetric. Hence, a crystal structure, which is time-symmetric, cannot cause acircularly asymmetric conductivity. Such a property can be found only in a system with time-asymmetric circularity, with a mechanical or electrical rotation, with Coriolis forces or magnetic fields. The Hall effect corresponds indeed to circular electric conductivity, the RighiLeduc effect to a circular thermal conductivity, both produced by a magnetic field."
-
I got interested in science years ago from reading newspaper accounts of Dr David Blairs endeavors to discover gravity waves. Einstein had predicted them 100 years previous and people have been looking for them ever since with no result,so the question must be asked.
That is incorrect. Although there has never been direct evidence of gravitational waves so far there has indirect evidence. The Hulse-Taylor binary star system shows indirect evidence of the existence of gravitational waves. Hulse and Taylor won the Nobel Prize in physics for this research.
Do they exist? So far,as far as I know, the answer is a resounding NO.
That’s no basis for claiming the don’t exist. They are extremely difficult to detect. It’s only been recently that gravitational wave detectors, such as LIGO, have gone on line to detect gravitational waves.
Obviously the weight of the atmosphere on earth holds everything down.
That’s incorrect. Gravity holds things down. How do you think the astronauts were able to walk on the moon which had no atmosphere?
On the moon,mars ect... with little or no atmosphere it would be mostly natural magnetism that holds you down,..
This is shear nonsense. You don’t know what you’re talking about. And I have no wish to read more of this nonsense. First learn physics then come back to try to talk intelligently about it.
syhprum is right about where this thread belongs.
-
Obviously the weight of the atmosphere on earth holds everything down.
What gives the atmosphere "weight" if gravity doesn't exist?
-
To play devils advocate may I suggest it is magnetic forces that holds the atmosphere down (it probably also helped the astronauts to walk on the moon) !!!!!!
-
To play devils advocate may I suggest it is magnetic forces that holds the atmosphere down (it probably also helped the astronauts to walk on the moon) !!!!!!
No. That wouldn't work. The atmosphere would have to be charged and moving with significant speed all in the same directionk, which it isn't.
-
The tenuous atmosphere on the moon is charged by cosmic rays and the solar wind.The solar wind traveling at 300/700ms would be the acceleration?
-
The tenuous atmosphere on the moon..
What atmosphere? For most practical purposes, the Moon is considered to be surrounded by vacuum.
-
Well of course for these practical purposes there is an atmosphere on the moon.
-
Well of course for these practical purposes there is an atmosphere on the moon.
The purpose of the atmosphere that you're using it for is insufficient for the purpose by far.
-
The total amount of gas in the moons atmosphere only amounts to approx 10 tonnes but the dust that is suspended in the atmosphere from meteorite impacts ect...is significant and has static charge.each time these molecules are hit by a cosmic ray up to a billion ion pairs are produced.So you've got the core of the moon (lets make this perfectly clear,when I say you have got the core of the moon! I don't mean that you have it, own it, or possess it) with its attendant magnetic field interacting with a charged atmosphere that is moving relative to the solar wind,the earth and everything else. A probe has just been sent to the moon to look at just these details. I think its name is LADEE?
-
Please don't be such a pain to everyone on this forum,you continually disrupt the flow of the discussion with your paranoid and stick in the mud attitude.( a quick google will give you that information)You've accused me of telling lies and disrupted my other thread because of your paranoia and here we go again.What do you think Ive just made this stuff up off of the top of my head to upset you. Please stay away from this discussion so other people can have their say without having to worry about you jumping down their throats all the time.
-
Redrooster might have a seed of truth in his statement of a relationship between magnetics and gravity. If you read Raymond Chiao's work, a physicist from University of California, Merced, he states using Suprconductors there may be a way of generating electromagnetic waves from gravitational waves and vice versa.
-
That's what I'm talking about,there seems to be a link between the two gravity/magnetism or electromagnetism. Maybe scientists have been looking at this from the wrong angle? As Ive mentioned previously,there has been no direct evidence in the search for gravity waves in the last 100 years or so. There has been indirect evidence of course but there has been indirect evidence for Bigfoot and anything else you care to name. Science is based on facts and the fact is that the present theory/theory's of gravity have been the stumbling block for the standard model to be complete.