[timey (OP)]

Could the acceleration of gravity be described like this?

All objects, no matter their value of mass, accelerate at 9.807m/s^2 in Earths gravity field.

If we attribute the increasing strength of the gravity field of the space the object is travelling through with a  gravitational time dilation that proportionally increases the rate of time in the space the objects are travelling through as they get closer to Earth, this would explain why objects of differing mass accelerate at the same rate, and also give the so far unexplained 'suck' of gravity a physical cause...

What do you think?

[timey (OP)]

I know that it is a weird concept that the time that a falling object experiences itself could be different than the time of the space that it is falling through, but as a piece of logic, I think it works rather well...

Any comment?

[alancalverd]

Can you explain why orbital speed is the same for all masses?

[syhprum]

While this may be true for bodies that have a small mass relative to the Earth it is not correct for larger masses, gravitational attraction is a mutual thing the Earth pulling the falling body down and the falling body pulling the Earth up.

[Ethos_]

It matters little the mass of the object because the object follows the geodesic of bent space/time.

[timey (OP)]

Syhprum - If it were a counter directional gravitational time dilation of empty space that caused the acceleration, the value of gravitational attraction, ie: the gravitational constant could be a lot less than currently thought.  The gravitational coupling constant could be a possibility here.  This would change the outlook somewhat.

(Please note: this concept can only be valid mechanically in a contracting universe)

Alan - as Ethos said.

[guest4091]

timy #op

If we attribute the increasing strength of the gravity field of the space the object is travelling through with a  gravitational time dilation that proportionally increases the rate of time in the space the objects are travelling through as they get closer to Earth, this would explain why objects of differing mass accelerate at the same rate, and also give the so far unexplained 'suck' of gravity a physical cause...

In an earth-like g-field, or an approx. uniform g-field, the basic components of an object (nucleon, electron, etc) are accelerated simultaneously, with a force proportional to their mass. If the acceleration is g for each component then it's g for the composite object.
You could imagine space as a very fine lattice/matrix of gravity elements, charged by a dominant mass M via low frequency energy radiation. The charge would be directed back to its source (like a weather vane or wind sock). A particle receives a boost when it interacts with a lattice point. I.e. the space surrounding M directs an object toward M. Its not a pull, but a push.

[timey (OP)]

I like your description.  Yes - agreed, and if you attribute that weather vane feed back element to being a transference of the gravity field of open space respective to M, at that 'location' of distance from M, being physically represented by a time dilation value - pull or push, it is the quickening of the time the object is moving through that facilitates the acceleration, or the slowing of time the object is moving through facilitating the deceleration in the opposite direction.

Just an alternative means of obtaining the same results.

Then GR gravitational time dilation is a m near M phenomenon, and that gets really interesting.

[syhprum]

"Can you explain why orbital speed is the same for all masses?", it is not of course if you removed the moon and replaced it with a 1 ton satellite the same distance from the surface of the Earth the orbital time would be somewhat greater as the Earth/Moon system rotate about a point offset from the centre of the earth by about 7000Km

[timey (OP)]

The maths of this suggestion should turn out to be proportional to GR, and however GT describes the situation will be relevant.  I think that it will be the initial velocity of the object moving in a space time geodesic that will determine its orbit, or its failure to achieve orbit, not its mass.

[yor_on]

No. you want a 'time dilation'. You will need a comparison.
Your 'wrist watch' isn't a comparison, it is the terminology of relativity, consisting of a same 'frame of reference' as you.

[yor_on]

No way you can define it 'objectively'. There is no preferred 'frame' existing here

[yor_on]

What you can do is to define it locally, but that's not the terminology we use normally. I use it but when I do I also tell you that 'every frame' is equivalent. So in my case no frame is 'preferred' either.

[yor_on]

What you're trying for is a Newtonian concept.
Check it up

[yor_on]

Giving  frames a locally equivalent status doesn't make a 'global representation' of a universe. It just guarantee your constants.

[AndroidNeox]

If we attribute the increasing strength of the gravity field of the space the object is travelling through with a  gravitational time dilation that proportionally increases the rate of time in the space the objects are travelling through as they get closer to Earth, this would explain why objects of differing mass accelerate at the same rate, and also give the so far unexplained 'suck' of gravity a physical cause...

What do you think?

This doesn't work for objects of all sizes. A higher gravitational gradient would yield more force though the net gravitational field would be the same.

[zx16]

It matters little the mass of the object because the object follows the geodesic of bent space/time.

But how does the geodesic of space/time get "bent".  It gets bent by the presence of "mass". So surely, the more "massive" an object is, the more "bending" it will produce.

That seems to follow logically.  Therefore it's hard to see why you say "It matters little the mass of the object".

I'd be grateful if you could explain please.

[timey (OP)]

If we attribute the increasing strength of the gravity field of the space the object is travelling through with a  gravitational time dilation that proportionally increases the rate of time in the space the objects are travelling through as they get closer to Earth, this would explain why objects of differing mass accelerate at the same rate, and also give the so far unexplained 'suck' of gravity a physical cause...

What do you think?

This doesn't work for objects of all sizes. A higher gravitational gradient would yield more force though the net gravitational field would be the same.

The notion would render the force of gravity as being of a much weaker value, (I think the as of yet dimensionless gravitational coupling constant might be relevant), and the acceleration of gravity as being due to this contrary directional gravitational time dilation of open space.
An object travelling at a constant velocity would find, as it moved closer to an object of greater mass than itself, its velocity increased by the increasingly shorter seconds of the open space surrounding the mass.