The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Gravity Problem Solved  (Read 48106 times)

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« on: 30/08/2008 10:33:45 »
Professor Brian Cox of CERN and TV fame has expressed his concern that a fundamental flaw in our understanding of gravity seems increasingly likely, especially if the results of the forthcoming LHC experiment turn out to be unexpected. Unbelievable as it may initially seem, after 25 years work, I am convinced that I have found the stumbling block of modern physics:

The OBVIOUS reason of how the moon causes the ocean tides is that it pulls on the Earth's inner core, creating a flexure of the lithosphere, rather than acting on the seawater directly itself. Hence Newton's law of universal gravitation must be wrong. Once you get the simple picture in your head there's no going back. You'll never look at the sea the same again.

The first person to really understand was Richard Madeley (!) who posted a tribute on his blog (6th March 2008) about my new scientific breakthrough. Also Professor Murty of the University of Ottawa is interested in the extension of the idea to account for a natural cause for global warming. I propose that convection currents in the Earth's mantle created by a giant comet near-miss of around 40,000 years ago gave rise to the last ice age, by reducing the amount of heat reaching the crust. The gradual re-warming of the oceans is inevitable due to the convection currents slowly subsiding.


 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #1 on: 30/08/2008 12:57:00 »
AS far as I know Brian Cox's concern about our understanding of Gravity is to do with quantum gravity and, more fundamentally, explaing why gravity is so weak. I don't think he would take issue with the application of Newton's laws, being an extremely good approximation for normal usage i.e. not subatomic or very massive (like a neutron star say).

I note that Richard Madeley, not known for his expertise in Physics, was commenting on how gravity affects Vanessa Feltz's cleavage which is hardly an endorsement of a new theory, although amusing.

I would really like to know why you think the current explanation of the tides is wrong. I am prepared to believe that there are other effects making some contributions but I do not see anything erronious in the conventional view.
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #2 on: 30/08/2008 13:32:10 »
The OBVIOUS reason of how the moon causes the ocean tides is that it pulls on the Earth's inner core, creating a flexure of the lithosphere, rather than acting on the seawater directly itself. Hence Newton's law of universal gravitation must be wrong. Once you get the simple picture in your head there's no going back. You'll never look at the sea the same again.

Are you really suggesting that the Moon's gravity pulls only upon the Earth's core and not the rest of it, including the sea layer?

You also seem to be suggesting that the sea level rises because the land beneath it rises, but this wouldn't cause a tide because the sea level would remain the same with respect to the land beneath it.  The whole thing about tides is that the sea level changes with respect to the land beneath it.  This is probably best seen at the beach, where areas of land normally covered by sea when the tide is 'in' can be completely uncovered by sea when the tide is 'out'
 

Online Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8663
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #3 on: 30/08/2008 21:44:18 »
Modern GPS technology can measure altitude very accurately. If the ground went up and down with the tides we would know about it. It doesn't, so the new "theory" is wrong.
 

Offline miranda

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #4 on: 31/08/2008 13:08:43 »
Thought you might like to know that we have also received the OP on the newbielink:http://www.sciencefile.org/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1220090937/20 [nonactive]
and I emailed Dr Murty. 

This is his reply:

Quote
Dear Sir, Yes, I am the same Murty. I did not say I support it, all I said was any new idea shoud be critically examined before either agreeing with it, or comletely dismissing it, or words to that effect.
I am not an expert on this topic. Regards,Tad murty

I think this guy has spammed everyone he can find!
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #5 on: 01/09/2008 12:39:32 »
Modern GPS technology can indeed measure altitude very accurately, and has measured the rise of the seabed to be around 1 meter in the presence of the moon. The bulge of the sea can be seen to precede that of the moon's motion, which can be explained by my theory. Also the highest tides are always found on the west coast of a continent compared to the east coast, which can also be explained by my theory. It takes a bit of time to get used to, I agree.
 

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #6 on: 01/09/2008 23:57:01 »
Water has mass and very little stiffness. The Earth's crust has mass (a density of only about ten times that of water) and very high stiffness. They will both be affected by the Moon's mass / gravitational field but I think that, it the Ocean floor moved up and down by 1m, the surface of the sea would be moving by at least hundreds of metres on account of the Young Modulus of rock compared with that of water.
How could Gravity be so 'selective'?
How come the rocks which are not covered by water don't move up and down just as much? The layer of seawater is, relative, very thin. Why would it make such a difference.
Actually, the whole of the Earth 'wobbles'on a monthly cycle because the Earth / Moon effectively orbit around their common centre of mass - which is inside the Earth but slightly on the Moon's side of the Earth's centre. You could say that this is a 'tidal' effect, I suppose, but there is very little actual distortion.

Any new theory would, surely, need to be consistent with observed facts. Isn't that 'common sense'?
« Last Edit: 01/09/2008 23:58:39 by sophiecentaur »
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #7 on: 02/09/2008 10:01:41 »
The mountains have also been observed to rise in the presence of the moon. But apart from the ocean bulge, seafloor and mountains NOTHING ELSE is seen to be affected by the moon's gravitational influence i.e. why doesn't it get windier on a high tide? Why isn't the dust affected by the moon's pull?

The only logical answer is that the uber-condensed inner core of the moon has a dominant gravitational attraction with the uber-condensed inner core of the Earth.

Does anybody reading this topic have a scientific qualification or background to substantiate their remarks?

common_sense_seeker : BSc Astronomy with Computing, former computer modeller for the MoD, Defence Research Agency, Farnborough.
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #8 on: 02/09/2008 11:33:38 »
Incidentally, the reason why Newton's law of universal gravitation appears to work so well is that the size of the uber-condensed inner core of a planetesimal is proportional to it's total size. My explanation for the daily tides is simply better than that of Sir Isaac Newton.
 

Offline miranda

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #9 on: 02/09/2008 12:15:16 »
Could you please give a link to evidence/research that the mountains rise due to lunar gravity?

Preferably something by an expert in the field and peer-reviewed.  Thanks
 

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #10 on: 02/09/2008 12:50:51 »
Quote
Does anybody reading this topic have a scientific qualification or background to substantiate their remarks?
I think you'll find that several of us have first degrees, at least, plus institute memberships etc.. I could go on a bit about joint degrees and the resulting dilution in content.

I still question your idea of 'selective' gravity. Is there there some special mass at the centre of objects which only affects the special masses inside other objects?

1. How would you detect the effect on dust?
2. Do you have a link to published data about this crust movement?
3. What do you mean by the "presence of the Moon"? Isn't it always there?
4. If the crust were to be flexing as much as you imply then would we not be aware of huge amounts of volcanic activity due to heating through frictional forces? Incredibly slow movements during subduction are sufficient to melt the rocks and cause volcanoes. What is different about your model which stops this happening?
5. Were you not aware of atmospheric tides? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_tide I wouldn't use Wikkers as a clinching argument but, if it's in there then it must be a well known phenomenon. Also, it would be more windy half way between high and low tide - when the rate of change is highest.

« Last Edit: 02/09/2008 13:00:56 by sophiecentaur »
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #11 on: 02/09/2008 14:18:49 »
The question should be:

Why is the moon's gravity seemingly selective in that it only acts on seawater?
 

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #12 on: 02/09/2008 14:34:04 »
It affects seawater because it is a LIQUID and it can move easily. Hadn't you noticed? The crust is rather stuck in place!
Are you for real?
 

Offline Andrew K Fletcher

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2331
  • KIS Keep It Simple
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #13 on: 02/09/2008 18:04:53 »
Post about predicting earthquakes based on lunar events, ocean shift and core distortion.

One possible reason is the stability of the crust in the area over a period of time has built up some resistance to the stress, due to the compacting of the sediment and rocks.

Having used a road drill for some time to break up concrete and road surfaces, the first impact does not cause any considerable damage, and the eventual crumbling of the concrete takes some considerable vibrational impacts before it crumbles, leaving a delay from when you start the hammer to when you actually break up the concrete.

Maybe it takes a while for the vibrations to weaken the surface before the pressure caused by the shift in the force to have an effect.

It is just something I have noticed over the years and would be very interested to see if it can be backed up by historical events.

In areas that are unstable, the event should happen soon after the planetary alignments take place, whereas in areas free from relatively recent disturbances in the crust should resist the vibrations for a longer period.

If we turn to Io again, the constant pulling and releasing of Jupiterís massive gravitational force does indicate that this effect is a possibility, as it is believed that a tremendous amount of friction and heat is generated by the alignment of the forces of both the planet and the moons. And I would presume that the effects on this environment would be near instantaneous, if not constant.

Another possibility is that the sudden release of the molten core, along with the weight of the shift in the ocean mass has an effect similar to that of stretched elastic when it is released and that the constant movements of the core as it settles back to a more stable ball shape rather than a slight egg shape is responsible for the delay in the events at the crust.

Andrew


"The explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely to be correct."
K.I.S. "Keep it simple!"
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=1929.25
« Last Edit: 02/09/2008 18:08:07 by Andrew K Fletcher »
 

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #14 on: 02/09/2008 18:05:30 »
Quote from: common_sense_seeker
Does anybody reading this topic have a scientific qualification or background to substantiate their remarks?

common_sense_seeker : BSc Astronomy with Computing, former computer modeller for the MoD, Defence Research Agency, Farnborough.

Are you claiming that the background associated with your name, in that quote above, actually applies to you?
 

Online Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8663
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #15 on: 02/09/2008 18:42:00 »
The question should be:

Why is the moon's gravity seemingly selective in that it only acts on seawater?
It only seems that way to you.
The rest of us know that the effect of the moon's gravity isn't very big. Because the ocean is sloppy it can be moved about. The rocks are not nearly as soft so they only move a little.
Tidal movements of rock are, however, perfectly measurable and they sometimes upset, or have to be accounted for, in sensitive experiments.
I should perhaps explain that I'm totally AWEstruck by your resume. Unfortunately, modesty; the official secrets act; and the fact that nobody would give a toss, prevent me telling you for whom I work.
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #16 on: 03/09/2008 09:55:23 »
If the moon pulls the seawater to create the tides as you say, and the moon travels from east to west across the sky, why aren't the highest tides on the east coast of a continent? The maximum tidal range of 12 meters is always found on the west coast, which is counter-intuitive to the simple Newtonian model. My theory predicts an increase in the flexure of the crust on the west side of a continent due to the acceleration of the pressure wave after it travels under it and is then released from the weight and added stiffness of the continental mass which is resisting it.
« Last Edit: 03/09/2008 10:10:24 by common_sense_seeker »
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #17 on: 03/09/2008 10:08:45 »
Barack Obama's speech about a United States which is independent of foreign oil within 10 years was very uplifting. The core-centered theory of gravity predicts that a new uber-energy source will be available to humanity in the not-too-distant future. I believe that 'magnetic hill' and 'gravity hill' sites are the location of meteor core material which has become embedded in the Earth's crust. I propose that this miracle rock is similar to, or another name for, Bose-Einstein condensate. Futhermore, places such as the Oregon Vortex suggest that this uber-condensed material has a directional component. I therefore wish to state that my new theory predicts that:

                         GRAVITY IS DIRECTIONAL
« Last Edit: 03/09/2008 10:26:41 by common_sense_seeker »
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #18 on: 03/09/2008 10:53:57 »
I predict that the gravity anomaly of the Pioneer probes 10 & 11 being pursued by NASA can be explained by this new way of thinking. Newton's theory of gravity also doesn't account for why the moon is moving away from us.
« Last Edit: 03/09/2008 13:04:00 by common_sense_seeker »
 

Online Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8663
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #19 on: 03/09/2008 19:15:27 »
"why aren't the highest tides on the east coast of a continent? "

They are.

From Wiki
"The Bay of Fundy (French: Baie de Fundy) is a bay on the Atlantic coast of North America, on the northeast end of the Gulf of Maine between the Canadian provinces of New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, with a small portion touching the U.S. state of Maine. The Bay of Fundy is known for its high tidal range and the bay is contested as having the highest vertical tidal range in the world with Ungava Bay in northern Quebec and The Severn Estuary in the UK. The name "Fundy" is thought to date back to the 16th century when the Portuguese referred to the bay as "Rio Fundo" or "deep river".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ungava_Bay
shows that it's on the East coast too.

The Severn's mouth is on the West coast so you are only wrong two times out of three.





 

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #20 on: 03/09/2008 22:10:41 »
This thread has just broken the bounds of loopyness. I'm out. And I don't mean BC's post.
« Last Edit: 03/09/2008 22:12:55 by sophiecentaur »
 

Online Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8663
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #21 on: 04/09/2008 06:58:59 »
I will just remind CommonSenseSeeker (BTW, was he in the Harry Potter books?) that if your theory does not agree with reality then it isn't reality that is wrong.
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #22 on: 04/09/2008 10:06:13 »
I'm certainly not quaking in my boots about Bored chemist's credentials. If you are so convinced that Newton's law of universal gravitation is 100% correct, why is the moon moving further away from us?? Sir Isaac Newton would have us believe that it would eventually coalesce with the Earth, just as my old physics teacher said all those years ago. WRONG.
 

Offline miranda

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #23 on: 04/09/2008 10:10:41 »
And I think the reason the Severn has a high tidal range is a large amount of water being squeezed into quite a narrow space.

And doesn't the Thames have quite a high tide?  I'm sure they said on Coast that it goes all the way up to Richmond......

and CCS, your answers to objections leap from one thing to another.....try and answer the question please?
 

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #24 on: 04/09/2008 10:14:59 »
Incidentally, the tide levels of NE Canada are an exception to the rule, due to the powerful Labrador Current flowing south east and the upcoming Gulf Stream flowing north.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #24 on: 04/09/2008 10:14:59 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums