Naked Science Forum

On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: pasala on 10/07/2016 15:18:29

Title: What exactly is gravity?
Post by: pasala on 10/07/2016 15:18:29
                                       What exactly gravity is

Friends, herewith i am placing a revised theory on gravity, taking into consideration ideas of newton and einstein as well.  Feel free to post your opinion.

In Newton's description of gravity, the gravitational force is caused by matter.  In Einstein's theory and related theories of gravitation, curvature at every point in space time is also caused by whatever matter is present. Here, too, mass is a key property in determining the gravitational influence of matter. But in a relativistic theory of gravity, mass cannot be the only source of gravity. Relativity links mass with energy, and energy with momentum.

In special relativity, energy is closely connected to momentum.  if energy is a source of gravity, momentum must be a source as well.  Taken together, in general relativity it is mass, energy, momentum, pressure and tension that serve as sources of gravity, they are how matter tells space time how to curve. In the theory's mathematical formulation, all these quantities are but aspects of a more general physical quantity called the energy–momentum tensor.

Newton's main focus is on matter only.  Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Where as Einstien has taken mass and energy as key points in his study on gravity. He has also taken energy for momentum in his special relativity.  He has taken energy and momentum as one of the four dimentional aspects.

In my view matter and energy are two different things which cannot be combined while calculating gravity and it is energy alone plays key role in gravity.  There is huge amount of energy on this earth, which i had already termed it as "energy base".  Suppose if anybody says that there is no energy base on this earth than what is bearing the weight of the hydrosphere.  It is true that mass of the hydrosphere carrys weight and if there is no obstruction than it will come down to earth. 

How this energy is created:
It is true that Sun is the important source of energy.  However, see our universe which is spread to far away places and there is energy throught the universe. If there is no energy than there is no scope for planets also.  In space, planets cannot exist.  Suppose, if the energy for any reason dwindles and area comes down than planets existing at the end of the universe, gains weight, looses control and start traveling with maximum speed. 

Well, how this huge amount of energy is created.  At present most of our calculations are on the basis of existing things only.  We are forgetting one key point that without "Big bang" there is no scope for formation of any Universe including ours.  After Big bang, devastating fire started on all the planets, including sun, and energy packed within masses started coming out. This energy started spreading to far away places.  Slowly planets started cooling and climate developed against them.  At present Sun is not a burning firewood, but burning coal only.  Other planets are still burning and are in the stage of  burning coal covered by ash.

Huge amount of energy present throught the universe is not created within short time but over a period of time.  This is the "Energy base". 

First of all let me tell you one simple incident which happened in my early days which helped me to recognise this energy base. This incident happened when i was 13 or 14 years age.  Ours is a tiles house and total area, bed room, dining, cooking everything in that only.  In severe winter, i.e., may be in the month of January, that day night i could not get sleep, seeing at my suffering father called on me to come near to him and he was sleeping near to the kitchen.  When i went there, it was surprise to note that it was hot, and wet.  When asked father replied, firewood is still burning.  But i could not find any firewood burning, removed ashes and found coal in red colour.  Cooking was stopped in the evening itself, however this small amount of fire, that too deep inside ashes was able to save so much area.  In fact i did not slept that night and started measuring area. This can be compared to all our planets as well, including sun.  Ones, our planets are also firewood only, after shedding lot of energy into open area, they have cooled now.  Energy released by planets turned out as "Energy Base" and is playing key role.

Energy movement:
There is strong energy base against sun.  When fresh energy is released due to burning it adds to the existing base.  It creates pressure on the existing rays and a momentum is gained.  If the addition is small/weak than it stops further movement and in case if the addition continues than it will move to farther and farther places. Some of these rays, if pressure/force continues than it will cross our universe and reaches other universes in the space.

Energy base on the Earth:
Our earth is also ones a ball of fire only and it shed lot of heat and energy into space.  However our earth is blessed with more hydrosphere than other planets and it started cooling at a faster rate when compared to other planets. Strong Hydrosphere helped in the development of climate on earth.  Strong hydrosphere never allowed free movement of energy into open area.  This led to formation of local "Energy base" on earth.  This energy base remained permanently on earth.  It is true that earth is still burning and is releasing lot of energy into this energy base.  Energy rays coming from sun are also bringing energy and it is addition to our base. Some of the strong energy rays taking movement from earth are taking away energy from this base.

Suppose if there is no energy base on earth than hydrosphere comes down to earth.  Strong energy rays coming from sun hits earth directly.  In case if there is no climate, strong energy rays coming from sun penetrates deeply and creates pressure/force on earth.  As there is no climate, on the other side it gains weight and a momentum is gained and start moving away from our universe.

About Gravity:
Development/creation of climate itself paves way for Gravity.  It led to formation of strong Energy Base.  This Energy base is nothing but presence of energy rays.  These rays carry energy from one place to other place.  It is true that energy is of object oriented and start concentrating against earth.  For this energy even minute cells are also its objects only. 

These rays not only concentrates against objects but also penetrates deeply.  Suppose, let us think that if we are in inertial position, millions and millions of our body cells are all objects of energy rays.  Generally our body temperature will be lower than outside pressure and therefore it leads to more concentration.

Energy rays coming from sun initially faces hydrosphere, weakens and comes out into earth atmosphere.  These weak rays start gaining with the help of energy existing on this earth.  Earth is an important and huge object for these energy rays. Concentration of energy is boosted on earth and it turns out as light.  In fact light is nothing but charging of energy rays. 

In my view gravity is nothing but pressure/force applied on objects/things.  We are all living within the Energy base and for this base, earth is huge object. There is complete concentration against each and every minute cell of earth.  It is penetrating upto deep area of earth.  So earth is completely within the grip of this Energy.  Human beings living within  this base, are also its objects only.  Energy rays pools/concentrates against human beings from all sides.  Since there is continuous flow of energy towards earth, long energy rays concentrating against human beings creates pressure and pushes from upside towards earth.  This force/pressure is gravity.  It is very difficult to escape from these rays.  Since these rays are object oriented, if we remove air, along with objects than only we can escape from these rays. 

It is true that earth is still burning deep inside and releasing lot of energy into open area.  Since earth is already
cooled from sides, most of the energy released is at the centre only.  As there is continuous flow of energy, long energy rays are developed and these rays are creating upward motion on things.

Rotation and Revolution:
Due to energy pressure from all sides, earth already lost most of its weight.  Now it is in energy grip.  Let us presume that in inertial condition, long range energy rays coming from sun with the help of existing energy on earth is holding almost upto 50% of earth in its control at any point of time.  It is simply like a basket ball player, to have control he must keep his hand upto 50% of the ball, or otherwise ball may not be in his control.  Suppose if his control over ball is less than 25 to 30 percent than ball moves in opposite direction.  In case if he takes the ball with the help of both the hands than the ball is fully in his control. 

Earth is simply like a soft in electrical motor.  To move motor there must be movement of electrons.  It appears that energy rays coming from sun are not hitting directly, there is bent or curvature of these rays and are hitting in a curved manner and there fore it is causing rotation of earth.  Einstien rightly presumed this and incorporated it in his General relativity theory.  He thought that gravity is due to pressure/force created by energy in a curvated manner.  Well, when it is about revolution, it is also in the control of sun energy only.  Suppose in inertial condition, earth is simply in static condition without any movement.  Suppose when it rotates, its fresh area comes into the control of the fresh energy rays.  So, movement of revolution starts against the energy rays.  In case for any reason, if these energy rays, which are holding earth, dwindles than earth comes near to sun. Moon is not having strong climate.  It is under partial control of sun.  Suppose if it is having strong climate means it would have turned out into a independant planet.  Strong energy rays moving from earth are hitting moon directly.  In a static condition these rays decides distance of the moon from earth.  Since earth is rotating, energy rays moving from earth, are not parallel and bents in a sloped manner and creates pressure at a different place.  It is causing movement of energy and thus rotation of moon on its axis.  This rotation against  the energy rays of earth, makes it to rotate against earth.

Finally:
Newton's universal law of gravitation is a different subject.  It mainly deals with attraction in between two objects. Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.  So here distance plays a key role.  Newton might have thought that Earth is a huge object and therefore it is attracting moon keeping aside distance.  In my view this is not correct.  But this theory rightly explains attraction of particles.  This is root cause for the existence of hydrosphere, energy moving in the form of rays, existence of mines, for that very existence of this universe itself.  But gravity is a different one, it is due to the movement of energy/force applied on objects.

Einstein came out from this fundamental thinking and proposed that energy force/pressure is causing gravity.  However he could not recognise huge amount of energy force present on this earth. So he has taken energy force as one of four dimensions.

If we say that there is no energy base than who is bearing the weight of hydrosphere.  It is true that water carrys weight and it is not staying at that height without any support.  Energy is also key player in Fire, explosions, light and the process which we will discuss separately.

Yours
psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 10/07/2016 16:29:45
Both seems to be correct, Newton's describles what matter does and Einstein's what space does, infact the mass is the only facto as "constant" that maters, form space the only real thing as "the force" is the inflation, space fabric can't pass trough dense atomic structure, so it works around of it, what we matter feel like compression is universe expansion, simple cause one does ot expands inside out without sompress oneself, as a reaction, from outside in...
 The expansion is rulled by heat, since there is one tousand types of stars and heat out there you will have different local system, different "epansion" from outside in the "starsphere"... Since the cold is prety constant the expansion of universe around stars will be most constant and will be the speed f the wavelenght frequencies  traveling trough it, now eneters dark matter but I don't know if I believe on it...

 Folowing forward, above we determinated what maters to matter is mass, and to space is temperature, this is the simpliest explanation I can provide, now you have to go deep into electromagnetism, the stars generates a constant inner expansion from all directions pushing the planets away, at the sae time the outerspace expansion compresses itself against the star, one must give up, but no one will, what they will do is convert this shockwave of expansion in momentum, and the star will start to spin on a axe, this will force the electromagnetism to leak only from the poles, those vortexes will climb up the star, eventualy they will loose to outer space expansion against the star, the expansion will force the vortex to go back towards the main star but they are to strong, so what expansion will do is force they to open up, compressing the vortexes, leading the electromagnetism to fall down away from the star, of course thereis no down or up, evething is the same, the electromagnetism leaking from the vortexes will be opened up and one extreme will find the other at the edges of what will be the horizontal spiral disk, and the planets will be existing inside of it, being constantly compressed from up and down, vibrating, floating with no weight... Eventually the planets will also develop their own magnetosmphere, they will inclinate their poles towards the main star poles, this will give them orbits..
 The horizontal spiral disk is submited by two forces, expansio of the main star pushing matter away, and expansion from outerspace pushing the planets against the star.... The ort cloud is a good example of how this two expansive froces are always perfectly balanced, the ort cloud is not stopped there, they can't come in, they can't go out, they can't climb up the hyperparable, and they can't fall down on it, simple floating without momentum....

 So one could say the mass is proporsional to the electromagnetism it will produce, electromagnetism will differ from star to star compossition, and electromagnetism will not do anything alone, what matter does is irrelevant, alone, what set everything in motion s what this forces are interacting with... So once again, mass for inner expansion, inner expansion against outr space expansion for convert it into momentum, acceleration, momentum will generate electromagnetism, two poles, two poles will leak electromagnetism will interact with electromagnetism giving orbits around... And the constant conflic betwen proporsional expansion forces will grant us stable orbits, much like a super conductor locked in on the system...

 For that I sugest you to watch experiments with water in zero gravity, watch what happen with the oxygen when they add momentum to the sphere, where does the ligher element goes! And than think as I did, if you are forming a bodie "existing within" space fabric, dark energy, what would be the lighter element to remain at the inner core of the bodies?
 If is not clear yet, go underwater and start to built a sphere with inumerous layers, can you built the sphere underwater without having trapped water inside of it, most at the center? And if you heat up the layers form outside in, what would happen to the water traped in there?
 See, that my conclusion about gravity, but I can't prove without see the inner core or the interior of a black hole, not that I need to see the interior, but I'm prety sure that we are the same as the black hole but with a crost, exacly on that way...
 And about the moons, the see as as being the sun, the electromagnetism of the earth also generates a invisible horizontal spiral disk, the moon is being constantly compressed on the plates, and so it goes for every single planet and star outthere...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: PmbPhy on 10/07/2016 17:07:56
Quote from: pasala
How this energy is created:
It is true that Sun is the important source of energy.  However, see our universe which is spread to far away places and there is energy throught the universe. If there is no energy than there is no scope for planets also.  In space, planets cannot exist.
Why are you claiming that planets can't exist? And what do you mean by If there is no energy than there is no scope for planets also.?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Yahya on 10/07/2016 18:05:47
it's true that the cause of gravity is  a stored energy , and things that are above earth have potential energy , instead of "energy base" I call it stored energy ,the collection of all possible potential energy is this amount of stored energy I call it stored energy because it exists no matter what is there outside, see my thread "all fields are the same, a new theory on field" in this section.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 10/07/2016 23:42:49
Well for me it's a little bit different...
 For me there is no weight, and never was, only electromagnetism being generated by the aceleration of particles inside the innercore, the heat triggers the energy by interacting with deactivated matter outside the planets, realing the generated energy as radiation and waveleng frequencies...

 There is so much more dark energy out there than there is nomal matter, simple because one is provinient from the other, black holes in my models are not depresions on space fabric that is flat, there is no flat space besides the illusion of it being flat when to observing it existing and from the horizontal disk of the big bang...
 Gravity for me is a pysical manifestation of a existence witch has density and also zero acceleration and zero speed, its simple null as in terms of charge or energy, but by the existence of atoms and atomic bounds ans reactions generating electromagnetism, that is able to interract and reshape this dark energy, imposing it etheral barries delimiting invisible spheres to provide a colision betwen two expansion that eventually will balance one with the other at the edge of their spheres, this constant friction will provides energy ofr the interior of the sphere, being originated due atomic reactions, but noneless only having pysical manifestation by and when those reactions are "existing, happening, interracting", over the dark energy, dark energy will expand and contract within everything extimulated by different density limitis with will determine the atomic structure that is "possible" to exist inside the sphere, determinating the elementas the sphere is able to posses, all this determinated by the type of the main star and the electromagnetic field it produces due its mass and compossition....

 Imagine a universe made of matter, imagine the universe as a gigantic super massive planet or star, working on the same way we do, and it whent supernova, forming a black hole, a primordial one, or use a flod between two dimmensions to describle the begining is not really important to understand the frame...
 And the frame is, black holes are stars that due compossition, neutron star, posses lower mass, but in compensation they can generate enourmous amoungts of heat, a specific temperature, that breaks the limit of the dark energy out there, the same temperature that originated the universe, maybe even highter, assuming that every single planet is a hole not by have weight but simple by being existing within the universe inflation, capturing the expansion, havving the impression that is compression when it never was comrpession or atraction, but a inflation pushing "holes" toguether, for dpace fabric we are not but holes, that it is constantly trying to seal, constantly trying to "fill", it try so much that when the planet grows bigger, the dark energy traped on the inner core during the formation of the bodi, is heated up to another specific temperature, proporsional to its size in expansion, this triggers the same black hole event but in a lower scale, and most important not complete, since the density of the outer core, inner and outer layers is able to inpose a limit on the "pysical manifestation" with would be the acceleration, but the spining and temperature inside the inner core are preserved and freely noneless, generating electromagnetism, forming another magnetosphere, its the paters...
 Planets can orbit black holes because they are nothing, nothing, more than a outercore that for specific reason, by the "inner" compression of the super nova "expansion" against the "exposed outercore", expanded the crost away "at the same time", it compresses the inner core against its own expansion, correct the outer core is there, but the expansion is proveninet from the inner core of bodies, if you have power enought to "pysicaly" compress the exposed outercore form outside in, you will exponetialy and in a fraction of a sceund exponentialy increase the already very high temperature on the inner core, to the limit or to almost the limit, depending on the size, but if the outercore is able to keep heating up the innercore by adding matter forming a new layer or by being zombie, its the same it will do it...
 The heat will eventually triggers this especific temperature, and than in a fraction of a secund the outer core will colapse and shirink itselv within the own expansion of the innercore, a expansion that collapsed the body generating the heat over its own expansion, much more strong that the one a planet or star is doing, simple because the corst never let the inner expansion interract dirrectly with the outerspace one, there is always the crost on the way slowing down the process and the acceleration, absorving the heat and leaking it to outer space, so instead of shirinks, the planet or the star starts to grow, simple because it can transfer heat properly....
  A black hole, at least for me, its a outer core that colapsed over its own expansion and than for this it shirinked, and now the problem beggins, when it does the heat is increased to unimaginable temperatures, one that this universe can stand, but also one that tryggers a powerfull Re-expansion of the universe, the same as the original one, the difference from the black holes to the big bang besides their size, is that universe expanded itself over a field itself was producing by converting matter into dark energy, by irradiating them with electromagnetism and radiation, the reason why the present has much more dark energy than normal matter is because the early universe had much more matter than dark energy, and not the opposit, its not being generated from nothing, at least I do think so...

 Black holes are stars that increased the heat and shiriked to a disproporsional balance and now the expansion goes far beyond the crost it should still theory still have, is an anomality, not a negative depresion, but two positive mountains.... In the most short version, black holes are stars that shirinked, conserving their inner heat, and now they can't transfer heat to anything, as more compressed by oter space more expands, as more it expands more heat is generated and more expansion, if you want to dismis a black hole is simple, stop its motion trough the cosmos, the surronding areas will heat up and it will die, this is happening anyway but the motion conserves the cold on the suronding areas peventing the heat from be transfered...

 Now to understand how I believe that dark energy is deactivated matter, you need to assume that we are wrong about photons, nto a sigle photon that we created with controled experiments, I accept that photons are produced when the electromagnetims finds a particle with right charge, but I do believe that everysingle photon as soon as it is created and looses its charge and momentum, it joins the space fabric, because they are the same thing, a photon would be something like a drop joining into a lake, similar to it, increassing the lake, the mass and the density....
 Black holes start to stretch matter using tortlefication, and nothing is falling into it, cause nothing can, the atomic bound is broken and the cords ripped apart to the last piece, the electromagnetism and radiation converte thise particles into photons, increasing the density of the field where the black holes exist within, also this explains why the inflation is not happening in a uniforme way, the production of dark energy would be happening more fast on reagion sof the universe where there is more black holes and matter to be converted....
  Now about the speed of light, when Einstein tested the existence of the photons as particles waves, his expirement was compromissed, you can't see a photon without experimentation, with includes interraction and meassurement, as soon there is interraction the photons on the area, already presented there, would be extimulated, and the wavelenght frequency you generated is being tranfered at the "maximum speed of the fabric", the maximum speed that the photons can transfer wavelength frequencies trough the fabric, determined by the density of the fabric alne, the wave lenght frequencies could be infinity, simple because the photons wouldn't need to be mass less or travel at the speed of the frequencies, just because the space fabric speed would be instantaneous, not by acceleration but by existence, by being at the point A and B even before and after any acceleration have ever happened, this can also be consider as infinity speed or instantaneously...
 Being the speed of light not the speed of the mass less photons, but being the speed of light the maximum "alowed due density" that the wavelenght frequencies could possible be traveling "trough" the photonic space fabric, C is than the base limit speed of the fabric, and not the one of the frequencies...

 Well math doesn't make anysence, but I do believe someone with time to win or loose would be able to do the calculations, but one experiment will not be possible, one need to presume the photon being a drop of water tht joins the phonic space fabric as soon as it hits another dense atomic structure, like your eyes, there it will stop, not being static, but being flowing around your body as a wave...
 I agree with most of you said but I can't agree that space has energy of its own, the only energy space has is the one of the waveleng frequencies provinient from interaction of matter, traveling trough it, of course this generation of bounds and enegy is ony possible by being happening over dark energy, otherwise there wouldn't be even electromagnetism or atomic bounds, so one needs space to interact with and create, but space need to be null and its speed must be zero, there is or was pyshical manifestation but it is only provinient from the matter precense, "the hole", it is representing on its "pysical" farbic, evoking expansion over what it can't penetrate, heating up, expanding back, and so it goes from the atom to the big bang....

One thing more Observing a galaxy, and than observing the maped universe with the heat and it all, I'd have to say, i believe that what we call as big bang is a rupture of course, providing a hyper horizontal disk where the galaxyes are orbiting within it, but I'm not sure that this heat is from the creation of universe, it seems to have belonged to a super massive sun, one that could be formed in a period in expansion when the expansion where strong enought to form and sustain such titanic bodies, and for the galaxies, things will get more weirdo, all this broken egg we called as milky way and the others galaxyes, where planets that expoded and entered supernova when "engulfed" by the expansion of this super massive sun....
 A galaxy can only be seing by its orizontal disk, but as our heliosphere it is rounded or eliptical, the mapped universe would than be only seing by the matter within it, doesn't mean that up and down wouldn't be electromagnetism acting over dark energy just as any other black hole is doing out there, I'm afraid that what we call as the entire universe is not worng, but our universe would be like any one of those galaxyes ou there, another super titanic massive bodie that was formed in a early and stronger period in expansion where it could be, a universe planet if you prefer, among many others, and it also eventually due expansion, "less compression" enetered super nova, just as is happening now, only in lower scale...

One more observation about the theory about the photons joinign themselves forming what we call as dark energy, the speed of light, out speed of light seems to be correct, but the speed of the photonic fabric would be infinity or instantaneusly...
 See the normal scenario requires the photons to be mass less only for describle how they would be able to move at the speed of light, but in my scenario the photons doesn't need to travel with the speed of light, C would be than the limit speed of witch the wave length frequencies can travel trought the photonic fabric...
 Lets built an example:
 Imagine that you're seeing a star that is sending a ray of light towards your eyes, we presume that the light would only be seein when it reaches our eyes, because it is traveling at a certain speed, its own...
 But in my scenario the photons already formed the photonic fabric that is already at the star and at your eyes, the photons have only one role, the one of transfer information from point A to point B...
 What I mean the speed of light, I'm not questioning it, but I'm restricting the speed of light as being the limit speed of the frequencies over the photonic fabric, but since the photons where already there and here, the information is acceptable that it is already being tranfered from deep space, instantaneously, this even before the wave lenght frequencies have hitted your eyes, you're not seein the spectrum, what you see is the information that is being carried trought the photons that where already here, even before the frequency have reached you...

 I'm researching on the possibilitie of the speed of light has being correct, but the speed of sight as being constantly and exponential in function to the speed of the frequencies...
 What I mean in terms of vision, eyes sight, one should than be able to see the light even before it have reached your eyes, half way is the light frequencie, the other half is the photonic fabric that where already there...
 I know sounds weirdo and its very hard to proff, specialy without our own math...
 In any case, what I'm saying is this "our observation exponentially increases the speed of light"
 In terms of matter, before light have reached the object nothing was really happening in the wy, nothing was being observed, but in terms of eyes, in terms of vision, one coud say that our obseration of a ray of light is instantaneously by being constantly observing the light and the path it will still cross too, untill it reaches you, and its not constant its exponential...

 So what's gravity?
 Its the result of matter interaction with space fabric, generating expansion, and all this, happening inside another expansion.... a "pysical" manifestation of a density field, compossed by decomposed matter, and the interraction of those forces generate electromagnetism and bounds converting the difference between the two expansions into acceleration, of its heat soruces,, on its fabric, atomic structure...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 17/07/2016 12:01:00
Friends,

Well, Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Here newtons focus is on attraction of two masses and he termed it as gravity and  whatever it may, it is of course a different subject, which i had already explained.

According to general relativity, a binary system will emit gravitational waves, thereby losing energy. Due to this loss, the distance between the two orbiting bodies decreases, and so does their orbital period. Within the Solar System or for ordinary double stars, the effect is too small to be observable. This is not the case for a close binary pulsar, a system  of two orbiting neutron stars, one of which is a pulsar: from the pulsar, observers on Earth receive a regular series of radio pulses that can serve as a highly accurate clock, which allows precise measurements of the orbital period. Because neutron stars are immensely compact, significant amounts of energy are emitted in the form of gravitational radiation.

Neutron stars may emit enormous amount of energy, does not matter, its impact is on the universe and it has no capacity to create so much of impact on the things within a planet.  Impact of gravitational radiation coming from far away place  is far limited.  All this is due to lack of knowledge about huge energy base on this earth.  It is wonder to see, even now, after 100 year of Einstein we are not able to detect this.

ABOUT ENERGY BASE:
As already told by me, burning of firewood sticks is already over.  It is only coal, still burning and emitting radiation.
Base is already developed at the time of burning of firewood only.  Ok, to prove existence of this energy base, one of my friend who replied, is doing research on light and let us start from this point itself.

Suppose if we switch on a battery light, it gives huge amount of light.  At present we are concentrating on battery cells used, potential energy stored there in and the amount of light given by it.  This is simply one side of the coin only.  If we switch on, very small amount of electrons start flowing out.  But the amount of light given by it is huge.  In fact it is being multiplied.  How it is happening.  Actually without energy base in the open area there is no scope for light at all.  When electrons start coming out from battery cell, they simply pushes existing energy rays and these rays are get charged.  Light is nothing but charging of energy rays only.  If the pressure increases, distance upto which energy rays are charged also increases and more light and if pressure decreases, pressure on energy rays decreases and thus light.

We are able to get light on our earth means, it is not a natural phenomina, but due to energy pressure only.  There is energy base in our universe also and that is why, we are able to get light there.  But if we cross our universe, in between to universes, it is of course completely blank and there is scope for this light.  There, in between two universes if we switch on battery cell, electrons start flowing out without any obstruction and there is no scope  for grouping or concentration of any energy.

This is the reason why light coming from sun also changes from place to place. In all low lying places, where concentration of existing energy is more, light is also more.  Where as, on all high hill areas where energy concentration is low, light is low only.  For that if we take our battery cell, to deep caves where energy concentration is low, naturally light goes on reducing.

It is not only light, but also other important things such fire, explosion also gets answers.

Leaving aside, existing before us, we are concentrating on expansion of universe.  We are concentrating on dark energy and  dark matter.  Einstein in his General relativity has taken us to a different world. Study of gravity is different subject and study of universe is different subject.  Einstien rightly noted that it is energy, that is root cause for this gravity. However he could not locate how and where this energy came from and creating pressure and there fore he linked it to mass.  He has taken mass, energy and space time as the reasons for this gravity. 

One of friend has taken this as:   
"Its the result of matter interaction with space fabric, generating expansion, and all this, happening inside another
expansion.... a "physical" manifestation of a density field, composed by decomposed matter, and the interaction of those forces generate electromagnetism and bounds converting the difference between the two expansions into acceleration, of its heat sources,, on its fabric, atomic structure.

If gravity waves are created/generated some where, why do not they show same impact on all planets.  It is true that we are experiencing more gravity on earth than when compared to moon. Why this difference, and on earth also it changes place to place. If it is so means, we should experience same gravity throught universe.

Please try to come out of this fundamental thinking.  Suppose let us think that we want to travel from London to a different place by ship.  We have started our journey, but by mistake, taking wrong calculations, driver has taken us to London only. Similar thing is happening here.

It is true that We all accept that it is the energy, whatever way, it may, is binding force behind gravity.  All our estimations are going wrong in "identifying energy pressure on earth".

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 23/07/2016 17:40:20
Friends,
Actually i had expected lot of criticism from different corners, but it is not so.  I know that there are number of alternative theories to Gravity.  Well it is very difficult to say which is correct.  I may say that my theory is correct, like wise others will argue.  It is very very important subject, like a base which paves or helps to crop up new theories. 

Now a days, science and technology developed a lot.  We know that climate plays key role in gravity, strong climate means strong gravity and weak climate means weak gravity.  This itself helps us to understand what exactly gravity is and how it is created.  It is true that energy plays key role in gravity.  Gravity rays are not created/developed some where, but are existing here itself.  Universe it having lot of capacity to absorb any pressure.  I do not think existence of any space fabric and reflection of electro magnetic rays.  Any test done  here on earth, of course it is within this climate acts differently and it has no relevance/comparison to things happening in space.

Due to criticism from friends, actually i did not forward any theory to any university or scientists.  Now they are encouraging, so i want to place this theory as one of alternative theory to gravity.

So i request friends, by this forum to give mail addresses of important universities or scientists to whom i can place this for consideration/discussion.

Thanking you

Yours
Psreddy 
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/07/2016 19:51:35
Friends,

Well, Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Here newtons focus is on attraction of two masses and he termed it as gravity and  whatever it may, it is of course a different subject, which i had already explained.

According to general relativity, a binary system will emit gravitational waves, thereby losing energy. Due to this loss, the distance between the two orbiting bodies decreases, and so does their orbital period. Within the Solar System or for ordinary double stars, the effect is too small to be observable. This is not the case for a close binary pulsar, a system  of two orbiting neutron stars, one of which is a pulsar: from the pulsar, observers on Earth receive a regular series of radio pulses that can serve as a highly accurate clock, which allows precise measurements of the orbital period. Because neutron stars are immensely compact, significant amounts of energy are emitted in the form of gravitational radiation.

Neutron stars may emit enormous amount of energy, does not matter, its impact is on the universe and it has no capacity to create so much of impact on the things within a planet.  Impact of gravitational radiation coming from far away place  is far limited.  All this is due to lack of knowledge about huge energy base on this earth.  It is wonder to see, even now, after 100 year of Einstein we are not able to detect this.

ABOUT ENERGY BASE:
As already told by me, burning of firewood sticks is already over.  It is only coal, still burning and emitting radiation.
Base is already developed at the time of burning of firewood only.  Ok, to prove existence of this energy base, one of my friend who replied, is doing research on light and let us start from this point itself.

Suppose if we switch on a battery light, it gives huge amount of light.  At present we are concentrating on battery cells used, potential energy stored there in and the amount of light given by it.  This is simply one side of the coin only.  If we switch on, very small amount of electrons start flowing out.  But the amount of light given by it is huge.  In fact it is being multiplied.  How it is happening.  Actually without energy base in the open area there is no scope for light at all.  When electrons start coming out from battery cell, they simply pushes existing energy rays and these rays are get charged.  Light is nothing but charging of energy rays only.  If the pressure increases, distance upto which energy rays are charged also increases and more light and if pressure decreases, pressure on energy rays decreases and thus light.

We are able to get light on our earth means, it is not a natural phenomina, but due to energy pressure only.  There is energy base in our universe also and that is why, we are able to get light there.  But if we cross our universe, in between to universes, it is of course completely blank and there is scope for this light.  There, in between two universes if we switch on battery cell, electrons start flowing out without any obstruction and there is no scope  for grouping or concentration of any energy.

This is the reason why light coming from sun also changes from place to place. In all low lying places, where concentration of existing energy is more, light is also more.  Where as, on all high hill areas where energy concentration is low, light is low only.  For that if we take our battery cell, to deep caves where energy concentration is low, naturally light goes on reducing.

It is not only light, but also other important things such fire, explosion also gets answers.

Leaving aside, existing before us, we are concentrating on expansion of universe.  We are concentrating on dark energy and  dark matter.  Einstein in his General relativity has taken us to a different world. Study of gravity is different subject and study of universe is different subject.  Einstien rightly noted that it is energy, that is root cause for this gravity. However he could not locate how and where this energy came from and creating pressure and there fore he linked it to mass.  He has taken mass, energy and space time as the reasons for this gravity. 

One of friend has taken this as:   
"Its the result of matter interaction with space fabric, generating expansion, and all this, happening inside another
expansion.... a "physical" manifestation of a density field, composed by decomposed matter, and the interaction of those forces generate electromagnetism and bounds converting the difference between the two expansions into acceleration, of its heat sources,, on its fabric, atomic structure.

If gravity waves are created/generated some where, why do not they show same impact on all planets.  It is true that we are experiencing more gravity on earth than when compared to moon. Why this difference, and on earth also it changes place to place. If it is so means, we should experience same gravity throught universe.

Please try to come out of this fundamental thinking.  Suppose let us think that we want to travel from London to a different place by ship.  We have started our journey, but by mistake, taking wrong calculations, driver has taken us to London only. Similar thing is happening here.

It is true that We all accept that it is the energy, whatever way, it may, is binding force behind gravity.  All our estimations are going wrong in "identifying energy pressure on earth".

Yours
Psreddy

What I mean is exactly that universe expansion we are measuring, is the heliosphere expansion, everything outside the heliosphere is also expanding, so its not wrong to call it universal inflation, but one need to consider than that the universe expansion is not constant and uniform, it is directly related with the massive star that is providing its atomic structure presence to it...

 Taking this in consideration, that different mass and elements, will produce different mix of energy, and the atoms may somehow have the same inner energy to transfer and inject as heat on the system, but the atomic structure of the different elements, will produce different kinds of electromagnetism, different power, directly related with the mass/ electromagnetism and not mass/ weight... No weight!

 Weight its simple the difference resultant between the two expansions, the outer space expansion over planets, minus the inner expansion of the body itself... If you imagine that 1kg of iron should fall equally on the moon as it does on earth or any other body, you maybe relating the weight as being result of the outerspacecompression alone, but if you add the inner expansion, things get interesting and messed up...
  Mass its not enough for heat, the composition is also very relevant in terms of electromagnetism, the inner core of all bodies I believe to be the same thing, but what's spinning, absorbing the innercore expansion "converted into acceleration as it is being compressed by outer space expansion", is relevant in terms of electromagnetism...
  A molten iron and rock outercore would be able to "conserve heat much more efficient than a gas or some other elements, like sun the hello produces much more heat but will not be as good as magma when in terms of absorbing the acceleration...

 The case of the moon example is simple on this consideration, the asteroids forming a moon start to form it fast cause there is only outerspacecompression against an insignificant force of inner expansion so it grow very fast... As it gets bigger, and this getting bigger is determined by the "sphere" it is being produced within, in our case heliosphere, minus, the planet magnetosphere, resulting in something proportional to the point it the moon, does not grow much bigger than the planet... The size of the moon when related to our sun plus the size of the earth, is a stationary one... If you make the moon get bigger, much bigger "where it stays" it will start to heat up fast cause due its size and density it will be able to capture more outer expansion, resulting in a stronger acceleration and electromagnetism, make moon become tree times the size of earth and earth will be trapped and subdued by the moon stronger magnetosphere, the interaction of both will state, electrically state, "earth, you will orbit moon"... At this scenario you can consider the weight of things on the moon as being a lot heavy, not directly related with the size of the moon, but with the counter force its new size is enabling it to produce...

  Things seems to be lighter on the moon, cause the moon "where it stands" is not big enough, and or also does not have a appropriated outercore to generate electromagnetism enough to push back the outer expansion over it... The same case as mars, but mars once in a much earlier solar system probably had it's magnetosphere as we do, "outside" the crost, the moon or mars "where they stand", have now so less rotation or wrong elements on the outercore that the magnetosphere is still being activated, magnetosphere is always there no matter which body, but barely leaking for outside the atmosphere...
 As resume, if you walk over a celestial body, the size is not directly important on this, only if the inner expansion of the inner core is strong and the outercore dense enough to observe it, differing the rocky from a gas giant, and you see that the "Weight you know" does not seem to be correct when related to the mass/weight of the moon, you need to be able to see the the "weight of things" is directly related with the mass/electromagnetism of the body...
 If you are tiny but, by means that we will ignore, become able to produce strong expansion, thus electromagnetic field when your outercore absorves the acceleration provident from of your inner expansion against the outer space one, the weight of the things over that asteroid will change, despised of its "Weight or energy"...

 About different gravitational pull over an one planet, there is many influences, such as the stars and moons around you, but in case of earth do you want to blame someone for the different magnetic fields, blame the diversity of elements on the inner layers, and also blame the oceans and their depth, the liquid salt water is the one to blame for earth magnetosphere holes... Also the moon going away from us each year is directly related with the oceans and their ability to disperse the electromagnetic invitation of the moon, and also disrupt the electromagnetic of earth's inner core to respond, they do interact but not as in the early universe, oceans can disrupt the exchanging of signals between both objects, as result the moon will be always gaining distance from us, by poor communication one could say... And remember earth is not rounded anymore...

 Yeah I don't desagree that Newton and Einstein calculated the orbits very well, and its reliable, I just wonder that they never understood gravity, cause they calculated the orbits "already" using a unity of measurement of gravity, humans had always called it as "Weight", the only thing that, at least I do believe, is that they should have considered the "Weight of things", as not being related with the mass alone, but from the presence of any mass that's near the planet, but the fact that the mass fall is not provinient from weigt, not here nor outhere, is provinient of the same force that shapes the panet, the dense atomic structure is being "pushed" by dark energy, towards the crost, true, but space does not know the apple was there, it only knows that it pushed something towards the crost in its constants atempts of reach the inner core, actracted by the heat expansion, constantly trying to seal it...
 What I mean is "the apple, has never felt from the tree", it was pushed by the dark energy cceleration...
  Now would you tell me to provide proof, weel the winds, the waves, the magma, the apple falling, everything is produce from atomic structure, such as water, oxygen, molten rock, but the the motion of all those and of everything is givent to liquid solid or gas, by the space within the atoms and within the objects themselves...
 Earth does not accelerate, space does... An asteroid will aways be atracted to a planet when nearby the same reason the apple interacted with the crost, both didn't... It's just that a a bigger hole recieving expansion will always atract another smaller holes nearby...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Colin2B on 24/07/2016 08:41:31
So i request friends, by this forum to give mail addresses of important universities or scientists to whom i can place this for consideration/discussion.
Unfortunately we are not allowed to give out these private emails. However, many top scientists read these pages and if they find your theory worthy of investigation they will pass it to the most suitable department and contact you.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 31/07/2016 07:41:33
Mr Alex siqueira,

In my view, whatever thing it may, total credit for identifying gravity goes to Mr.Newton only.  Where as Mr.Einstein spent most of time on experiments to identify existence of gravity. 

01 Gravitational redshift
02 Gravitational time dilation.

Having formulated the relativistic, geometric version of the effects of gravity, the question of gravity's source remains. In Newtonian gravity, the source is mass. In special relativity, mass turns out to be part of a more general quantity called the energy–momentum tensor, which includes both energy and momentum densities as well as stress. Einstein was almost near to the point, however he was confused and he could not locate huge amount of energy already present on this earth.  He moved to curvature of space time and thought that it is raising gravitational radiation. 

But it is true that electromagnetic waves emitted by stars is too small to measure and its effect on objects, on planets is very limited.  In case if it is so means, suppose let us assume that  mass weight of an object is  10 kgs and its gravitational weight is 10 kgs than total weight of the mass is 20 kgs and when it is giving additional weight of 10 kgs on simple mass, what about its influence on the total universe. 

It is true that energy moves from high to low area and it is of course a simple phenomena.  In our universe sun is emitting lot of energy into universe.  Similarly binary stars also and whatever quantity of energy they may emit, energy moves from high pressure areas to low pressure and thus spreads to new areas and existence of space fabric is also in question.  Due to attraction in between electrons, they keep together in the form of rays and these rays carrys energy from one place to other place.  Initially energy start establishing base and due to pressure some of the rays moves to longer distances.

Dark energy is also another important area to be studied carefully.  Actually, due to attraction energy tries to exist in the form of base, and the other area where there is no energy is termed as vacuum or dark energy. In my view this is rarest thing.  Energy entering dark energy area, as there is no mass or energy, it simply moves out to other area where there is concentration of mass or energy base.  Chances of dark energy creating pressure on objects in a planet is remote.

Actually i had seen one of my friend carrying out a simple test, taking water in a bucket, closing outside, vacuuming and showing how water escalates.  Here we have to remember one important point that we are living on this earth where there is huge amount of energy which is influencing each and every thing.  This energy is creating lot of pressure on surface of the water and it is also penetrating deeply.  When you try to create vacuum, energy along with mass moves out, and pressure on water is lost and water tries to escalate and one more important point is that pressure inside water is high when compared to outside and therefore energy within water tries to occupy this gap.

Your point of view:
A molten iron and rock outercore would be able to "conserve heat much more efficient than a gas or some other elements, like sun the hello produces much more heat but will not be as good as magma when in terms of absorbing the acceleration...

Let us take two or three iron pieces and place them in open area.  First one of course absorbs lot of heat and passes a part of which to next one.  See, what ever matter it may, when energy moves from one matter to other, due to obstruction created by mass, it slows down and gets reduced.  Think, how much energy, matter can absorb and passes it to inner core.  Here comparison is in between iron and rock outer core to gas or other light elements. This is an exceptional/rare case and is to be studied as such and not to be taken as main item.

Your point of view:
Things seems to be lighter on the moon, cause the moon "where it stands" is not big enough, and or also does not have a appropriated outercore to generate electromagnetism enough to push back the outer expansion over it... The same case as mars, but mars once in a much earlier solar system probably had it's magnetosphere as we do, "

In my view it is not outer core or size that determine independent existence of any planet, but it is the amount of energy released by the planet and the climate that determines independent existence of planet.  Suppose if the moon is releasing lot of energy into open area, than strong energy rays will hit earth and distance will increase and moon will move away to far away distances.  Climate is also another important point that determine very existence of planet.  Suppose if any planet is not having strong climate that sun rays will hit directly and energy rays penetrate deeply and creates pressure on one side of the planet. whereas on the other side, as there is no climate, dark energy prevails and it has no capacity to maintain the planet in its original place and planet start moving away.  Climate is aslo key factor in the rotation and revolution of any planet. 

Since moon is already cooled to a great extent, it is not releasing strong energy rays into the space and it is also not having strong climate.  So it is mainly depending on the energy rays coming from earth.

Your point of view:
About different gravitational pull over an one planet, there is many influences, such as the stars and moons around you, but in case of earth do you want to blame someone for the different magnetic fields, blame the diversity of elements on the inner layers, and also blame the oceans and their depth, the liquid salt water is the one to blame for earth magnetosphere  holes..

yeah, we have so many options to blame.  If the choice is not right we will go for more options to blame for.  if the moon is moving away from us means, there may be so many reasons, earth may be releasing more energy and strong energy rays may be hitting moon.  The other option is moon to release more energy, which is almost ruled out.

Your point of view:
What I mean is "the apple, has never felt from the tree", it was pushed by the dark energy acceleration

Dark energy is unknown form of energy presumed to be exist througt the space.  It is also said to be causing expansion of universe.  Dark energy is thought to be very homogeneous, not very dense and is not known to interact through any of the fundamental forces other than gravity.  Expansion of the universe is common thing and i do not know, why and how this was linked to gravity. 

In my view, energy is the base for air movement, when energy start establishing base, water within that area evaporates, start moving, light molecules raises from the earth and start moving.  Here if water is to create gravity means total hydrosphere must come down to earth.  Energy is having an important quality of moving from high area to low and this is movement of air. 

We are now searching for gravity waves, and somebody says we have found them.  We are experiencing gravity on earth, but we are searching for gravity waves from stars.  we also link it to the outer expansion of universe and also link it to outer  surface of the planet and to inner expansion. We take exceptional/rare things and link them to gravity.

Ok, let us take a simple example which is causing force/pressure on objects on the earth.  We are all taking this as
atmosphere pressure and where as gravity is taken as attraction in between objects.  We are all using borewell motors to pump water and this is working with the help of atmosphere pressure only.  What exactly is creating pressure on water in deep bore well, it is not, oxygen, nitrogen or dust particles, but it is energy only.  Charging of energy rays is causing heat and creating pressure on surface of sea water and to evaporate or sea water cannot evaporate by itself. Three cycles of the water is possible means it is due to energy pressure only.  First of all we have to acknowledge that there is energy base on this earth and it is helping in:
01  Normal functioning of nature.
02  Water taking three cycles.
03  It is not allowing temparature to fall extra-ordinarily during night time.
04  It is also aiding some of the key functions such as:
    a)  fire
    b)  light
    c)  explosions
    d)  and others
Small amount of energy coming from sun after escaping hydrosphere is giving lot of light and heat means it is due to energy base only.  Hydrosphere existing against our planet never allows energy to escape into space that much easily and at the same time it never allows excess energy to pass on to the planet. It is indeed providing us a comfortable, dry, wet climate suitable for the existence of nature.  Energy coming from earth is acting as support to this base.

For that how the barometer is working and how time dilation is proved to be correct.  It is due to energy pressure,
barometer is raising and it is due to gravitational waves i.e., energy rays present on the earth that time dilation and gravitational red shift  is proved to be correct.

Yours
Psreddy.
   
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 03/08/2016 02:53:10
Well friend, your mind is no less than brilinat, very complex explanation but at the same time very detailed, thanks for that...
 
 English is not my mother language, for this is hard to pick the correct words, but I agree with youm as for my poor explanation...

 I picked up the name "dark energy" as the reference to wherever is on the blackground of empty space, more than a material substance, a phisical manifestation of a form of energy...
   As for the universe expansion, inflation, I can be very brief and state the resume of my whole point of view about gravity, for this escaping the details as Eisntein did, that being said...

" Dark energy I refering as to being the force of universe expansion, "from outside in the bodies", stars and any source of "electromagnetism"
  You are absolutly correct, energy is the key factor, but only energy existing and occuring over a base field, space, energy can be represented as and for matter, atoms hold energy, the space within the atoms and objects suck as planets, is filled with deactivated matter, matter that was not destroyed, but matter that had its atoms and particles torn apart by the acceleration of black holes horizons, there due the acceleration of the neutron star, different from a ordinary sun, it does not requires to produce a nuclear reaction to produce electromagnetism, the very existence of the neutron star and the friction of the neutrons one against the other is doing it alone. A black hole only diverges from any ordinary sun cause there is no more outer layers to speed down the acceleration between the universe expansion against the super heated inner core expansion, a sun or planet needs a crost to be able to heat up the inner core, the acceleration of the inner core is transfered to the oter core, there I refer to it as magma and rock being better elements in terms of absorving the acceleration...
  I never ment that the outercores composition or energy was the one to producess the acceleration, the outher core composition is only relevant in terms of producing electromagnetism, the black holes for me are self-sustaining suns, the neutron star compression generating heat and electromagnetism without the necessity of nuclear reaction as a sun, the black holes are for me, nothing more that something as a any ordinary sun innercore, that does not require a crost to conserve and produce heat, thus they do not need to produce light from thei own...
  I diverge to the general concept of black holes when is about swaling things, this for me doesn't make any sense, never did, is most likely that what black holes do is not spagetification, but the same event in a positive result, tortlefication i would call it, the "exposed event horizon is the hidden and limited acceleration of any planet or sun, hidded by their crost, the apple falls from the tree by the same reason omething falls into the event horizon, it is being carried, pushed to the center of the acceleration, in the case of the earth or planets, the apple falled on the crost, but the apple had never falled on the crost from space point of view, the apple that falled on the ground is still falling, we, plants, cars, mountains, we are all falling towards the earths crost, we're all being pushed towards it, simple by being dense...
  Dark energy acceleration is reduced by the apple from outside in, at the same way the horizon of earth is pushed back trowards earth from inside out, a perfect balance...

 See universal expansion is common knoledge, but I consider planets, or dense atomic structures as 3d holes on space fabric, the universe expansion from inside out the big bang, seems to never being consider as "compression over the planets", the universe expansion is the source of gravity on any body, the universe expands over itself, but this very expansion, the one I call outher expansion, is expanding over us, being atracted because and towards us, dense atomic structures...

 I agree earths energy is a correct point of view, but the temperatures and acceleration is provided by interaction with dark energy, there would be no heat, heat is the pshisical manifestation of the energy being transfered, but it happens and belongs only to the blackground, the termal energy, is not from the blackground, energy is from matter, would be fair to say that the "thermal" is from space, and that the "energy" is from matter, thermal energy is simple the act of the energy being transfered...

 As fro the atmosphere, I can only agree with you, it is given by earths energy, resultant from the presure against earth, it's just that like I said, I do believe, that the compresion we feel and call as gravity, is the universe expansion itself, expansion over us, our energy, our mass, our weight, only different names to achieve the same concept, atoms are compressed by space because thei cary energy, this compression is affected by the other atoms and in the big scale is affected by the other planets and stars, injecting energy onto the system, energy in for of spectrum, indeed energy is atracted to energy, but is also that universe expansion is compressed against us, forming a web between all the bodies out there, one is always interacting with the space, this very existence produces dark energy, this interaction between systems injecting and expeling energy from their ssystems, will eventually set space into acceleration...

 Yeah one could say that the earth is moving, it is indeed, but is not the earth that is acelerating, is acceleration comes from the fact that the sun produces its own horizontal spiral disk, provinient from its own event horizon, we can't see cause the density of the star reduces the acceleration and keep it on the interior, for us on earth all we can feel is its effects, the same for any other activated magnetosphere outhere...

 So yes, energy of matter for interaction with decomposed matter, decomposed matter as being not many photons, but "one" imensurable field of lower density, something resambling a unique super massive photons, but not "photon" only the blackround, I say photon, cause the "thing" wil, create temporary photons, a contrustion of the blackground to transfer the energy in form of spectrum, intill it hits another system, the enegy is transfered, an the photons cease to exist, they are not lost, they cant desapear into nothingess without let any trace if they where real, don't get me wrong I do believe they where only acceleration, a meaning to an end, a wave to tranfer the information, what cease to exist where their irregular shapes, the energy was tranfered or deflected, no need or possibility to keep a photon existing without energy, their are born from energy as momentum, when the energy is tranfered the momentum cease to exist as it was, the photons return to be what they where in the first place, space...

 I like to call it as dark energy, cause space is accelerating no mater where, the acceleration is the source of the lower density it seems to have, the same way anything that is speeding up is loosing weight on the suface of a planet, things float in space cause it will accelerate anything that has density at the same speed, the same reason why things fall with the same speed towards the crost of earth, is the same acceleration, only the size, thus energy of the object, should matter...

 Anyway your explanation is really intristing, I still thinking about manythings, I'm tired to refer to black holes, as it anyone elese of s, but my models always goes to nowhere when it comes to the fact that black holes are swaling matter inside, this for some reason that I may not be qualified to explain, doesn't match, at all, they should be decomposing matter by acceleration and irradiation of particles, converting it into something like deactivated matter, converting matter into space, and the interaction of matter with deactivated matter, space, results in acceleration, the acceleration somehow is fro time...

 The acceleration is real for me, and time is a concept based on it, only to our brain comunicate to the rest of the body when to eat, when to sleep, when to... thats all, nothing more than a usefull unity of measurement of acceleration, as weight another usefull measurement of gravity...  For me the same acceleration that occured into my house during last week are not the same that is occuring now, but my present house, is the same of last week, and will continue to be the same on the next week, the atmosphere around it, the things inside of it, the composition of everything including me is constantly changing, but if I come to ignore the concept of what is a house as its location as a static place "somewhere", time does not affect my house of last week, it may be different this week, but as I say if I choose to ignore the concept of location, my house of the last week is still existing, now...  Time as a measurement of events, fine seems to work well, but as for reality, seems like that never where such things as last week, and the now is product of my brain alone...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 09/08/2016 17:09:47
Friend,
Thank you for the kind response. As i was busy in office work, i could not respond in time.

At the time of newton period, when science was not so developed most of the research was on identifying different masses and its qualities.  In this process they have found similar masses attracting each other.  Well, keeping this in mind Newton thought that the Earth is a huge mass and therefore it is attracting each and everything towards it and he named this attraction as 'gravity'. 

Whereas Einstein thought that the attraction in between two masses is least one and therefore he has taken mass and energy as responsible for gravity. Einstein was so genius that he carried out number of tests and came to a conclusion that it is the acceleration in energy which is causing gravity.  However he could not found the source of energy. In fact to cause/create acceleration, addition of fresh energy is must.   So, naturally he  thought that the invisible rays released by neutron stars are responsible for gravity. In his general relativity,  he has taken us to a different world and mesmerized the scientific world.

Dark energy is thought to be very homogeneous, not very dense and is not known to interact through any of the fundamental forces other than gravity. Dark energy is also the other side of energy, where there is no energy.  Dark energy or the other side of energy or vacuum is said to be accelerating expansion of universe. There is huge amount of energy on this earth, so naturally if we create any vacuum, huge amount of pressure is developed.  Suppose if we cross our atmosphere, there, energy is spread loosely and in case if you create vacuum, there is no scope for huge pressure.  So, naturally energy in the universe, outside our earth climate is present without any pressure.  Here, there is no huge object which attracts/changes the direction of the energy, so it moves freely from one place to other.  Actually there is "strong energy base" in the universe.  Due to attraction in between electrons, they keep together.  Dark energy is the other side of the energy, where there is no energy, in fact it is empty.  On earth, this Dark energy/vacuum exerts lot of pressure, due to so many reasons but in space it is not so.  In my view, if the Dark energy is having so much strength means, our solar system will collapse.  In fact linking this Dark energy to outer expansion and thus to gravity is not all correct.

One may accept my theory or not, I hereby request our friends to recognize the presence of huge energy  on this earth. 

01  At present most of our concentration is on solar energy.  In fact we are taking existing things as base, and any increase there on is taken for conservation of energy.

02  I request you not to compare day and night, but space/dark energy to earth.  This comparison itself is giving lot of clues on converting energy into electrical energy. On the success of which all our energy problems goes.   In my view this is not a difficult one and on the success of which Direct current will rein the world.

03  At present we are using telescopes to view, what is happening in far away solar system.  See, to view far away things means, energy rays are moving from this place to the other place and from the other place.  These rays are potential source of energy.  If research is taken up in big way, in my view it is not a difficult one to produce electricity from these rays.  Nature is providing lot of clues, but we are not catching them.

04  In space travel, energy rays coming from other universe are potential source of energy and therefore they may used for all our energy needs.  These energy rays may be termed as "potential rays".  On the other side, energy rays coming from our universe guides us and these rays may be taken for "guided rays".

05  Actually, we have left, any research on anti-gravity vehicles.  In my view they may not succeed on earth or on water, but there is every chance of success in space.

Well, gravity is not a simple subject, it is having its roots in different branches.  If research is taken up, keeping in mind, the things proposed by me, i am sure science will take 'U' turn.   

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/08/2016 04:33:31
Very objective explanation, so I see hudge amoungs of energy, such as massive objects, as planets, as Earth, atracts outher energy, just by being what they are, and somehow, this atraction is what causes gravity, cause it produces aceleration of space energy to itself, absorving the outer energy acceleration, seting itself on motion, as also as in orbit, when the same concept is applied for the sun...

 But about anti-gravitational devices do not work on earth or water, isn't it a bit wrong, I mean if the amoung of energy on a point on space is the responsable for gravity, as being the atraction of energy produccing acceleration, is not also aceptable that the "size" is only an "always comes with", the energy?
 I mean to set a car size object on orbit, one would not require a huge density on the car, not even a spherical shape, only that the car is able to produce high energy frequency on its interior, and somehow acumulate it and release the internal presure in one specific direction...
 Propolsion is for gases, rocket mind, to levitte any kind of device, is more than certanly that the interior of the object should be the source, not of a propulsor, but of a field expanding to outside and beyond the event?

 I personaly like to think that to set anything apart of any gravitational pull one needs strictly to produce a electromagnetic event, that will not interact with the enviroment itself, but with the blackground, somehow, as any floating object outhere, creating a horizontal spiral disk, in this scenario an artificial one, also invisible to human eye...
 I do not believe, that at that very moment, the mass of the object nor even earth will be relevant, once the interior of the field, would be apart for the whole equation, of course this for floating, disrupt the balance, increasing power on one of the poles at the time, and it will change balance for acceleration, as th energy is not being equaly atracted towards it anymore...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 25/08/2016 15:49:43
Well, i could not understand in what way or how massive objects such as planets attract outer energy.  Suppose, in case if it is true means than it is the size of the planet that decides gravity and not climate on that planet.  Saying earth is a huge object and there fore it is attracting objects towards it, is what extent correct, outer energy creating pressure/force is also. 

First of all we have to understand the qualities of "Energy Base".  It is the static amount of energy present at any place at a particular time.  It is true that energy exists in the form of rays only and electrons due to attraction in between them keep together.  In an inertial condition, these rays sting to objects without any movement.  These rays may be divided into short and long and long range rays carrys energy from one place to other place.  Let us suppose during early in the morning, strong energy rays from sun after facing hydrosphere and after weakening  entered earth atmosphere and these rays gains strength only after joining  existing long range energy rays only .  Here we have to remember one important point that energy coming from sun is not alone playing key role on earth.  Well, suppose if you switch on a battery cell, few electrons coming from the battery cell is not alone creating/developing energy rays.  It is simply boosting the existing energy rays and they are charged and light comes out.  Suppose if we feel that energy coming from battery cell is alone than it should give light at all places without any exception. 

Long range energy rays existing on earth are creating pressure on nature continuously. For these long range energy rays Apple is also simply an object only. At any point of time these rays will be exerting pressure on apple.  Short range energy rays are also there against the apple from all sides.  Energy rays carry weight, so longer the energy ray, thus weight also.  From the day one, apple start developing, pressure/force against the apple also.  As long as the apple is having strength it will stays in the tree, ones it weakens it falls to long range energy rays.  Short range energy rays creates pressure from all sides, including from opposite direction.

Here we have to remember one important point that energy coming from outside is simply supplementing the existing energy. 

Gravity is not due to acceleration in energy alone and it is only creating additional pressure/force against the objects.  If we take energy coming from stars, for creating pressure/force and to gravity than what about sun energy. 

Ok, we will discuss about anti gravitational vehicles later.

Yours

Psreddy.       
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 27/08/2016 01:18:16
Facinating... About the planet energy as the responsible for atracting external energy, due its energy/size... I didn't mean the planet itself, as massive sphere of matter, but as someone that is looking at it from space and with space eyes... Of course are only loud toughts, but our eyes, cameras, telescope, scratch the surfaces of such celestial bodyes and it's nearly impossible to "consider" the crost on the equation...
   I wondering the crost of a planet as a simple "meaning to an end", and the bigger size resultant of matter only as a "always comes with"...
   See, your toughts are very accertive and I trully following your lead on the issue, no doubt about it...
  Its just a concern, a question: "why do we think that space would care bout the atmosphere, surfaces, and outher layers of a planet, I mean, to set its gravitational engine into motion?
   Of course one could not have a inner and outer core without the crost, but that is only important to us, to nature, I do not believe that the crost is a "must have" for space engine, prove of that will come with the black holes closer look, they for me are simple inercores, that for specific reasons, in resume that reached a certain temperature and adquire inner expansion against the universal inflation (compression), the friction of neutrons does not require to produce light as a sun does, and different from a ordinary sun that live short, the inner core of the black hole is the same, but a much more, "reliable" one...

 That being said, I wish you to try to apply your knowledge but this time picturing a alternative frame, where, "I'm, Mr Space-Time", do not work, see, have knoledge abot your layers, Im working around the result "your planet is producing", although, for me, I don't see, know, or even care, on "how you're doing", All I care about is what your doing at your very center...

 For me the question to our awnsers lies right below our feets, and there is little way to know for sure cause, again, we can't see, but given the facts, I do not support our actuall theory about innercores, not even for stars or black holes...
 I also do not desagree with modern science, people as yourself, are very carefull and organized with all the steps on the process... It's just that I understand human nature too well, I do believe that a few of us, do share the correct knoledge about the "reality of things", too much forbiden information, and one must agreee, that if we all share the same base premises, the most basic concepts, it's inevitable that we all will trive on the same dirrection, and wonder ourselves about it, and even produce the correct math to aplly it, but one must ask, "Even if it work, means that it is the reality, or it is only result of my personal knoledge?"

 I know, sounds very little resonable, and it is indeed, but our human being way to think, always worked very well for us, when we do want something like GPS, probes, missions, but I wonder if in ourselves, we really do wish to figure out the universe, even when we believe we are...

 Anyway, thank you for your last awnsers, the best ones I heard in quite a while, the absense of emotions make itself very notable and logical, and I really consider your knoledge for that... Less than an emotional response, I see that I can follow the lead, the absence of emotions do not bend you to personal preferences, once that is true, the most probably possibility is that your line of sight, is the most near of reality, when considering the question ...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 28/08/2016 16:24:13
Thank you, friend,

Initially i had attempted all the theories, Gravity, light, electromagnetism, fire, explosion separately, but faced lot of criticism.  Whenever i switched on a electric bulb, almost everyday, my mind immediately raises a question, how it is giving so much light.  For that if i switches on a battery cell, same question, how small amount of energy released by the battery is giving lot of light.  I use to wonder about fire also, small quantity of mass, when attached to fire, how it is giving lot of light and heat. 

In case of explosions, if i start reading them, my mind never concentrates on chain reactions and the amount of energy released by it. It is true that, if one tonne of atomic bomb is detonated it gives lot of light and heat. Some of the questions, rocked my mind repeatedly and never allowed me to sleep properly.

01  Leaving aside other things, total process is separation of mass and energy only.
02  Here, even if we take one tonne atomic bomb, most of the weight is mass only.  Energy released, after detonation is very small quantity only.
03  Actual capacity of the energy, coming out from mass is very little.
04  Here we have to remember one important point that it is simply multiplying after coming out from the mass.
05  How it is multiplying and where from it is drawing additional energy.

Finally i had attempted gravity. While writing gravity, luckily a simple incident that happened in my early life came back to my mind and it answered all the questions.  This incident happened in the cool winter season.  Firewood was used to cook food in the evening itself.  Ours is a tiles house and therefore there is every chance for free movement of air into or outside.  Cool winds have occupied, almost total area of the house, except up to 10 feet distance near to the kitchen. Here there is no further burning of firewood, but very small amount of heat generated due to burning of coal, guarded so much area almost upto 4 'o' clock.  Let us compare this to our earth:

01  Earth is also ones a ball of fire only and it shed lot of heat into the open area.  Most of the water evaporated and it moved up.
02  Lot of energy generated by earth started concentrating against earth and it paved way for "Energy base".
03  It is true that earth crust is still burning and is releasing lot of energy.  This is simply an addition only.
04  Energy coming from sun is also an addition only.
05  Lot of energy is also moving out from this "Base".

Energy is having important quality of grouping/concentrating.  If support is available than it remains for longer period. In my view, if there is no such quality of grouping/concentration, than within short time, total area would have been occupied by cool winds. 

This base is bearing the total weight of hydrosphere.  For any reason if the "Base" weakens than total hydrosphere comes down to earth. 

This simple incident helped me to understand the existence of "Energy base" on this earth.  Due to this strong energy base on this earth, we are able to get light, heat, fire, explosions.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 29/08/2016 13:27:27
I think I understood, Earth's atmosphere is the kittchen, if Earth somehow turn of its heat, its energy base, the kitchen will be occupied by the cold winds...
  And If I interpreted you correctly, comparing earth hydrosphere with earth energy base, here, in the kitchen we can have and experience lot of different effects, and when hydrosphere is compared to space, there would be almost no effects...
   So I I trully understood, the light bulb, the fire, the heat, everything, every sort of releasing energy we do feel and produce on earth's hydrosphere, has its true power exponentialy increased by the energy base, the weight of the hydrosphere is "speeding up" the reactions, by adding acceleration to the particles? Something like that?

  The gravity on a planet than being dirrectly related not properly with its size and composition, but with it's enegy base, the size being an "always comes with", the weight of things as being miss interpreted as originated from the mass of the object, when weight was already a unit of measurement of gravity, not of the apple but of the acceleration of gravity, the total weight of the hydrosphere against earth's enegy base?


 One question, magma requires oxigen, there is magma beneath our feet, but my question is, do you think, that is possible, like a bubble of water in zero gravity, when movement is added the oxigen, by being lighter, goes to the middle of it, do you believe that is possible, that the cristal like substance found at earth's innercore, may be "space"?
 I teory of my own, consider that as the object is growing in size, it starts to melt but only when its already considerable big, as gases will become traped inside of it, I assume that "space" will also be traped inside of the planet, and as it heats up, it will like bubble of gas inside water be presured towards the center, and that is ths that will give the spherical shape to the body...
  I want to know what do you thing about earths solid inner core modern theory, do you believe it is correct?
 I do believe that the planets crost, is a meaning to an end, the end as being "the only way to heat up space", does not need to be logical only necessary, a singularity gave birt to this dimmension, is acceptable that whatever happens inside the dimmension will inevitable leat it to the same event in lower scale, for me every single spherical object outhere is simulting the begining, at the very center, heating up trapped space on the interior, uo to a "certain temperature", where it starts to push back, expand back trying to release...
 A sun is more simple, not too dense, it expands further, that's why its bigger, a black hole does not need to burn, the neutron star producess friction and the friction alone is producing electromagnetism and expansion, but or that one need consider as I do that blackholes, suns and planets are the same thing, an expansive force at the center, space was heated up to the point its expanding back, but for planets there is a crost, slowing down the horizon, the acceleration being absorbed by the other layers, producing the energy base you're talking earlier, the black hole, its simple that due its mass, it is a one way engine, see the neutron star does not need to burn or react, it does not need to conserve heat as earth does to keep burn, the very expansion of space over the neutron star, starts to heat up and force it to expand back, if the mass is right, it become able to expand back "beyond" the virtual surfaces, at this point the expansion of space, is not compressing the neutron star, but the expansion of the neutron start over the neutron star itself, forcing it to shirink, and when it does, the nomaly is created, there, the neutron star didn't pierce the space time, nor bended it, it is the space that is bending itself near it, the neutron star become virtually "untoutchable", and will remain isolated from anything, nothing will ever get near of it, except another neutron star, only such object has the meanings to conflict the expansion and be able to penetrate the expansion, merging...
  Change espagetification, for, tortlefication, radiation and acceleration, aliied with the thin density of space fabric inside the horizon, is able to decompose matter and by irradiating the particles with every single right charge, it converts matter and particles into "photonic space fabric". and this fabric, "deactivated matter", will join and increase the density and size of the lake, "inflating" the lake, homogeneusly "from where its happening into all dirrection", specially towards souces of energy, such as planets and specialy "stars"...
  At this very moment I do believe that "photons" are not being produced as a real particle, but photon as being a "construction" of a one, photonic lake, a construction to care energy, of all sorts...
  For me was just a miss interpretation, that the photon is massless cause he travel at the speed of light, the density of te photon is the one of the fabric, the one of the whole, nothing can travel faster than the whole, cause it is already at point A and B and D, even, and before any energy was released.
 So one could wonder, that is not the photon that is traveling, but a photon is created "whenever" the energy is passing by, not being trully created, we do see like that, cause we developed the quantum eraser to explain what we cannt compreend, that the speed of the wave leng frequencies is finite, is the speed of light, the maximum speed witch the wave leng frequencies can travell "trought" the photonic fabric... But we fail to consider that the speed of the fabric is none, zero, of course energy such as stars are able to produce acceleration of such fabric, but the acceleration of the fabric itself, even when accelerating, is still zero, and most important, by being everywhere, its speed can be also considered as "instantaneusly and infinite", this, without have ever trully had any speed... The only way to something be infinite, at least in this universe, is to be everywhere before, for me this is the missing peace, althoug, I do realise that there is much conflic, but one should consider that the whole is not worng, only that something, primordial, was, simple missnterpreteded.... As for example a car runs with a engine, and it does it over the surface of a planet, do you need to understand gravity to make a car work "correctly"? Considering that it was you, that invented the concept of what, a car is!  If we determinate that a car is a anti-gravitational device, the "Car" would be still working properly, but not it's "true" function....
  So its the planets, for us, they have crost, and we consider it a lot, I do not believe that space, the blackground outhere, do care about us, nor nature, we are from our own group, space cares about one thing, wherever is happening at the very center of those planets, stars, and blackholes, the meaning to it, he does not know, that's why universe is so violent and caotic, "to us"...

 Anyway, would really apreciated to know your perception of earth's inner core...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 02/09/2016 15:46:30
Well, when i started comparing the incident that happened on that night to earth, suddenly mind stopped working.  It is true that hydrosphere carries weight and who is bearing that weight.  In case if it gets weakened for any reason, hydrosphere start occupying earth.  This is what happening in north and south poles, where earth started cooling right from the beginning. 

Here, the comparison is not for any other things but exactly to understand the quality of energy i.e., grouping/concentrating at a particular place.  Initially when it is released from mass, it start concentrating at any one place.  When the concentration is boosted, due to attraction between electrons, it start forming into energy rays.  This quality of energy helped in the formation of "Energy base". 

All the planets, including sun, in our universe are not in the stage of burning firewood, but are burning charcoal only.
All the planets have already shed lot of energy into open area. This freed energy developed into a energy base.  This base is permanent one.  It is true that Sun is blessed with more light materials, and there fore it is still burning and releasing lot of energy.

About Oxygen:
In my view fire is a different one and it has no relevance to oxygen.  Well, oxygen may burn, it does not mean or matter that it helps in burning of things. It is the first subject to be taken up by me, but faced lot of criticism.  It is true that it is very difficult to convince others in this present scenario.

Earth crust:
The crust of the Earth is composed of a great variety of igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks. The crust is underlain by the mantle. It is true that deep inside of the charcoal is still burning.  But this should be taken as a example only.  Mantle of the earth consists of hard rocks and these rocks takes lot of time before heating up.  But ones it gets heated and start burning it takes lot of time to cool down.  There is huge energy concentration at the centre of the earth.  It is true that energy moves from high area to low area and there fore there is continuous flow from the centre of the earth into open area. Rotation of the earth is speeding up this process of movement of energy. 

However, a simple test for the life of the mantle is amount of energy released by it.  What ever matter/material mantle may consists, it has to cool over a period of time and it cannot remain permanently.  As it cools further and further more area will come into the hands of hydrosphere.  This should not be taken for or compared to shorter period changes. 

Even in the case of sun also, there is no addition of matter, but it is the existing matter that is burning.  Upper layer of the charcoal is not cooled and it is still burning and it is in the red colour only.  There is strong energy base against the sun and it is moving into all directions continuously. 

Well, energy released by earth or coming from sun is simply maintaining this "Energy base".  In fact, at this juncture they have no capacity to create this Energy base.

We have already discussed about dark energy and the experiment relating to it also.  But coming to Black holes, these are rarest phenomina, which cannot taken for this gravity or expansion of universe.  Einstein in his general relativity, taken us to a different world and in fact mesmerized the scientific world, with his thoughts.  Some of the tests carried out by them on the earth, where there is huge concentration of energy, led to miscalculation of power of Dark energy and Black holes.  Black holes are developed due to temporary conditions prevailing at a particular
place and it will diminish over a period of time, and they have no capacity to influence the total universe.  In my view, our universe is having lot of capacity to absorb these changes.  What ever energy, neutron stars may release, but they are not having any capacity to influence total universe.  In my view Dark energy is not having that much capacity/power, as expected by us and it is simply working as a receptionist.  If any energy due to pressure enters it, it simply allows it to move without any obstruction.  In case if any matter enters it,
it allows the matter to move with maximum speed. 

Yours
Psreddy



Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 02/09/2016 16:33:42
Fundamental energy that move electrons in mass is not represented in work we currently understand as energy. So dilation of fundamental energy is actually entropy of mass. This suggests entropy as being the cause of gravity since mass has no energy of and by itself. The universe being a sea of energy and mass is attracted to the lowest energy density. If I am understanding the beginning premise correctly. Or did I understand it differently?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 04/09/2016 15:14:04
Well, Energy is neither created nor destroyed.  It is also equally true that energy is of object oriented. 
Basically i want to tell you that there is huge concentration of energy, which i had already referred as "Energy base", and of course fundamental source of this energy is mass only. 

Due to the huge energy base, water started evaporating and started concentrating as a layer.  This layer is not allowing free movement of energy into or outside.  Thus it led to formation of standard energy.  Since this energy is of object oriented, it started concentrating against each and every minute one, and at the same time it varies from object to object and study of which is quantum or mass and energy, which is different one.  Hydrosphere carry weight and there fore it is creating pressure on energy and in turn against objects. 

Apple in the tree is not pulled, but pushed down towards earth.  For this energy base, apple is also an object only.  There is huge energy concentration against apple from all sides.  Long energy rays concentrating against apple, due to pressure/force of hydrosphere, these rays are exerting pressure right from the day of inception of apple.  This pressure/force exerted against objects is gravity. 

Yours
Psreddy

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 04/09/2016 16:41:33
Here, i am sharing my ideas on working of gravity vehicles.  Well, after attempting some of the basic theories, they have in fact paved the way for writing this.  At present most of the vehicles working or designed is based on the three principles of newton.  There is huge energy on this earth and it is exerting influence against each and every object and  this is the Gravity.  It is true that energy is of object oriented and if objects are removed from any place, energy along with objects moves out and thus we can escape from gravity. 

01  Any vehicle working on this earth, broadly can be divided into two i.e., 01  Engine and 02 carrier. 
02  Engine pulls or pushes the carrier and the carrier consists of objects to be carried.
03  Both the Engine and carrier are working in the gravity field only.
04  It is impossible or no scope to run engine in anti gravitational field.
05  Only scope available is to vaccum the carrier only. 
06  Ok, let us presume that carrier is vacuumed and the weight of which was 1000 kgs, and just came down to 100 kgs.
07  Now Engine is working in the gravity field and the carrier is working in the anti gravity field.
08  When the engine starts pulling the carrier, which is just 100 kgs, on movement it further looses weight and start moving in all directions.

For this i would like to present an alternative way, which i am sure are ideas only and are not tested anywhere.

01  While designing the vehicle, we have remember one important point, how sun energy controls our earth.
02  For full control over earth, sun energy at any point of time must focus over more than 60% of the area.
03  I had also compared this to basket ball player.  To have perfect control over ball, the player has to keep his hands  more than 60% of the ball, or otherwise the ball will move in other direct.
04  Keeping this in mind, we have to design the vehicle.
05  In my view, vehicle is to be designed in a circle or rectangular shape and place may left for the carrier at the center.
06  Vehicle, including Engine, is raised from all sides and it must control the carrier more than or at least 75%.
07  Here only engine, along with vehicle moves and the carrier remains in tact.
07  By doing this, volatility caused by carrier is reduced to barest minimum.
08  When the carrier is vacuumed, it leads to heavy concentration of energy and there fore it is to be designed in twin model.  Inner part of the carrier is completely vacuumed.  One more layer is to be created against the carrier and it is to be partially vacuumed.

But, in my view, bowl shape or flying soccer design is the best and there fore, it is easy to develop them and to run.

Ok, we will continue this later.

Yours
psreddy

 
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 06/09/2016 03:12:15
I can sort of visualize that model, but let me ask you something, the carrier wouldn't, or more precisely the enrgine would have to be existing within the center of the carrier, at the vertical axes, and from there be able to inclinate itself 360° on the vertical and almost 180° on the diagonals, up and also be able to flip axes, otherwise we would be able to propell it up, but to return a hudge unpractical circle would have to be made, to be able to propel it back, isnt it?


 What I realise as for structure, as a vaccum sphere like object for the carrier, and for the engine, existing within this vaccum, as being a arrow or rectangular model, atached with 3 mobile axes, that touch and slide as commanded trough the carrier inner wall... This for being able to move freely in 360 degrees when on vaccum...
  Also the tirth layer, the outside one, not as another sphere, but as a mobile ring, right at the horizontal axes of the carries, atached to it, by a protuberance of 360° resambling a blade, and the outher ring resambling a V shape, being atached right over the blade cointaining rolls, for beig able to spin freely around of the carrier as it moves...

 As for the engine model, some sort of device that is able to produce an controled electromagnetc field, that will when done correctly, like a planet generate a invisible horizontal spiral disk on the surrownding areas, this field would do with the outher mobile ring, the same the same a sun does to the planets, and the earth to the moon, wich is to lock on the mass on the horizonal plate, foccing any kind of matter to follow the orbit, thus spining the outher ring, producing electricity to powerup the enegine inside the carrier, self sustaining the process, when on vaccum...
 And as for propolsion as a rocket to break earths gravitational pull, more than floating trough outher space, a difference would have to be created between the verical axes, different from a planet that is lock on the horizonal plate by having almost equal electromagnetism at both poles...
 The enegine would need to produce unbalanced electromagnetism, more from one pole than the other, for this the carrier would requere a extra half sphere inner layer, one that can mode on the vertical axes, to block, when necessary the electromagnetism to leak equaly from the verical poles, forcing the bottom to be pushed up, or down, depending in witch direction the carrier whould move...

 And as for last consideration, wouldnt be the carrier nor the engine that would be moving the device, the carrier is simple the vaccum chamber to contain and operate the enegine, to produce the electromagnetic effect, thus the horizontal plate, in with, the "mobile outher ring", once atached around the horiontal blade trail of the carrier, tha would be feeling the effects...
  The movement of spining would be camming from the center, from the carrier generated by the field the enegi is producing around of it, but the thing that would be propeled up and down, would be exusively the other ring, the device being a perfect sphere would only float, steady, when on vaccum of space, for propolsion up and down, there must be a mobile horizontal disk to be pushed up and down, by the horizontal plate, otherwise the device would only spin on its vertical axes...
 But conincidently this is my perception for a anti gravitational device, for a interstelar ship, one that can produce the own magnetosphere around of it as it moves...
 The saucer model ofr me always resambled a still rocket mind, where the enegine is not destinated to produce a artificial magnetosphere to be controled for propolsion of the exterior atached to it, but as for a disk that is bulded for vertical propolsion, and its engine being as a common propolsor as the one of the rocked to lift the carrier, isn't it?
 Thats the sole reason why I think humanity hasn't achieved it yet, it will not come from a propolsion device, it will come from from simulating a articifial magnetosphere, invisible, around the device, as a planet does...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 06/09/2016 16:33:41
Well, friend, actually i do not want to put my nose into this subject, fearing that it may divert main subject but 
knowingly or unknowingly i had touched it.  Your mind is so sharp that it is taking me to new areas, which were not yet touched by me.

First of all, let us discuss vehicles that work on earth. 

01  By taking up explanation relating to rocket, you have have given me a chance to explain in a better way.
02  Here total rocket is in gravitational field only.
03  But the capsule, carrying human beings, or other objects into space is completely in vacuum.
04  This capsule cannot be left freely, in gravitational field. 
05  See, the design of rocket, engine, capsule are all in single mode only.

Design of transport vehicle:

01  Transport vehicle design may be broadly divided into two parts, which work in gravitational field, and the other which is not in gravitational field.
02  Design the vehicle in rectangular model, and place is left for carrier at the backside.
03  All the sides of the vehicle is to be raised, so that the carrier is fit.  If the sides of the vehicle is not raised to
    more than 60% to 70% than the carrier controls the vehicle.  So, it is better to raise the side walls completely.
04  While designing the carrier, as told by me, twin model may be adopted.
05  Fill the carrier, remove the air and block it.

This, in my view, may bring revolution in the transport vehicles.

Your
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 10/09/2016 07:12:54
Mr. Alex, please break the silence and continue the discussion on the main subject.  Actually, You have started
with lot of interest, but i do not know why i had done like that.  I had written this theory, gravity almost 10 years
back and forwarded to different universities and scientists, but no response.  It is after long time, and because of you and science forum, i could share my ideas in a better way. 

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 10/09/2016 17:50:28
Hi, friend, the thing is, I read it all twice, I can understand what you propose, or in the better explanation, I can see it within my toughts, but trully, english is not my mother language, and as I said, I can visualiseyour Idea, and I do not doubt them, at least no reason for doing so, yours can be correct as all the others, the problem is, I can't help with formulas nor math, so from here on out, for me is ear and think...

   The only gap I can discuss, is that mass does not posses energy, althoug you theory supose that hudge amougts of energy/mass is able to compress itself, in our case within the hydrosphere, and this is the main source of gravity, as we feel...
  I can't discuss with that, but I wonder if is mass/energy alone, my toughs and theories, are always focused on the inner core, for me there we missed the math badly...

 I wonder that your theory is correct but that this masses,/ energy, are not directly responsible for the compression, for me this masses/ energy are interacting with space, vaccum itself, inside our planet, causing it to expand and change density, flooding it with radiation and electromagnetism, becoming something like a cristal substance, "altought" we do not explode(expand), as we I'm refering to the outercore and all the other layers including the hydrosphere...

 For me the sun as matter, Mars, Jupter, Earth, all those bodies orbiting each other, are not orbiting at all, the masses are only the "cage" for some sort of singularity, self contained within the density of the planet, and that is this effect that is interacting with otherspace, invoquing compression, spining, adding acceleration to the planet, but not as intentional only as consequence of its presence...
 What I wondering, in a rudimentar aligation, is that the mass is only important to produce the event at the center, and that our solar system is not made of planets that are orbiting one another, but that ours inner cores, are made of space traped and infused with energy, and those "portion of space" are resonating within the whole, like "holes", space is trying to seal them, but there is the crost on the way, and this compression only increase and balance within the inner expansion...

Try to pick our solar system, and imagine that there are the planets but without matter, only space, and now reproduce the inner core effect of all the planets, but without using a planet around of it, its impossible but its a simple ordinary example, at this very moment you wouldnt see a thing, but there would be the planets orbiting the sun as usual... Can you understand what I'm wondering?

I left you with a question:

 _ First you need to consider that I believe that blackholes are made of inner expansion duel radiation produced by the neutron star, and that the event horizon, its destructive power, only occurs when the acceleration of such star, forces space "density" to get thin, so thin that matter can no longer exist, basicly you need to know that for me, black holes do anything, but not suck...

 Now, consider that one by means we wwill ignore, start a black hole just inside "earth", but one that is apart from space, it can spin but it can't destroy matter, only melt...
 Could such event, "considering that they do not swallow", could such event in lowe scale and less magnitude be happening at the center of our planet?
 Not the hole black hole structure, with includes space, only the singularity... Would it be possible that your energy base perception is not definitive nor wrong but just half of the whole, a meaning to an end?

 Think about the black hole when there is some massive gas cloud around of it, the presence of the dense atomic structure "around the horizon reagion", around the horizontal axe, is invoking more gravity there, squising the perfect sphere.
 At this moment the sphere start to become more eliptical, and eliptical does not combine with the engine, the black hole spherical flow of energy, achieves a flow resambling a drill, when it does, the gass cloud is able to bypass the horizon and fall directly "undecomposed" on the vortexes, and from there it recieves only a possitive push away from the center, it is ejected, before the horizon acceleration could decompose the molecular structure... I'm not supporting that matter can cease to exist, onyl that space is decomposed matter... Science consider that the bigbang originate the universe, I'm simple wondering that once upon a time, the universe was a whole dimmension filled with matter, sort of super massive galaxy planets that explode from inside out on nova, and the vaccum created by and during the ejection of the outher layers, possibilitate to the singularity achieve a horizon, and from this point forward the universe has basicly started to "decompose" itself...

 In a sort version, I atesting that when earth orbits the sun, is not the matterial planet that is orbiting the material sun, but that is space reacting to space, outside and inside those material bodies, basicly what is orbiting the sun is not "earth", is space, and what eart is orbiting is not the sun, is space... The matter is simple the meaning to the end, but the comunication is provinient from something deep wothin the crost, the crost is moving along simple cause it is there, it couldn't happen otherwise, cause the "sphere like object structure" is the only way universe has, to trap and infuse "space", no other shape would work... And without gravity all there is would be no more... All this we see, its simple miniatures in lower scale of the original rupture that create the universe, the hot one long ago....
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Thebox on 10/09/2016 18:05:36
                                       What exactly gravity is

Friends, herewith i am placing a revised theory on gravity, taking into consideration ideas of newton and einstein as well.  Feel free to post your opinion.

In Newton's description of gravity, the gravitational force is caused by matter.  In Einstein's theory and related theories of gravitation, curvature at every point in space time is also caused by whatever matter is present. Here, too, mass is a key property in determining the gravitational influence of matter. But in a relativistic theory of gravity, mass cannot be the only source of gravity. Relativity links mass with energy, and energy with momentum.

In special relativity, energy is closely connected to momentum.  if energy is a source of gravity, momentum must be a source as well.  Taken together, in general relativity it is mass, energy, momentum, pressure and tension that serve as sources of gravity, they are how matter tells space time how to curve. In the theory's mathematical formulation, all these quantities are but aspects of a more general physical quantity called the energy–momentum tensor.

Newton's main focus is on matter only.  Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Where as Einstien has taken mass and energy as key points in his study on gravity. He has also taken energy for momentum in his special relativity.  He has taken energy and momentum as one of the four dimentional aspects.

In my view matter and energy are two different things which cannot be combined while calculating gravity and it is energy alone plays key role in gravity.  There is huge amount of energy on this earth, which i had already termed it as "energy base".  Suppose if anybody says that there is no energy base on this earth than what is bearing the weight of the hydrosphere.  It is true that mass of the hydrosphere carrys weight and if there is no obstruction than it will come down to earth. 

How this energy is created:
It is true that Sun is the important source of energy.  However, see our universe which is spread to far away places and there is energy throught the universe. If there is no energy than there is no scope for planets also.  In space, planets cannot exist.  Suppose, if the energy for any reason dwindles and area comes down than planets existing at the end of the universe, gains weight, looses control and start traveling with maximum speed. 

Well, how this huge amount of energy is created.  At present most of our calculations are on the basis of existing things only.  We are forgetting one key point that without "Big bang" there is no scope for formation of any Universe including ours.  After Big bang, devastating fire started on all the planets, including sun, and energy packed within masses started coming out. This energy started spreading to far away places.  Slowly planets started cooling and climate developed against them.  At present Sun is not a burning firewood, but burning coal only.  Other planets are still burning and are in the stage of  burning coal covered by ash.

Huge amount of energy present throught the universe is not created within short time but over a period of time.  This is the "Energy base". 

First of all let me tell you one simple incident which happened in my early days which helped me to recognise this energy base. This incident happened when i was 13 or 14 years age.  Ours is a tiles house and total area, bed room, dining, cooking everything in that only.  In severe winter, i.e., may be in the month of January, that day night i could not get sleep, seeing at my suffering father called on me to come near to him and he was sleeping near to the kitchen.  When i went there, it was surprise to note that it was hot, and wet.  When asked father replied, firewood is still burning.  But i could not find any firewood burning, removed ashes and found coal in red colour.  Cooking was stopped in the evening itself, however this small amount of fire, that too deep inside ashes was able to save so much area.  In fact i did not slept that night and started measuring area. This can be compared to all our planets as well, including sun.  Ones, our planets are also firewood only, after shedding lot of energy into open area, they have cooled now.  Energy released by planets turned out as "Energy Base" and is playing key role.

Energy movement:
There is strong energy base against sun.  When fresh energy is released due to burning it adds to the existing base.  It creates pressure on the existing rays and a momentum is gained.  If the addition is small/weak than it stops further movement and in case if the addition continues than it will move to farther and farther places. Some of these rays, if pressure/force continues than it will cross our universe and reaches other universes in the space.

Energy base on the Earth:
Our earth is also ones a ball of fire only and it shed lot of heat and energy into space.  However our earth is blessed with more hydrosphere than other planets and it started cooling at a faster rate when compared to other planets. Strong Hydrosphere helped in the development of climate on earth.  Strong hydrosphere never allowed free movement of energy into open area.  This led to formation of local "Energy base" on earth.  This energy base remained permanently on earth.  It is true that earth is still burning and is releasing lot of energy into this energy base.  Energy rays coming from sun are also bringing energy and it is addition to our base. Some of the strong energy rays taking movement from earth are taking away energy from this base.

Suppose if there is no energy base on earth than hydrosphere comes down to earth.  Strong energy rays coming from sun hits earth directly.  In case if there is no climate, strong energy rays coming from sun penetrates deeply and creates pressure/force on earth.  As there is no climate, on the other side it gains weight and a momentum is gained and start moving away from our universe.

About Gravity:
Development/creation of climate itself paves way for Gravity.  It led to formation of strong Energy Base.  This Energy base is nothing but presence of energy rays.  These rays carry energy from one place to other place.  It is true that energy is of object oriented and start concentrating against earth.  For this energy even minute cells are also its objects only. 

These rays not only concentrates against objects but also penetrates deeply.  Suppose, let us think that if we are in inertial position, millions and millions of our body cells are all objects of energy rays.  Generally our body temperature will be lower than outside pressure and therefore it leads to more concentration.

Energy rays coming from sun initially faces hydrosphere, weakens and comes out into earth atmosphere.  These weak rays start gaining with the help of energy existing on this earth.  Earth is an important and huge object for these energy rays. Concentration of energy is boosted on earth and it turns out as light.  In fact light is nothing but charging of energy rays. 

In my view gravity is nothing but pressure/force applied on objects/things.  We are all living within the Energy base and for this base, earth is huge object. There is complete concentration against each and every minute cell of earth.  It is penetrating upto deep area of earth.  So earth is completely within the grip of this Energy.  Human beings living within  this base, are also its objects only.  Energy rays pools/concentrates against human beings from all sides.  Since there is continuous flow of energy towards earth, long energy rays concentrating against human beings creates pressure and pushes from upside towards earth.  This force/pressure is gravity.  It is very difficult to escape from these rays.  Since these rays are object oriented, if we remove air, along with objects than only we can escape from these rays. 

It is true that earth is still burning deep inside and releasing lot of energy into open area.  Since earth is already
cooled from sides, most of the energy released is at the centre only.  As there is continuous flow of energy, long energy rays are developed and these rays are creating upward motion on things.

Rotation and Revolution:
Due to energy pressure from all sides, earth already lost most of its weight.  Now it is in energy grip.  Let us presume that in inertial condition, long range energy rays coming from sun with the help of existing energy on earth is holding almost upto 50% of earth in its control at any point of time.  It is simply like a basket ball player, to have control he must keep his hand upto 50% of the ball, or otherwise ball may not be in his control.  Suppose if his control over ball is less than 25 to 30 percent than ball moves in opposite direction.  In case if he takes the ball with the help of both the hands than the ball is fully in his control. 

Earth is simply like a soft in electrical motor.  To move motor there must be movement of electrons.  It appears that energy rays coming from sun are not hitting directly, there is bent or curvature of these rays and are hitting in a curved manner and there fore it is causing rotation of earth.  Einstien rightly presumed this and incorporated it in his General relativity theory.  He thought that gravity is due to pressure/force created by energy in a curvated manner.  Well, when it is about revolution, it is also in the control of sun energy only.  Suppose in inertial condition, earth is simply in static condition without any movement.  Suppose when it rotates, its fresh area comes into the control of the fresh energy rays.  So, movement of revolution starts against the energy rays.  In case for any reason, if these energy rays, which are holding earth, dwindles than earth comes near to sun. Moon is not having strong climate.  It is under partial control of sun.  Suppose if it is having strong climate means it would have turned out into a independant planet.  Strong energy rays moving from earth are hitting moon directly.  In a static condition these rays decides distance of the moon from earth.  Since earth is rotating, energy rays moving from earth, are not parallel and bents in a sloped manner and creates pressure at a different place.  It is causing movement of energy and thus rotation of moon on its axis.  This rotation against  the energy rays of earth, makes it to rotate against earth.

Finally:
Newton's universal law of gravitation is a different subject.  It mainly deals with attraction in between two objects. Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.  So here distance plays a key role.  Newton might have thought that Earth is a huge object and therefore it is attracting moon keeping aside distance.  In my view this is not correct.  But this theory rightly explains attraction of particles.  This is root cause for the existence of hydrosphere, energy moving in the form of rays, existence of mines, for that very existence of this universe itself.  But gravity is a different one, it is due to the movement of energy/force applied on objects.

Einstein came out from this fundamental thinking and proposed that energy force/pressure is causing gravity.  However he could not recognise huge amount of energy force present on this earth. So he has taken energy force as one of four dimensions.

If we say that there is no energy base than who is bearing the weight of hydrosphere.  It is true that water carrys weight and it is not staying at that height without any support.  Energy is also key player in Fire, explosions, light and the process which we will discuss separately.

Yours
psreddy

My apologies , but to me you have not explained anything in this post, you have not explained what mass is and you use energy in a generalised use without description. It is easy to get carried away with speculation, it is easy to say things like Gravity is a combination of energy and matter and use such words as force, but without the inner details it is meaningless.
The ''mechanism'' of gravity can not just be explained by using just such generalised terms as energy, mass has process.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: JoeBrown on 10/09/2016 20:35:53
What is gravity...  The question still stands as unanswered.

Yeah Newton was the first to give it a name and value.

Einstein took a completely different approach and described some things more accurately, but still neither had said what it is.

We see there's a correlation between mass size, locality and attraction.

But we have yet to identify the underlying "cause" of the force.  Tho the LHC has put forth what appears evidence of the bozon, Higgs proposed. 

Electricity & Magnetism seem to share identical attraction properties of Gravity, on a much more powerful scale.   We don't know why E. is stronger than M, nor why E & M are far greater than G.

These are questions we would like answered.  Hopefully someone will come along and point out why.  If god created the universe, it seems god's not telling how.  Or if it randomly happens to be so....  We're just gonna have to figure it out.  Who knows, maybe some kind aliens will come along and enlighten us.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Thebox on 11/09/2016 10:58:46
What is gravity...  The question still stands as unanswered.



Well Mr Brown, I believe science already has the answer in their ''vault'' of vast information, I just think that the information as just not been processed/interpreted correctly.


The answers is within why a Quark is attracted to a Quark, a Quark has mass and must have charge like the three Quarks that make up the Proton has mass and charge.


Two quarks are not attracted to each other by magic, in my opinion they are some sort of mono polarity ''magnet'' that in someway defies laws that opposites attract and likewise repel and equally attract. I neither think the electron is attracted to the Proton, I think the electron ''shell'' is actually an admitted field from the Proton that is absorbing hf , storing hf and emitting hf.
Entropy being a capacitance of hf /charge.   hf+hf=q maybe. (things stay at room temperature)


Then when I consider distance  between bodies, I consider this is simply likewise charges repel, the quarks still attract that gives an equilibrium, because the entropy of a body will remain in equilibrium entropy by its ''exchange'' rate of hf .

added- if we look at the atom +/-   and a second atom +/-  , both atom (A) and atom (B) have likewise charge and would repel each other.

+<>+

-<>-

<>=direction of force.

F=ma





Gravity is seemingly the lack of charge/hf, when things lose hf they contract,


added- an electromagnetic field such as the earths field stops some hf from getting in, so likewise it must also stop some hf escaping.

added- Imagine the creation of a single particle that is without charge and has the ability to attract to itself.

At the instant of creation, the particle instantly gains charge and also the ability to repel. However the repel is slightly weaker in magnitude than the attraction of itself.

Three particle join, they become denser and therefore have denser attractiveness, but the charge of the three as a whole is enough to form a repelling field to stop the atoms merging into one.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 11/09/2016 12:47:08
Well, it is not requesting your help, but expressing happiness over sharing of mine ideas with the world. At the early
school days, I am not a bright student,  but i use to counter the lessons.  For example, when the teacher start explaining electromagnetism, i use to rewrite them, saying if the electricity start developing into magnetic waves than how and where the electricity is flowing.  Later these type of ideas and some of the incidents that have happened in the early days, paved the way for writing these theories. 


Let us see the principle, E=MC2:

where E is the energy of a physical system, m is the mass of the system, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum. In words, energy equals mass multiplied by the speed of light squared. Because the speed of light is a very large number in everyday units, the formula implies that any small amount of matter contains a very large amount of energy.

01  Where this energy is stored.
02  If it is in the small atoms, than how it is stable.
03  It is also true that as long as the energy is remained within the atoms, it is not multiplied.
04  It is only after coming out from the atom that it is multiplying.

Here we have to remember one key point that as long as the energy remains within atom, it is not multiplied and it is only when ignited and after coming out into open area that it is multiplying.  So, there is no mass and energy relationship.

01  It is multiplying only after coming out from the mass.
02  Here, It is the energy in the open area that plays key role.
03  So, it is energy to energy relationship only.
04  So, we can take this formulae E = EC2.
05  This is the reasons why explosions vary from place to place.

SPEED OF LIGHT:
Light is nothing but charging of ray only.  At present we are of the opinion, if we switch on battery cell it gives light.
Actually, no fresh energy ray is created each time.   Few electrons released by battery cell is not having any capacity to create any fresh energy rays.  It against depends upon the energy in the open area and that is why it varies from place to place.  If the battery cell releases more electrons, the pressure/force on the existing energy ray increases and thus speed.  Suppose if the battery cell is weak, electrons released by it is also few only.  These weak electrons pushes energy ray slowly and thus light. This is the reason, why we get more sun light at the centre of the earth, where there is huge concentration of existing energy.   As we move towards north and south poles, where earth is not releasing so much energy and thus concentration of energy on the earth and there fore light is developed slowly.  Here light is so weak that if the support from sun is lost for any reason, light goes sharply.

Yes, as you said, lack of maths and formula have badly affected my theories. Actually all the theories written by newton or Einstein, have its base, taking previous ideas/theories and they have extended formula, maths.  But my theories are not having previous base/extension. I had started with huge amount of energy present on the earth and in the universe for which i can give logical/reasoning explanation only and  i cannot give any maths.  Hereby i request the scientific world, not to rely on the mathematical presentation alone for any judgement, but to give importance to new ideas and logical explanation.

We will discuss your point later.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 11/09/2016 13:56:50
02  Here, It is the energy in the open area that plays key role.
 Space has energy, not only other space as on the universe vaccum itself, but as for the space within the atoms, seems to be a coexistence between mass/energy, but only when mass is existing within a field of energy, the existence of atomic structure that has charges, positive, negative and neutral, the continuous strugle of balance between the atoms, existes the field within it exists...
  Could be that energy is released from space when in the presence of mass, hudge amounts of mass, increae the strugle, exponentialy increasing the energy that is been produced, on and from space...
  Mass been than, not related directly with energy, but mass as being provinient from acceleration, not of the body, but from space around and inside of it...

 I understand than that on E=EC2, when we consider that as for example, Earth is orbiting the sun due its mass, is that space is what is indeed accelerating, and that the mass of both, Earth and Sun, its simple there cause it must be, a simple catalistor...
 An quick assumpition on E=EC2, the sun and the Earth are cinstantly trying to join one with the other, their energy, but the individual effect one body has individual with the space on surrownding areas is preventing this from happening?
  The solar system not being an designed engine for ever kast existence, but provinient from a constant struggle of energy trying to join one with the other. Don't get me wrong not as if the planets would simple magicaly move without space between them, but as if the precense of the sun's enegy, when interaction with space fabric, forces it to accelerate forming a horizontal plate that is preventing the "static" masses to join by sharing it's own acceleration with the masses due friction?

 For me, iour ideas sound clear, a dense atomic structure material, has less space within the atoms, and as denselesss the material gets, more energy it has, not on its own molecular structure, because the energy is on the field where the mass is existing, if you split the molecular bound of a piece of a substance to it's limits, one would cross the whole states of matter and end up with pure energy...
  So mass does have energy, "capability to have energy", cause considering a scenario where the energy belongs to the field not the the atoms, it would need atomic structure to be able to release in the fierst place, otherwise all there is would be vaccum and matter, the interaction between both forces the "atomic structure of the masses" to "release energy from the field", by interaction of charges and temperature...

 Something like that?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Thebox on 11/09/2016 15:23:56
Well, it is not requesting your help, but expressing happiness over sharing of mine ideas with the world. At the early
school days, I am not a bright student,  but i use to counter the lessons.  For example, when the teacher start explaining electromagnetism, i use to rewrite them, saying if the electricity start developing into magnetic waves than how and where the electricity is flowing.  Later these type of ideas and some of the incidents that have happened in the early days, paved the way for writing these theories. 


Let us see the principle, E=MC2:

where E is the energy of a physical system, m is the mass of the system, and c is the speed of light in a vacuum. In words, energy equals mass multiplied by the speed of light squared. Because the speed of light is a very large number in everyday units, the formula implies that any small amount of matter contains a very large amount of energy.

01  Where this energy is stored.
02  If it is in the small atoms, than how it is stable.
03  It is also true that as long as the energy is remained within the atoms, it is not multiplied.
04  It is only after coming out from the atom that it is multiplying.

Here we have to remember one key point that as long as the energy remains within atom, it is not multiplied and it is only when ignited and after coming out into open area that it is multiplying.  So, there is no mass and energy relationship.

01  It is multiplying only after coming out from the mass.
02  Here, It is the energy in the open area that plays key role.
03  So, it is energy to energy relationship only.
04  So, we can take this formulae E = EC2.
05  This is the reasons why explosions vary from place to place.

SPEED OF LIGHT:
Light is nothing but charging of ray only.  At present we are of the opinion, if we switch on battery cell it gives light.
Actually, no fresh energy ray is created each time.   Few electrons released by battery cell is not having any capacity to create any fresh energy rays.  It against depends upon the energy in the open area and that is why it varies from place to place.  If the battery cell releases more electrons, the pressure/force on the existing energy ray increases and thus speed.  Suppose if the battery cell is weak, electrons released by it is also few only.  These weak electrons pushes energy ray slowly and thus light. This is the reason, why we get more sun light at the centre of the earth, where there is huge concentration of existing energy.   As we move towards north and south poles, where earth is not releasing so much energy and thus concentration of energy on the earth and there fore light is developed slowly.  Here light is so weak that if the support from sun is lost for any reason, light goes sharply.

Yes, as you said, lack of maths and formula have badly affected my theories. Actually all the theories written by newton or Einstein, have its base, taking previous ideas/theories and they have extended formula, maths.  But my theories are not having previous base/extension. I had started with huge amount of energy present on the earth and in the universe for which i can give logical/reasoning explanation only and  i cannot give any maths.  Hereby i request the scientific world, not to rely on the mathematical presentation alone for any judgement, but to give importance to new ideas and logical explanation.

We will discuss your point later.

Yours
Psreddy


I am not a scientist and this is only an opinion , but a valid opinion, energy has nothing to do with c but rather the opposite and the slowing down of c to form compression and the process of energy.


E=c compression not c squared blah blah.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 13/09/2016 07:58:23
Mr. Thebox,

Well, Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Well, keeping this in mind Newton thought that the Earth is a huge mass and therefore it is attracting each and everything towards it and he named this attraction as 'gravity'. 

Whereas Einstien thought that the attraction in between two masses is least one and therefore he has taken mass and energy as responsible for gravity. Einstein was so genius that he carried out number of tests and came to a conclusion that it is the acceleration in energy which is causing gravity.  However he could not found the source of energy. In fact to cause/create acceleration, addition of fresh energy is must.   So, naturally he  thought that the invisible rays released by neutron stars are responsible for gravity. In his general relativity,  he has taken us to a different world and mesmarized the scientific world.


In General relativity, removing energy is removing mass, and for an observer in the center of mass frame, the formula m = E/c2 indicates how much mass is lost when energy is removed. In a nuclear reaction, the mass of the atoms that come out is less than the mass of the atoms that go in, and the difference in mass shows up as heat and light with the same relativistic mass as the difference. In this case, the E in the formula is the energy released and removed, and the mass m is how much the mass decreases. In the same way, when any sort of energy is added to an isolated system, the increase in the mass is equal to the added energy divided by c2.

There are two distinct cases of mass, the gravitational mass and the inertial mass. The gravitational mass is the quantity that determines the strength of the gravitational field generated by an object, as well as the gravitational force acting on the object when it is immersed in a gravitational field produced by other bodies. The inertial mass, on the other hand, quantifies how much an object accelerates if a given force is applied to it. The mass–energy equivalence in special relativity refers to the inertial mass. However, already in the context of Newton gravity, the Weak Equivalence Principle is postulated: the gravitational and the inertial mass of every object are the same. Thus, the mass–energy equivalence, combined with the Weak Equivalence Principle, results in the prediction that all forms of energy contribute to the gravitational field generated by an object. This observation is one of the pillars of the general theory of relativity.

Existence of Energy:
It is true that when an atom is split energy is freed and comes out freely.  Light particles of atom start moving out into the open area.  It is true that similar mass attracts each other and therefore these particles joins together and with the help of others turns out into a full pledged atom once again.  Here in this process certain amount of energy is gets packed within the atom and in my view this small quantity of energy may be termed as "quantum energy".  When energy is freed into open area, open area is not empty and there is huge amount of energy and the freed electrons joins the existing rays and a movementum is created.

Here most of our research/concentration is on the amount of energy emitted by an atom only.

Grouping/concentration:
Energy is having one of the important quality of grouping/concentration.  Suppose if you light a match stick, energy freed from the mass start concentrating around the match stick, this in turn leads to further addition of heat and light.  This is the base for fire.  Suppose if the energy is not having this quality of grouping/concentration, then what ever energy that is freed moves out freely and there is no fire or explosion.  In the example, referred by me previously, firewood was used for cooking in the evening, however energy released through burning of wood, with the help of existing energy in the open area developed energy base and this energy base with the help of small energy coming from charcoal, survived for longer period. 

When two huge masses, faced each other, devastating fire started against all the small pieces, also known as planets.  Energy freed, due to burning started spreading to wide area.  When the fire stopped, spreading to further area is also stopped.  In my view, even sun is not burning, it is in the stage of burning charcoal only and small amount of energy released by it is supporting existing Energy base.

Similar thing is happening on the earth also.  But due to strong hydrosphere, this energy base is further strengthened.  This energy, due to the pressure/force of hydrosphere, in turn accelerating on objects and this is "Gravity". 

In my view, attraction in between two masses, may be known as "Gravity" and this force/pressure of energy is a different one.

Yours
Psreddy   
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 24/09/2016 15:19:16
Friends, Let us share what exactly Dark energy is...

The dark energy is that it is simply the "cost of having space" that is, a volume of space has some intrinsic, fundamental energy.  Since energy and mass are related by E = mc2, Einstein's theory of general relativity predicts that this energy will have a gravitational effect. It is presumed that dark energy would need to have a strong negative pressure like radiation pressure in a metamaterial to explain the observed acceleration of the expansion of the universe. According to general relativity, the pressure within a substance contributes to its gravitational attraction for other things just as its mass density does. This happens because the physical quantity that causes matter to generate gravitational effects is the stress–energy tensor, which contains both the energy (or matter) density of a substance and its pressure and viscosity.

Well, it is predicted that dark energy is causing expansion of universe and it is giving strong negative pressure. It is sometimes called a vacuum energy because it is the energy density of empty vacuum. In fact, most theories of particle physics predict vacuum fluctuations that would give the vacuum this sort of energy.

Dark energy is the strong negative pressure and it is presumed to be causing the expansion of universe.  It is true that if we create vacuum, it exerts lot of stress/force.  But how it is gaining stress/force is to be studied carefully.  In the example previously discussed by us: Take water in a bucket, and close it by an empty bucket and now create vacuum.  As you create vacuum, water start raising and in this way we are presuming that vacuum is accelerating the expansion of universe.

But, how far and to what extent it correct. 
01  When you create vacuum, energy, which is of object oriented moves out along with masses. 
02  It is true that there is huge amount of energy is present on this earth and it is exerting lot of   
     pressure/force on all  objects.  For this energy, water is also one of the objects only.
03  When energy moves out, pressure/force on water is lost and it start raising.
04  HERE KEY AND BASIC POINT IS:
    a) Vacuum is gaining force/pressure is due to the outside energy pressure only.
    b) Suppose if we create vacuum in space, where there is no pressure/force of energy, its effect is little or
        nothing.
    c) Vacuum is the difference of high pressure area to low pressure area. 
    d) Actually vacuum carry's no pressure/force at all.

Let us assume that we are trying to cook food using a pressure cooker.  Here, pressure cooker start working only when it is taken to high pressure area.  It is true that we are all living in high gravitational force, but its effect is common on all objects, including things to be cooked.  So to cook food, we have to place the cooker in high pressure area created due to the flames. 

Actually Dark energy carry's no weight and it has no capacity to create pressure/force on the expansion of the universe and on the gravity.  It is true that energy moves from high area to low area, and due to this reason universe may be expanding.

Yours
Psreddy


Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: LB7 on 24/09/2016 15:50:40
For me, gravity is a repulsion followed by an attraction at a high frequency. When the distance is small the attraction is higher because 2 objects are in phase. When the distance is too high, 2 objects can't be in phase, the repulsion can be higher than the attraction.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 02/10/2016 13:31:26
Mr LB7

Well, i think you are moving to Newton's Inverse square law.  As per Inverse square law a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.  This is an wonderful theory, which explains how two similar masses attracts each other and actually they have named this attraction as gravity.  So gravity is natural phenomina by which all the masses attracts each other.  This is the root cause for the formation and existence of planets, stars, galaxies.

As per Newton, earth is huge mass and it is acting as an attractive force on all objects. Assuming a spherically
symmetrical planet, the strength of this field at any given point above the surface is proportional to the planetary body's mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the center of the body.

However Einstein came out of this fundamental thinking and has taken mass and energy as responsible for gravity.  He carried out number of experiments, such as  gravitational time dilation, gravitational lensing, the gravitational redshift of light, and the gravitational time delay. All these tests are to find out exact thing behind gravity.  But  source of gravity remained in question.

It is true that attraction in between any two masses is far limited and it is limited up to keeping things together only.  Here attractive force starts only when other mass comes near to it.  When the attraction in between two masses is responsible for gravity than what about climate and it is also exerting lot of pressure/force on all the things on earth. It is also true that if there is no climate than there is no gravity at all.  We are not living in 20th century, but in 21st century and science developed a lot.

Newton theory "inverse square law" is limited up to attraction in between two masses only and this can not be extended beyond that. If earth is exerting gravitational force means, it should be normal at all places on the earth, but it is not happening so.  There is less gravity on high hill areas and it is increasing in low lying areas. If this attraction in between two masses is called gravity than pressure/force, due to climate accelerating on the objects, on the earth is  different one.   As per newton theory  if mass alone is responsible for gravity than huge planets have to enjoy/possess more gravity than small planets.

But it is not happening so, it is the climate that is playing key role. In my view it is the hydrosphere and energy that  plays key role in the formation of climate.

Yours
Psreddy 
   
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 11/10/2016 20:39:44

There, we were simple checking if it is constant as the speed of light is, can be slowed down, can speed up, but only and only when compared to a previous frame (previous dilatation)... Just checking if time was constant dispise the dilatation, for know if a car running at (V) on mars, and the same car running at (V) on earth, would take the same amoung of (T) to reach the destination, sounds reduntant, but, at least I asusme the point of the question was to know if Time is constant dispise the dilatation, cause, "suposely" if so, time would be in control of (V)... V is for acceleration of the car...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 12/10/2016 17:10:28
Mr Alex,

"Time dilation is caused by differences in either gravity or relative velocity. In the case of ISS, time is slower due to the velocity  in circular orbit; this effect is slightly reduced by the opposing effect of less gravitational potential. Relative velocity time dilation From the local frame of reference, the relatively accelerated clock moves slower"

Actually, my ideas go differently and i am sure it is very difficult to convice others in this present scenerio.  It is true that time is a medium by which we measure period and it is standard at all times, either you are in the spaceship or on the earth and it is only clock timings that varies when compared.

Velocity is the speed with which an object reaches other place and simply it is a measurement only.  Here velocity makes the clock to move slower and when compared to other inertial clock on the earth. In my view this is due to so many things which are yet to be explored by science, for this, i feel it is electromagnetic waves present throughout the universe, but it may be different too.

For me, gravity is the main subject and therefore i had deleted previous posting also.  Here by,  i request you to continue the discussion on the main subject.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 13/10/2016 12:56:06
Mr Alex,

"Time dilation is caused by differences in either gravity or relative velocity. In the case of ISS, time is slower due to the velocity  in circular orbit; this effect is slightly reduced by the opposing effect of less gravitational potential. Relative velocity time dilation From the local frame of reference, the relatively accelerated clock moves slower"

Actually, my ideas go differently and i am sure it is very difficult to convice others in this present scenerio.  It is true that time is a medium by which we measure period and it is standard at all times, either you are in the spaceship or on the earth and it is only clock timings that varies when compared.

Velocity is the speed with which an object reaches other place and simply it is a measurement only.  Here velocity makes the clock to move slower and when compared to other inertial clock on the earth. In my view this is due to so many things which are yet to be explored by science, for this, i feel it is electromagnetic waves present throughout the universe, but it may be different too.

For me, gravity is the main subject and therefore i had deleted previous posting also.  Here by,  i request you to continue the discussion on the main subject.

Yours
Psreddy

Sure, I agree, the thing is a car moving at V, a planet orbiting at V, V on mars V on earth, wouldn't all be time?
 The purpose behind the question, was if Time wasn't always in control of V, so almost literaly T=V, so on first instance, the car moving at 100kmph on mars, and also moving at 100kmph on earth, dispise the time dilatation in function of the area the event is taking place, T would still remain equal V...
 Our clock would say that they took different amounts of time to reach the same destination due dilatation, when it would have being in fact (V) that was wrong...
 What I have in mind is, the dime differes from the same event on mars and earth, not because the time dilatation, but becouse in function of the dilatation time (that is in control of V "proportional), that possibility wouldn't affect the speed of time to up and down, but the "acceleration frame", the same as we consider for light...
 The thing that differs than was the velocimeter of the car that should have being ajusted, time stood constant, but due the dilatation of space, it resulted in two different (V)...
 Is that a probability?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 13/10/2016 15:22:51
   The real confusion in science, what exactly is energy. Mass has no energy in and of itself. What we measure as time is actually fundamental energy. Mass attracted to mass, atom attracted to atom is a reduction of energy c as space time energy reduction in space. Heat is just friction between mass and fundamental energy which is energy removed from space that mass occupies. Space energy move electrons. At rest it is a stable flow that expands energy (dilation) to a less dense dark mass energy (space energy). Attraction is caused by this less dense energy base (space time energy) by entropy. Mass has no energy not given to it by fundamental energy. The dilation of space energy is the gamma term in Einstein's relativity. In a planet there is a gradient like an onion ring where the center of mass produces the largest dilation and the gradient is being reduced as you get closer to the surface. Gravity is the difference in gradient dilation which causes the curvature of space time. Space is a fluid c spin. Everything to understand physics is in relativity mathematics. It is merely the mechanics that elude us.

We have let the standard model confuse us with its interpretations. We need to start fresh with fresh ideas. And I am glad to see this new ideas coming from all of you in this discussion. We have to question the opinion of others even to their base understanding. The MMX set science on the wrong path in my estimation. While it proved there was no static Aether it failed to prove there was no sub electron matrix. Everything below the electron has to be detected orthogonally. This is the spectral range of waves on the matrix. Mechanically by relativity mass cannot contribute mass to the spectrum identity. This is ok because the dark mass energy (space time) propagates spectral waves on itself always at c. Mass creates friction on space time which is the cause of macro mass energy. Remember space time energy move the electrons or they are moved by magic. Its your choice to have faith in magic or understand reality as mechanics. Rather than a top down mechanics are always from the bottom up. Relativity postulates that follow all observations so far are the key to understanding the mechanics. The current standard model forces all observations to fit the model. This is a invalid process for science and causes such terms as virtual photons. Relativity math does not allow a reduction of macro mass or the photon to have mass. This is enough to dismantle the standard model. Photons transfer energy by waves is the observation. Virtual waves cannot transfer energy but this fact is glossed over in favor of the standard model.

The Big Bang model is also a fabrication of magic. A top down approach that violates mechanics. Once again reality is a choice of magic or mechanics. My understanding follows mechanics of relativity and not the magic of something from nothing. Macro mass comes from space time energy same as a black hole comes from macro mass exposed to gravity in excess of the speed of light attraction. A black hole is atoms combined into a super element. In the single atom (H) the relative distance its electron travels is a football field compared to a marble. Energy keeps the other atoms at bay but at the same time attracts other atoms. At the speed of light attraction the football field is filled with marbles. The lack of energy this produces in space causes a massive dilation in the energy state of space. Entropy of mass is dilation of space and the cause of gravity.

   Suns create macro mass through their lifetime in the form of (H) atoms from dark mass energy (space time)  similar to black holes in a fractal universe where black holes are electrons.

Magnetism is the rotation of the fluid energy c caused by electrons being coiled or natural magnets in open faced molecules where there electrons line up in a rotational column. Right hand rotation in and right hand out. Mirror images of each will be opposite spins. There is no Plus or minus just flow and rotation.

Back to the BB interpretation of expansion of the universe. Relativity actually has an interpretation different from expansion of the universe. Back to dilation of space. The accumulated dilation of space in the center of galaxies creates a type of lens astronomers use to expand the light of other galaxies behind the lens. This expansion is the accumulated dilation of space that keeps the galaxy together as a solid type of rotating disk or ball. 75 % of the light comes from 25% of the center of a galaxy where it is most dilated. From our perspective 75% out from the center of our own galaxy we are in a much less dilated space. So we view all galaxies as gravitationally red shifted. Even Andromeda is gravitationally red shifted from our perspective. we only know it is moving towards us is because of the arm moving towards us is more blue shifted than the one moving away is red shifted. Now we have the issue of increase in red shift by distance. Our concave and convex lenses may be causing the increased red shift as an artifact similar to a prism effect. The wave becomes more flattened and expressed over more of the lens with distance causing the red shift with distance. There was an astronomer that knew two galaxies were in the same neighbor hood and they gave two different red shifts. He was ignored in favor of the standard model of red shift SR and not Red shift GR.

Reality is smaller things create larger things. Distribution of the larger things are our universe.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 16/10/2016 17:53:28
Mr GOC,
Thank you,
As said by you,
"At rest it is a stable flow that expands energy (dilation) to a less dense dark mass energy (space energy). Attraction is caused by this less dense energy base (space time energy) by entropy. Mass has no energy not given to it by fundamental energy. The dilation of space energy is the gamma term in Einstein's relativity. In a planet there is a gradient like an onion ring where the center of mass produces the largest dilation and the gradient is being reduced as you get closer to the surface. Gravity is the difference in gradient dilation which causes the curvature of space time".

Well, dilation of energy is the key point in the theory proposed by me as well.  There is continuous flow of energy from high area to low area.  During day time, space has more energy when compared to our earth and it results in movement of energy towards earth, resulting in the strengthening of the "energy base".  However during night time, space is in the dark side of the planet, resulting in weak space energy and movement of energy from this "energy base" starts and weakens energy base. Here, during night time energy movement from earth, strengthens "energy base" and saves us.

Gravity is the difference in gradient dilation is 100% correct.  It is the dilation of energy from the center of the
planet that decides strength of "energy base" on any planet.  It is the key factor in the formation of climate. However gradient dilation of energy has no capacity to decide curvature of space time.  It is the shape of a planet that decides space time as curved one or horizontal.

It is true that north and south poles of the earth is already cooled to a great extent.  Any dilation of energy is at the center only.  There is continuous flow of energy from the center to north and south poles.  At the center, where there is continuous flow of energy into open area, is shattering existing energy rays and it is taking a shift in the momentum.   Existing energy rays which are causing gravity i.e., gravity waves are weakened.  So, naturally gravity is weakest at the centre of the earth.  But at the poles, where dilation of energy from earth is weak, gravity is strongest.

In my view gravity is nothing but pressure/force applied on an object by the gravity waves, due to the hydrosphere pressure against them.  So, naturally it is the distance from the earth to space that decides gravity at a particular place. 

Suppose if you are on a high hill area, gravity waves are weak and thus gravity, where as in the plains where gravity waves are strengthened and a gravity well is stabilised.

As per Newton, our earth is a  spherically symmetrical planet, and there fore the strength of gravitational field at any given point above the surface is proportional to the planetary body's mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the center of the body. This is for the sake of inverse square law only.

Where as, on the gravity difference from the center to poles, centrifugal force is applied.

But Einstein has taken a different approach. 

"Gravity not as a force but as a consequence of the curvature of space time caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy and resulting in gravitational time dilation, where time lapses more slowly in lower (stronger) gravitational potential"

He also carried out number of tests on gravitational lensing, the gravitational redshift of light and these are simple
experiments to know presence of gravity.

However, he gained lot of knowledge after carrying out these experiments and came to a conclusion that it is gravitational waves as responsible for gravity on earth.  But he could not locate source of these energy waves.  He turned towards space, looked at neutron stars, black holes and dark energy and taken as responsible.

We are feeling gravity on the earth and not in the space and it is not caused by small gravity waves coming from other universes.  It is true that science developed a lot and we all knew that it is the climate that is deciding factor on gravity.   

Here by I request the scientists,

"First decide, what exactly gravity is" and then go for exploration of universe. 

Ok, other things, we will discuss later.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: jerrygg38 on 17/10/2016 10:29:49
So i request friends, by this forum to give mail addresses of important universities or scientists to whom i can place this for consideration/discussion.
Unfortunately we are not allowed to give out these private emails. However, many top scientists read these pages and if they find your theory worthy of investigation they will pass it to the most suitable department and contact you.
   All the emails of all the professors are listed in the college directories. Then you have to send an email explaining your theory in a few words and ask them if they are interested in your work. They get a lot of emails and only respond if they like what you have to say in your email. That is how I get professors who ask for my books.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: jerrygg38 on 17/10/2016 10:51:21
   Everything is related to the gravitational field and the electromagnetic fields. Mass is concentrated gravitational field. Charge is concentrated electric field. Prior to the big bang we had just the fields. As the universe compressed mass formed at the center sphere upon which we live. This is where the battle between dark energy and dark matter resides.
   At present this is a distance of Ru from an absolute center and also a distance Ru from an outer sphere such that every point in the universe is the center of it own universe
   The physical universe which exists on a quasi spherical surface (Einstein's Relativity page 136) slowly loses mass which expands the universe. The loss of mass into linear dot-waves (Relativity and the Dot-wave theory by Gerald Grushow-jerrygg38) expands the universe to a maximum but not infinity. This changes the balance between dark matter and dark energy. At maximum radius after 544 billion years, the universe will start to compress and then after another 544 billion years it will contract to a small size but not zero. then the fields will again precipitate matter and the cycle continues. Everything of importance occurs on our spherical plane.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 17/10/2016 17:40:50
Jerrygg38

Much of what you discuss is subjective like the BB. What caused the BB? There is no scientific explanation other than it was voted in by 13 of the most respected men of their day by a vote of 12 to 1. The one did not let magic persuade him into the field of physics without a cause.

Your dot wave theory:
1. How does it affect a photon?
2. What is the physical appearance of a photon?
3. How does the dot wave affect mass?
4. How does the dot wave maintain c in the universe?
5. What is the cause of gravity?
6. What is a charge?

I can go on but unless you can answer those questions by mechanism its like a politician taking sentences out of context. You and others are looking from a top down approach to physics. Blowing up a car than trying to put it back together is your approach while in reality the car was put together before it blew up. That is the reality I know.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: jerrygg38 on 17/10/2016 23:29:43
To GoC You asked
Your dot wave theory:
1.   How does it affect a photon?
The red photon is composed of 6.241E32 bipolar dot-waves in the linear momentum configuration.
2.   What is the physical appearance of a photon?
When the photon appears as a particle, the positive dot-waves start at a point and rise upward as they chase the negative dot-waves. At the same time  the negative dot wave is falling from a maximum size toward a zero point. Each exists in their own time dimension. The negative dot-wave exists in the minus time dimension whereas the positive dot-wave exists in the plus time dimension. The property of mass occurs when positive and negative dot-waves form a spherical pattern such that the positive dot wave expands from a point while the negative dot-wave contracts.  Dot-waves only travel at the speed of light C.
3.   How does the dot wave affect mass?
Mass is a property of spherical patterns of electromagnetic and gravitational motions. Everything is made of dot-wave. An electron has 3.377E38 dot waves with a mass of 2.698E-69Kg and a charge of 4.745E-58 Coulombs. The proton has an equal number of positive dot-waves and  3.098E41 bipolar dot-waves. You cannot find the individual dot-waves because they have been crushed together by the big bang and star implosions. However the photons readily absorb and radiate dot-waves as they encounter changes in the gravitational field density.
4.   How does the dot wave maintain c in the universe?
The Universe is a light speed C universe. At the dot-wave level everything travels at light speed whether in spherical oscillations or linear motions. We live in a mixed area of space time that combines spherical dot-waves and linear dot-waves plus orbital configurations of dot-waves. Thus our universe is basically ground speed zero. We are on the border of the battle between dark energy and dark matter.
5.   What is the cause of gravity?
The cause of gravity is still debate-able in my mind. If I look at the universe from a constant energy constant charge structure, it is a puzzle. In my book I look at  various effects of gravity. In chapter 13 I discuss General variable space time. For this situation, the charge and mass of the visible universe radiates into the universe of dark matter/dark energy. The stored charge in the time domain discharges and there is dot-wave current flows which cause electrical attractions. Yet for the present book I maintain constant charge. In my Doppler Space Time, I discharged the universe into nothing. However all this really means is that the visible universe erases and the invisible universe remains. Yet I do not go from a big bang at near zero radius to near infinity. I go from minimum radius to maximum radius with a cycle time of 1088 billion years.
6.   What is a charge?
Charge is the plus time dimension or the minus time dimension. These dimensions are in the nanosecond range. The big time dimension on our clocks only exists for a split second. The photons carry information about the past but the past does not exist. Einstein was wrong to believe such things. The past only last a few nanoseconds at most. Of course I believe in a practical Engineering universe and not a mathematical fantasy. Yet Einstein’s work was great. He makes up great mathematical solutions such as the bending of light around stars but he does not understand the engineering details of what happens. I explain this in my book.
  Anyway thanks for the questions and if you are interested in my book it is available for free on my Facebook page. I send free paper copies to those professors who ask for an autographed copy but I have limited resources to do that.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 18/10/2016 05:46:57
jerrygg38

   The words you use have different meanings to different people. I agree we only live in the present. There is past configurations and future configurations but only present is possible. This brings us to a need to define time. Time to my thinking is the smallest movement of the electron to the next smallest movement. If electrons stopped moving time would stop.

So to me minus time and plus time has no meaning. There is no logical minus time motion.

I ask for a definition of charge as in what causes charge? Electron negative charge and the proton a positive charge. This definition would cause entropy if balanced as being suggested. More likely being a flow rather than a charge.

If a dot wave for a photon has mass it violates relativity.

What is a time dimension? You cannot throw out words without defining a mechanical structure of a time dimension. Otherwise it just becomes background noise.

How does dot wave maintain c in the universe. Changing the words by saying we live in a c universe is not an answer. Just circular reasoning.

What is the mechanical cause of the motion of the electron? One planks length movement to the next that creates time in the first place. That needs to be answered first mechanically before the structure of the universe can be attempted.

I believe everything needed is in relativity mathematics. The complete mechanical structure of the cause of relativity is needed.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: jerrygg38 on 18/10/2016 22:03:24


GoC:   The words you use have different meanings to different people. I agree we only live in the present. There is past configurations and future configurations but only present is possible. This brings us to a need to define time. Time to my thinking is the smallest movement of the electron to the next smallest movement. If electrons stopped moving time would stop.
Jerrygg: Ok it is surely possible that the electron jumps from one electromagnetic field line to the next. This enables many coexisting universes to exist in our space. The same can be said of the photon which jumps from one gravitational field line to the next.
GoC:So to me minus time and plus time has no meaning. There is no logical minus time motion.
Jerrygg: The alternate is a plus dimension and a minus dimension. What you speak of is the big time dimension whereas my plus and minus times are tiny dimensions. So we have space time effects at the atomic level and other effects at the big time big ruler level.
GoC:I ask for a definition of charge as in what causes charge? Electron negative charge and the proton a positive charge. This definition would cause entropy if balanced as being suggested. More likely being a flow rather than a charge.
Jerrygg: The compression of space causes a split into very small dimensions. The plus time and minus time dimensions charge up. They are separated in the little time dimension (or the positive and negative dimension). This causes us to have plus dot-waves and minus dot-waves. They cannot damage each other because they live in different and separate dimensions. Yet they attract each other.
  Any discharge is like a parallel plate capacitor where the plates move apart. There is no actual current flow between the plus and minus dimensions. However in our world of big ruler big time clock we get actual current flows as in a battery.
GoC: If a dot wave for a photon has mass it violates relativity.
Jerrygg:   Photons are energy configurations which are linear planar with spins. The same stuff when in spherical type configurations have mass. Photons becomes mass and mass becomes photons. It is all geometry How this violates relativity I do not know. Of course to me relativity is a good mathematical analysis of space time problems but not the solution to all things.

GoC: What is a time dimension? You cannot throw out words without defining a mechanical structure of a time dimension. Otherwise it just becomes background noise.
Jerrygg: Hopefully I explained what I meant.

GoC: How does dot wave maintain c in the universe. Changing the words by saying we live in a c universe is not an answer. Just circular reasoning.
Jerrygg: I look at a spectrum of universes light speed C, 2C, 4C, up toward light speed infinity. Our universe operates upon the light speed equations.
Energy = QC^3
Energy = MC^2
Mass = QC
 MV = QVC
MoC = QC^2
  Thus there are primary light speed equations which govern the universe that we live in. I cannot give you a reason why this is so. This is the particular universe we live in. I have studied many other possibilities over the years but this is the most likely solution to our universe.
GoC: What is the mechanical cause of the motion of the electron? One planks length movement to the next that creates time in the first place. That needs to be answered first mechanically before the structure of the universe can be attempted.
Jerrygg: I study the unit equations and I see the possible relationships between the mechanical world and the electrical world. At the same time I look at the constants of the universe and the relationships between the gravitational constant and the permeability constant. This takes years of study in order to look at all the possible solutions. In the end my theory is based upon the primary equations of the universe and the conversion of kilograms to coulomb meters per second. I do not need any fancy math. All I need is charts of conversions and a hand calculator. Am I right? That is for others to say in the future since at 78 years this December my effort in this regard is coming to an end.
GoC:I believe everything needed is in relativity mathematics. The complete mechanical structure of the cause of relativity is needed.
Jerrygg: Relativity appears to work well. Yet it lacks Doppler relativity which shows the details of the structure of the universe. Once you add that in then the universe is fully understood. I like that the neutrino is the Einsteinian mass/energy of an electron as it becomes part of the proton. I also like that the binding energy of the hydrogen atom is the Einsteinian mass/energy increase. Thus relativity theory defines what happens in the neutron and the hydrogen atom and in a lot of other things. Quantum mechanics uses particles and the like to explain things but they are only the equivalent energy levels using Einsteinian calculations.


Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 19/10/2016 12:41:21
I did not realize you were a multi-verser. Personally I place that into science fiction. I am a realest and cannot be bothered with magical things. Carry on.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 21/10/2016 03:10:03
Jerrygg:   Photons are energy configurations which are linear planar with spins. The same stuff when in spherical type configurations have mass. Photons becomes mass and mass becomes photons. It is all geometry How this violates relativity I do not know. Of course to me relativity is a good mathematical analysis of space time problems but not the solution to all things.

 I read it all twice, my first thought is, he knows...
 Let me ask you something, to see if I understood your ideas correctly, more specific in relation with the photons...
  Something like photons being a construction of space, most likely a spiral "shape" that is constantly happening wherever the light is present, although when on the absence of dense atomic structure/matter(absence of macro mass), the light(photons) remain possessing a special configuration, that enable the energy to be carried at "C" trough space?
  One rudimentary and simplistic assumption, you do not say it loud: Light is the source of gravity?
 Or better, the way space reacts to the energy(spectrum), creating (photons) on itself eventually forming waves and colliding with macro mass, there on the presence of the macro mass the photons, constantly colliding at "C" against the macro mass, start to re-adapt their structure, in resonance with the atomic structure. Photons traveling at C, photons rearranging their configurations, rebounding one back over the other, mixing configurations, source of dark mass energy/space energy?
 Reading your description, I'm wrong to assume that the constant rearrangement and rebouncing of this photons, from light on space, to mass on dense atomic structure, as being the true source of the interaction that results in gravity? Light photons, interacting with mass photons, the constant for behind "C"? Also photons as being a shape/configuration of space(itself) in the presence of light, the rebouncing between spiral light at C, against "photonic mass?!", the reasons for behind the dilatation, when near massive objects?
 I'm not presuming, only trying to glimpse further on your concept, is occurring to me that state that mass is able to dilatate space-time, could not be more incorrect on your suggestion, when infact, and I'm simple wondering that, (mass) is (photon mass), mass is the dilatation of itself?
 " Mater have never directly produced mass as a source only as a calatizador, when a planet is causing dilatation on space-time, what's really happening is that the refraction of photons against matter is changing the configuration of "light", releasing the energy from the spiral configuration of light, directly infusing it on the surroundings, resembling and aura, this process of reconfiguration of light, the true source of mass( dark energy?!), and mass not causing dilatation of space, "mass" being the dilatation?
 Cause if photon is a shape, a carrier (on space and of it) able to change configuration ( I did not knew that the configuration could affect the behavior), will one end up with something like (Gravity/mass/motion) "everything was the light"?
 I would really appreciate if I'm diverging to far from what your idea of photon/mass, are leading to?


One other question, about parallel universes, I do not tend to believe o that, but from your perspective on one simple example: A solar system, could be interpreted as a universe, although this "universe" is existing (inside?!) a larger universe (galaxy),. The question is could this mechanic layers be interpreted as what they suggest as coexisting parallel universes? And if it is possible, could this correlation of opposite charges, existing on different dimensions, that do not interact, have as possible being result of a correlation between light and electromagnetism?
 Could the jump of the electron, from inside the heliosphere, be different from the outside, but here it is, where is inside the galaxy and where is outside heliosphere? Both are not the same, although both are coexisting, could this sort of parallel coexistence, take place over "hidden dimensions"?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 23/10/2016 11:18:48
Mr Alex,

As said by you,
"Something like photons being a construction of space, most likely a spiral "shape" that is constantly happening wherever the light is present, although when on the absence of dense atomic structure/matter(absence of macro mass), the light (photons) remain possessing a special configuration, that enable the energy to be carried at "C" trough space?"

For me, quite long time, this is a mystery only.  How photons construct a space, may be spiral or different one.
In Newton's description of gravity, the gravitational force is caused by matter only. In Einstein's theory and related theories of gravitation, curvature at every point in space time is also caused by whatever matter is present. Here, too, mass is a key property in determining the gravitational influence of matter.

In general relativity it is mass, energy, momentum, pressure and tension that serve as sources of gravity, they are how matter tells space time how to curve.

In fact matter is not having any capacity to decide the shape of the space.  The shape of the space whether it is curvature or horizontal is decided by the shape of the planet and the gravitational force.  Suppose, let us assume that if the shape of the planet is horizontal, than the shape of the space cannot be curved.  When coming to matter, though light particles may present in the space, they cannot decide or construct the space.  For that in the words of Einstein itself, gravity is due to uneven distribution of mass and energy.

They have taken different masses in the shape of earth and rotated them with maximum speed.  They have noted light photons escaping into the open are.  Since earth is having spherical shape, they have found most of the light particles concentrating at the edges and moving out.  They have compared this to to earth.  As earth is moving with maximum speed, they have presumed that lot of mass is escaping into space and it is constructing curvature of space.

But, here we have to keep in mind one important point that we are living on earth, which is in the grip of gravitational field.  Here, whatever test you have done or going to do is influenced by this gravity field.   When the mass is rotated with maximum speed, gravity that is influencing the mass, start creating rupture, and this results in movement of light photons.

Here, basic and key point is that earth is in the grip of gravitational field and it is not rotating but made to rotate.
When earth rotates, total gravitational field moves along with it.  Total mass, small or big is fully in the control of
gravitation field.  Light atoms and dark matter, which escapes gravity moves to space.


Gravity influence on things:
Gravity is having profound influence on the behaviour, movement and knowledge of the things on the earth.  Actually it is the shape of the things that decides, gravity influence.  Luckily, human beings are having different shape, in the form of straight. Our body is far less influenced by gravity and thus we are able to move to different places, acquaint with different things. In my view whatever knowledge we may posses, it is the shape that decides its development and fate.

Suppose, let us presume that we are having the elephant shape, horizontal, which is more influenced by gravity.  What ever knowledge elephants may have, they cannot move, more freely as we are doing.  To face this gravity effect, elephants are having four legs, where as human beings are blessed with hands, which facilitate to do so many things.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 23/10/2016 12:49:40
pasala,

   Yes the shape of mass controls the dilation of space by the inverse square of the distance. Mass causes a expansion of space energy to a less dense state. Half of the stars in the sky are binary and the other half have planets. Some are outliers but basically suns are created in pairs. Some pairs are unbalanced to the point where one sun destroys the other creating planets. The planets are molten and gravity causes them to form sphere shapes. Throw water n the air and the drops will be sphere shaped. The earth bulges at the equator and is flattened at the poles. Atomic clocks all tick at the same rate at sea level. So the space energy is the same at sea level. The spin is compensated with increased distance at the equator to counteract centrifugal effects counteracting gravitational effects.

Energy of space that allows light to be propagated is affected by dilation expansion.  The light is a energy wave created on spin energy c of space itself. Both GR and SR dilation of that same energy cause light to expand outward. Gravity is that dilation and the aura around mass is that threshold of abrupt change in energy density contracting. This we observe in galaxies as lensing. The expanded energy acts like a convex lens to view galaxies behind expanded. Light is expanded to curve around spherical objects and dilated in space occupied by mass. The density is a gradient from the center of mass out by the inverse square of the distance.

Mass and energy are two separate systems working together to create relativity.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/10/2016 13:57:56
Hello,

I do not question your attestments about gravity, and I agree with your explanation. I admit I do not quit understand everything but seems logical to follow the group.

 Although, what Jerrygg suggested about photon and possible configuration diverging from light to mass, and the opposite too, sort of make sense....

 I'm just trying to visualize, that if someone would be able to prove that not for logic.
  Not attesting, only considering, if photons are to have different configurations, and if photons most likely are construction of space, seems quite possible, if real, for photons being mass...
  Follow this, may be subjection: Space creates photons on itself on the presence of energy (light)
 Now you have a universe that has no matter and only light, there would be no significant mass, or in a better sense there wouldn't be presented, at thta point, references as stars and planets...
  Let's advance to where matter already does exist, for I do not know why it exists, or how it was formed..
  Now you have the exactly same universe, with the addition of a "not massive" object made of matter, lets suppose, following the concept even if incorrect, that the atoms that form the planet alone have no mass, only electromagnetic bounds, strong bounds, given to them by the particles...
 Probably the spinning of those very particles, given to them by C itself since the very beginning of their existence...
 What I have in mind is one could say that a brick for example, does not posses weight nor mass, only atomic structure, and that by "existing space within its atoms" it, the brick, seemed to have mass, when infarct there was only photonic mass, lets say, flowing trough the brick...
  Something like the atomic structure of the brick, its atoms, resonating with the empty space that is existing "now" within this atoms, given to them a special shape, and the configuration of those atoms, diverging from the ones on the environment, defining what that specific configuration of atoms is...
  I do not know how to put in words to explain once, and that is from my limited English.
 The question is, if there is only one source of mass? That mass being photonic mass, from space, and comprehending all that is, mass of any given object, mass of anything, dark matter...
  What I mean is, what if we are observing dark matter or theorizing it from the wrong point of view? If could be possible that space is there happening fine at C with the photons arranged for light, and than matter comes in, and "gives" a center, a point of reference to this photons, lockingg them within the atomic structure, by giving them configurations that diverges from C... I mean, a ray of light with photons moving at C, lets say that there was a structure (a wall) that could not stop the motion) but instead, something that is able to capture and hold it on place, still being at C, and this the source of the rotation of the other particles including the electron?

 I do understood what you explained about part of the mass licking trough space as the planet moves...
 But what if is the opposite? Matter being a combination of particles and atoms, and each one of those components, receiving "potential mass" from the photonic space surrounding them? So why do not say, that if was possible that space is giving "mass" to matter, by existing within the gathered atomic structure, why not, "photonic mass"...
 The question should be, couldn't be that dark matter, if they are correct only miss interpreted, is "mass of space" happening "freely" on space, due N factors, one of them as being the presence of numerous particles and atoms, like on a gas cloud or maybe even due the presence of too much "light" crossed between stars on a specific sector of space?
  IF possible, that all mass is given and provident from space by being constantly producing this second configuration for photons, couldn't be also the case that too much light, eventually and gradually starting to form particles, consequently atoms.. What I have in mind, is possible that all that dark matter, is "similar" to the first stages that are necessary to form particles, atoms and eventually matter?

 Thin about it, they are considering that is missing matter, because there would be missing mass right, so they come up with dark matter to compensate and it sort of match, they can only feel the gravitational effects it has...
 Well it occurred me, clean up an area of space, and now set the planet earth on the center, at distance one is observing the dilatation in function of its mass. Now disband the planet separating each particle from the other and distribute all those particles trough the entirely area, now...
 For a distant observer, particles wouldn't have quality of light enough to be visualized, although, the effect on gravity can be observed, correct? For the earth that was there, on the future, is already there, past, the only difference is that its mass is still disparced trough the whole region...

 I do not believe that, but I'm considering, what if the black holes are not the end of the chain of events? it's natural to us, our scale, to believe that our scale is absolute, that we have purpose, maybe even the last purpose... But with a universe this big, couldn't be the case that only "we" consider the black holes, (center of galaxies) as being the end of the line?
 There is so much thing we do not know, that I usually allow myself to wonder, if we are not looking at galaxies from the wrong perspective. If galaxies as we call and see, isn't but a coincidence, that we are live, seems to be perfect, but maybe we woke up in half of the way, maybe universe is not done yet, perhaps black hole, if on the right conditions can give birth to a star... Sounds weird but the truth is, "Galaxy" could very possible be as any other star formation we observe "a simple gathering of particles to form something else"...
 All this, can be happening in large scale, at the afterwards of a ordinary massive super nova expansion of a fraction of what we would consider to be minutes, and after billions of years for us, we wouldn't be able to know...

 it's just a lot of doubts, but what had never occurred me, is what Jerrygg mentioned, a possibilities, of the configuration of photon, diverging straight flat linear wave light, to spherical spiral sipping particle when "trapped" by atoms and particles (matter), photons(space) given it shape, composition, frequency and also mass...
 Is possible photons be linear wave light on space, and at the instant (constantly) they (space) interact with atomic structure they absorbed the spinning of this second configuration of photons (spherical like particles(Space spinning at C)presented on matter? And if so,could normal space (linear) when in interaction with this second configuration (indeed not from matter, but provided by ts existence on space). The rebouncing of both configurations "happening in free space" resulting in local gravity?
 Gravity existing because of the mass, mass existing because the existence of atoms, this mass promoting the gathering of those atoms towards a center, and eventually after the formation, all the mass be still present but most of it outside the object, like space resonating and responding to the planet like if it was a single atom? Producing its mass on the exterior(space), and this mass "constantly" happening around the planet as it moves trough space? Dark mass?

 If possible, once one have stars and matter that is spinning faster, is quite possible that they are moving so fast that the mass that should be happening more at the surroundings is being left behind as they move, this being the impression of dark matter and its effects? The relative mass of a moving object on space (minus) C(speed of light)?
 Can something, any object, left behind its mass as it moves around another?
 Or is dark matter, the proportional photonic mass of super massive objects, as in black holes?

 Or more precisely, is the mass truly on the atoms that form matter? Or any given amount of atoms is constantly subjected to a "proportional mass" due their existence in space-time?
Is possible add this two configurations light/mass for the photons, without violate "only the base" relativity?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 23/10/2016 14:54:05
    Macro mass and micro mass are different things because the mass of the atom always remain the same. Micro mass has to be a organized system for macro mass to reliably follow relativity. There would not be a change in micro mass if there was no macro mass. Macro mass disturbs micro mass to create ripples (waves) for the spectral identity. Dilation of that micro mass (dark mass energy) energy to move the electrons of mass. We need to follow all of relativity in the mechanics of the universe.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/10/2016 15:57:30
    Macro mass and micro mass are different things because the mass of the atom always remain the same. Micro mass has to be a organized system for macro mass to reliably follow relativity. There would not be a change in micro mass if there was no macro mass. Macro mass disturbs micro mass to create ripples (waves) for the spectral identity. Dilation of that micro mass (dark mass energy) energy to move the electrons of mass. We need to follow all of relativity in the mechanics of the universe.

 Following the possibilitie of the mass of an atom be provinient from space(photonic mass/potential mass), of two atoms would not interfere with the number of atoms presented, being that number 1 or 1 towusand of them, macro mass would be the result of the sum of individual potential mass of each atoms that is forming matter?
 I'm not suggesting this photonic configuration within atomic structure as being static, more like each space within the atoms being the whole universe, flowing trough the objects, constantly producing "where they exist" two different types of mass provident from the same source, space... 1 Kg of iron, should have the same mass in wherever given location, at least inside heliosphere, although, the weight of this mass can be increased by the dilatation of space where it exists, but, wouldn't be weight and mass two different things?
 What I'm asking is, the electrons keep one atoms to touch the other, there is always empty space among normal matter, other than that one have fusion, fusion may be forcing the atoms to combine and in the process strait much more energy from the photons(space within the atoms)..
 Isn't, even if not correct, imagine a system where the mass of any giving atom is given by it from space, making use of the construction we call as photons... One system where each atoms is built to be equal the other atom of the same kind, with particles and charges making sure that they nerver fuse one with the other, isn't that an organized system?

 You have a spherical rock, it does have space within its atoms, than you add a spherica layer, a cover of dust, and another of gases, another of liquid, it's irrelevant for matter, micro mass would still remain organized as long there is space within the atoms that formed the rock(potential mass), but should be truth that if one keeps increasing the number of layers, there would eventually start to occur a delay in C, there would take considerable time for space to flow from the exterior to the center of this layers(the rock in the example).
 Isn't possible that this gap on C, from outside in a planet for example, stared to reduce the micro mass, and consequently start to fuse the atoms one with the other by gradually, from inside out the planet, removing the space within the atomic structure on the inner layers of a planet, resulting in a conversion of atomic structure into energy...
 Al tough that energy would not be able to transfer itself very easily or escape the center, not from pressure or compression, but because its medium was the space within the atoms of the other layers, so I imagine that a planet is able to conserve heat energy because due the density of its layers, it cannot transfer the energy from the interior to the exterior, for there is a gap within it (a lack of space), without that all that energy should not be able to convert into mass, for mass would have being from interaction with space?

 I'm not assuming that relativity is wrong, there is no basis for that, I'm considering N possibilities for the high probabilities that relativity is "misinterpreted"...
 More precisely, and I can't proof or be sure neither, the photonic experiment of Einstein was miss interpreted ed, the wave/particle should be correct indeed, but something is suggesting that Light/mass should  also be of the same...
 For this above, I'm also considering what I already doing for a while, that "temperatures" are properties excursively of "space" within and outside matter, every temperature that is, ( and I do acknowledge that temperature is a feeling), I'm just picking the world temperature, to cover all sorts of (irradiation and transfer), being it radiation, heat, any sort of "transfer of energy" I'm comprehending on "temperature"...  As I human I agree that could is the absence of heat, but also I cannot even closely agree with that...
 If you have a sphere of "spinning" energy, pure energy, and you do not have much "Space" around of it, to transfer that very energy as heat properly, that very energy will remain conserved on the interior, gradually expanding itself as the sphere grows, or as the sphere receives more "proportional mass" as the field(heliosphere) that is containing the sphere is changing the "proportional mass"...
 Although I'm not sure if mass is from space neither, only that if it is, and electromagnetism(magnetosphere) can infarct control space within the field, is acceptable that the earth may be expanding when compared with the early earth, for the sun may be considerably smaller now than it was on the past. Assuming that is not the universe that is expanding but instead a smaller heliosphere, not only for our sun but for all stars we are observing... As the sphere reduces, the planets are submitted to an "bigger proportional mass", as this happens more energy is stored in the interior, expanding the planet...

 I'm wondering that the planet stays together and spherical from within, for energy is less dense than matter, or has lower mass at the very center... Earth would than be, a external layer of rock and molten rock around a center( a gap) of pure energy that is trapped there, unable to transfer for it was formed there, unable to transfer the energy for there is motion and basically no "space" within the atoms of the outer layers surrounding it...
 Drill a hole to the very center of earth, shoot a laser, strong volcanic activity, or even a wrong burn of elements at the center that may result in a strong shock wave that crack up to the surface... In resume not different from any sun, crack open a direct path from the exterior to the interior and depending on the conditions you'll have a collapse of the planet (waiting for reformation) or you'll have a nova, for all that trapped energy will find the meanings to immediately be transferred...

It's much of speculation, but it suggests an inner core that explains everything else, right bellow our feet.
 I tend to believe that wherever is "truly" happening there would solve or confirm any other possible question about the universe...

 For having no proof I'm still on your side with relativity, but we do have to pay attention, for all the work over relativity has "light and a photonic universe as its basis" with has proven to be most likely correct, although it's not completely closed to misinterpretations, that when corrected, would lead to the same relativity we do accept...
 If I decide that a car is a motorcycle, and keep that tough for one hundred years, to eventually discover that it wasn't a car, none of that changes everything I observed and experimented within at that period, the only significant change is that "I" not relativity that was incorrect, our understanding of it...
  For not having proof other than thoughts, I stick with your opinion and knowledge with relativity, although, I'll natural always question the reasons behind relativity, for the creator also did not knew neither...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 23/10/2016 18:32:38
Mr GOC
As said by you,
"Mass and energy are two separate systems working together to create relativity".

In GRT Mass and energy relevance is expressed as:
"The equivalence between mass and energy, as expressed by the formula E = mc2, is the most famous consequence of special relativity. In relativity, mass and energy are two different ways of describing one physical quantity. If a physical system has energy, it also has the corresponding mass, and vice versa. In particular, all properties of a body that are associated with energy, such as its temperature or the binding energy of systems such as nuclei or molecules, contribute to that body's mass, and hence act as sources of gravity".

This equivalence principle is impossible, except in gravitational field only.  Unless, otherwise outside energy supports and boosts energy it never equates mass.  It is true that mass and energy are two different physical quantities and enjoys unique qualities.  Mass is less dynamic and mostly static.  Where as energy is more dynamic. Each and every mass carry's certain amount of energy and it varies product to product.  This energy, stored inside mass gives dynamism and it start attracting electromagnetic waves in the open area.  However it is far limited and it mainly depends on the external source of energy. 

Here, on the earth where there is huge concentration of fundamental energy, whatever experiments we are doing is influenced by the gravity field.  Suppose we are sending light on a metal, here light itself is being influenced by the gravity.  In the absence of gravity, there is no scope for light at all.  Small amount of electrons  released by you has no capacity to create a light ray.  Small amount of energy released by us, creates pressure on the existing rays and a light ray is formed.  Further reflection against metal is being done by the gravity waves only.  For this gravity waves, metal is an important object only.  When light is forcussed, metal is excited and absorbs upto certain amount of energy and there after electrons start taking a different shift and already existing rays in the opposite direction are high lighted.

If we keep this in mind in our research, in my view quantum theory will take a different approach.

Yours
Psreddy   
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 23/10/2016 18:45:00
Mr Alex,
Thank you, for the elaborate explanation. 

Well, i think your feelings are affected. 

Actually, whatever you have said is within the frame work of general relative only. 

Here, every thing presented by me is simply mine ideas only and they have no relevance to your
explanation to jerrygg.

Yours
Psreddy



Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 23/10/2016 21:59:11
Mr. pasala,

  I do not believe mass has any energy. Energy is of space. c is of space and move electrons. This is the only way electrons and photons can be confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. We can not believe mass can move at c if relativity is correct. A photon can have no mass from the atom.

You cannot get a photon moving faster then the electron that produced it if fundamental energy is from mass.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/10/2016 22:05:48
Mr Alex,
Thank you, for the elaborate explanation. 

Well, i think your feelings are affected. 

Actually, whatever you have said is within the frame work of general relative only. 

Here, every thing presented by me is simply mine ideas only and they have no relevance to your
explanation to jerrygg.

Yours
Psreddy

 Perhaps you're correct, yes you're correct, I have a big limitation for my perception, there is no way I can produce math for those toughs, although if I share the thoughts with other people that actually can figure out the math, maybe one of those can come up with something.
 No necessity to happen immediately, no need to quote as reference, can happen years from the moment they read or maybe the next half hour, at the other hand may not happen at all, could mean nothing...
 I do not know how to bridge toughs with formulas, I do understand what they mean, I just do not know how to focused on those letters for more than a few minutes. Al tough if one describable the equations as what they mean, the way most of the other members do, I can easily visualize it "happening" within my thoughts, and even when I'm able to visualize a different possibility, I lack the attention necessary to built the math, so the only option left is to share...
 I got a lot of general knowledge, never had the necessity to advance much further on a specific mater, although as days pass by one and another piece of technical information I "borrow" from each post, specialty in new theories topic, goes adding and increasing those glimpses, as much more, the better..
 My apparently necessity with alternative incoherent "magic" comes from the fact that to try to glimpse the logical visualization within my thoughts, I need to know as many possible information about what defnetly cannot be out here and a short explanation of why.
 I need as much incorrect information as possible, to get closer of what "could happen", otherwise I do not know that see, nor even how to compose it...

This is the main reason behind my apparently attestments and false claims, I can guarantee that I'm correcting and revising them as fast as I'm typing the words...
  For those, like you who actually understand the math behind those equations, the best way to do it is to ask on a proper manner, for you have the understanding, the tools for it...
 I'm a simple Worker, I do study a lot but using my free time and my own methodology, in fact I never come to finish the last half year on high school, not until I reached 25 years old, not using as a excuse but as for explanation of why my claims are not reality, are in fact question, it's the way I trained my mind to operate, constant meditation... I sort of feel envy when other people come up with complex formulas, for I do understand most of it, although I can never hope to built or correct any, reason why you'll not find a single commentary of my under any topic that involves complex equations...

 Just a few mounts here, thanks for the kindness of all of you, into answer and correct my misinterpretations, I can each day more easily understand what is not correct on the frame...
 As the gin-clear concept of The Box, the Box experiment itself within its meaning, the energy base of jerrybb, this member seems to have a great piratical knowledge of energy and particles he's an EE after all, he also does a lot of question which is very helpful, for each member question is one thing else on the frame, and also one thing less(impossible to be) to worry about, the commitment of GOC with relativity along with the concept of fundamental energy, his commitment is so great and he seems to only have problems with mainstream, so it's very helpful tho have someone "stood" within relativity, that is basically our only stick at the moment. Most of users with great knowledge tend to be impatient with ignorance, and even those who actually answer, seems to be able to do it only once at best, for specific reasons, as much as one, as myself, keeps coming up with different possibilities formed within my toughs, he dispose to correct it, and more explain why not...
You seems to work in the same way, although you're seems to sound too much open to new ideas, I did read your post more than once, as I do every day with all the others... Do not get me wrong, you add information as anyone else, but you do not fight back the claims I usually do, witch is much appreciated, although, for someone with my "actual" knowledge of universe, provide me the right answers I not as effective as correct my own mistakes...

  For an example, today I set a new solar panel at my roof, i sit there for almost an our, luckily I live on a German colony here in South Brazil so we have a lot of opportunities to do anything without concern with society, with is very helpful... So, I sit there for about an hour, observing the panel, changing the format of the ray of light was hitting it, "even considering what a ray is? Is correct to refer to it as "a" ray of light? and if so is correct to assume that light here is formed by many rays of light, or by a single ray of light? What's light? Electrons being released from one side of the cell to the other? Photons hitting the electrons? New electrons forming from nowhere? What about that nonsense of photonic mass and carrier, what if the "shape" photon does release the energy into the matter that for the cell and a electron is ejected for the energy contained on the carrier was transferred and assumed the place of the electron? What is an electron "in fact"? What of the surroundings of the cell if a carrier of light spinning at C transferred its energy, would the missing energy on the "shape" of the photon to disband back into the "aether"? Whould than the abrupt stop of the spinning C, cause dilatation of the space"ripples" where the carrier was disbanded? Perhaps heat(irradiation) is related to that? Isn't heat energy of space that different from an atom, or exactly for not have an atom available nor energy enough to join, could be heat energy of space without a point of reference? heat!? I know what it is, to the point sounds logical to refute this idea and search other possibilities! Could be heat the natural "temperature/state" of space when it is not at C? Nearby particles and atomic structure, due to their mass? Mass?
 In resume i mentally visualize the ray of light hitting the panel, even projecting myself to watch myself watching the panel in order to visualize how the ray, rays, or "light" have reached my eyes...

For this very reason fell free to comment on every single over explained explanation, I do it so to be able to better express a tough due my lack of mathematical representation. The reason and only expectation behind those explanations, is not to be correct, is both a gamble that someone else will read, and think about it, and harvest knowledge to my own visualization...

 As for your question, i cannot prove nor be sure, but I do frame that the answers, the missing piece, is right bellow our feet, it's not an obsession, everything I glimpse Saturn orbiting the sun, how and why Neptune exchange orbits, why there is gravity, anyway a sum of everything it almost 90% of the time, and its a lot of time, it always point me the center of those objected, and perhaps my subjection or not always tend to point back to the "photonic everything about it", all the rest has even if incorrect has being corrected since than for it can be visualized, I'm not focused on light, we know what it must be, I want to become able to complete an logical orbit around the sun, this without in half of the way earth do not fade, explode, desperate, stop, implode, become a sun, any many other possible outcomes...
 As much one explain why not something, anything, longer earths survive within my toughs...
 For this also considering if the very existence of planets, even if I'm alive because of it, is a good thing at all, is this what this "place" was meant to be, are galaxies a post graveyard of massive objects, or under the right conditions a super massive black hole is able to "become something else", for this also considering that it could also be causality that follows the rules, considering also for this that the physical laws we know could also be causality, left overs, all this happening at the afterwards of a super nova expansion of a older hyper massive sun, that exploded all those planets we now call stars, given the scale what seems to be billions of years to us, due our universal speed of light, could comprehend within hours on an past higher scale, is there past? Past?  What about that big time dimension he was wondering about? Parallel with physical?
See? there is no much left to me once I cannot express this with math, but words.

The logical answer is to spend most of my time here reading on silence, and I have to admit, here in my country we do not have any good source of updated information, not even close to the one, you guys make available here...
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 23/10/2016 22:24:12
Mr. pasala,

  I do not believe mass has any energy. Energy is of space. c is of space and move electrons. This is the only way electrons and photons can be confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. We can not believe mass can move at c if relativity is correct. A photon can have no mass from the atom.

You cannot get a photon moving faster then the electron that produced it if fundamental energy is from mass.

 Let me ask you, all this you state falls in into the question:
 What if space seems to be empty and massless right because it is at C, what if the atom has not its energy from its own, what if the atom is formed(on space) by the interactions particles, by gathering together sort of, slowing down C...
 The proper question should be, consider for a minute that mass is from space, what are the chances of mass of any given object, dark mass, any mass, being "space when it is not at C" due the presence of atomic structure? Supposing that the electron is infact "borrowing" its energy from C(Photon) on some sort of cooperation, as the electron is constantly borrowing the spinning C, from the photon(space) and on this process, to be releasing space energy(trough the photon), in the same frame as the photon has it's acceleration borrowed by the electron, it goes out from the state of C, and this change on C, only within the presence of atomic structure, as the source of mass as we know?

 What if dark matter, is the effects of all the matter (including gas and particles) gathered on a certain open area, such particles would not posses quality of light to be visualized, could be that the presence of too much distributed particles, occasional to remove space from the state of C just on a specific area? And the difference between dark matter and the mass of any matter, as being only the possibility of being visualized in open space? I mean you can't look inside a piece of rock or any given object made of matter, how to know than that dark matter isn't mass(its effects)visually exposed?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 24/10/2016 23:19:37
Mass is created in suns from fusion by a process similar to what you expressed as dark mass. Fission is the opposite process to change mass beck to dark mass energy.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 30/10/2016 15:00:06
About time dilation:

It is true that Einstein proved in his General relativity that time is not a universal law of physics and it dilates from
place to place, it may be due to gravity or velocity.  He has taken two places, one point A on the top of a hill station and the other, point B low lying area.  He compared ticking of clocks at the both places and found variations. 

Here, time dilation is due to gravity.  On the high hill area where gravity is weak, ticking of clock is faster. Where as on the low lying area, where gravity force is high ticking is slow.  This is due to gravity effect on the clock. 

But, here we have to remember one important point that high hill area is not  free from gravity.  It is also reeling under gravity pressure only.  But when we move to low lying area, gravity pressure/force increases.  Due to this pressure/force, ticking of clock is slowed down. 

Let us presume that we are in a zero state of gravity.  Here, how clock works is an important point.  In zero gravity, everything is in free state.  Suppose if we are using atomic clock.  Here, basic function of atomic explosion is controlled by the gravity.   Electrons released due to atomic explosion, have no control over atomic clock. Here we have to remember one important point that without gravity force/pressure electrons never splits automatically.

In fact very functioning of the atomic clock depends on the gravity.  It is in the grip of gravity.  Existing energy rays in the open area, have already deeply penetrated into the clock.  When the electrons are freed, they joins the existing rays and pushes them in upward direction.  It is due to this force/pressure that clock is working. 

In low lying area, where there is high gravitational field, pressure/force on the clock is increased.  Energy rays in the open area are more potential when compared to the inside the clock.  So, naturally pressure/force towards clock is more when compared to pressure/force of electrons.  Here electrons have to gain more strength, when compared to outside pressure to come out and to move the clock. 

This is the reason why at the centre of earth, gravity is less when compared to poles. 

Einstein used this function simply to compare how time dilates from place to place.  If we understood, "what exactly gravity is", so many things will come out.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 31/10/2016 15:10:43
Quote
About time dilation:

It is true that Einstein proved in his General relativity that time is not a universal law of physics and it dilates from
place to place, it may be due to gravity or velocity.  He has taken two places, one point A on the top of a hill station and the other, point B low lying area.  He compared ticking of clocks at the both places and found variations.
True

Quote
Here, time dilation is due to gravity.  On the high hill area where gravity is weak, ticking of clock is faster. Where as on the low lying area, where gravity force is high ticking is slow.  This is due to gravity effect on the clock.
 
This is false. g=a in equivalence between SR and GR. Gravity is stronger on the hill not weaker. You are confusing increased dilation with gravity and that is just wrong. Many scientists view this the same as you do. In GR dilation is the greatest in the center of mass and reduces to the surface of mass. You would be weightless in the center of the earth no acceleration at all. More dilation of space energy the slower the tick rate. Clocks would tick the slowest in the center of the earth.

Here is the SR equivalence to show gravity is not due to acceleration. Acceleration of a space ship causes gravity and the increase in speed slows your clock. The clock remains slow with vector velocity. Now you decelerate and produce gravity. Your clock speeds up in gravity until you are at relative rest from the starting point.

So increased position in more dilation in GR reduces potential energy by reducing attraction. Dilation causes gravity. That is Einstein's curved space.

Quote
But, here we have to remember one important point that high hill area is not  free from gravity.  It is also reeling under gravity pressure only.  But when we move to low lying area, gravity pressure/force increases.  Due to this pressure/force, ticking of clock is slowed down. 

Once again backwards gravity attraction is lower in the valley and greater dilation of potential energy of space.

Quote
Let us presume that we are in a zero state of gravity.  Here, how clock works is an important point.  In zero gravity, everything is in free state.  Suppose if we are using atomic clock.  Here, basic function of atomic explosion is controlled by the gravity.   Electrons released due to atomic explosion, have no control over atomic clock. Here we have to remember one important point that without gravity force/pressure electrons never splits automatically


Fission creates its own temporary dilation of space.

Quote
In fact very functioning of the atomic clock depends on the gravity.  It is in the grip of gravity.  Existing energy rays in the open area, have already deeply penetrated into the clock.  When the electrons are freed, they joins the existing rays and pushes them in upward direction.  It is due to this force/pressure that clock is working.

Gravity starts with the very first atom and electron. The electron flows out into space and dilation decreases causing more resistance to the electron in the form of friction. This causes the electron to curve when the velocity reaches the resistance point where it returns to more dilated space. The electron returns to the proton. This pushes out another electron for the cycle to start again. More atoms increase the total dilation of space and cause an increase in the electron travel distance. The creation of light with the longer travel distance is the red shift.

Quote
In low lying area, where there is high gravitational field, pressure/force on the clock is increased.  Energy rays in the open area are more potential when compared to the inside the clock.  So, naturally pressure/force towards clock is more when compared to pressure/force of electrons.  Here electrons have to gain more strength, when compared to outside pressure to come out and to move the clock. 

This is the reason why at the centre of earth, gravity is less when compared to poles.

Gravity attraction is non existent in the center of the earth.


Quote
Einstein used this function simply to compare how time dilates from place to place.  If we understood, "what exactly gravity is", so many things will come out.

On this we agree
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 31/10/2016 15:40:41
Gravitational lensing:

"Well, gravitational lens bends to the maximum light that passes closest to its center, and to a minimum light that travels furthest from its center. Gravitational lens has no single focal point, but a focal line. The term "lens" in the context of gravitational light deflection was first used by O.J. Lodge, who remarked that it is "not permissible to say that the solar gravitational field acts like a lens, for it has no focal length". If the (light) source, the massive lensing object, and the observer lie in a straight line, the original light source will appear as a ring around the massive lensing object.

Even before his breakthrough in the formulation of general relativity, Einstein realized that due to light deflection it was also possible that a mass could deflect light along two different paths causing the observer to see multiple images of a single source; this effect would make the mass act as a kind of gravitational lens.

Gravitational lenses act equally on all kinds of electromagnetic radiation, not just visible light. Weak lensing effects are being studied for the cosmic microwave background as well as galaxy surveys. Strong lenses have been observed in radio and x-ray regimes as well. If a strong lens produces multiple images, there will be a relative time delay between two paths: that is, in one image the lensed object will be observed before the other image".
 
If light is distorted near the gravitational field means, it may be due to attraction or force acting against it.  When a strong light ray passes earth, it will bend near earth and an arc in the shape of earth is formed.  When the light ray reaches near earth, it gets touch with the gravitational field and gets merged in it along the line and an arc is developed.  Since the light ray, near the earth is merged in gravitational field, light is boosted temporarily and arc is developed.

When the gravitational field affects strong light passing outside the earth, what about inside earth.  Earth is not free from gravity.  Why do not this gravity influences light.  If it is so means in what way and how it influences. 

It is true that gravity is influencing each and everything on this earth.  At present we are of the opinion that natural magnets emits light.  Actually natural magnets have got no capacity to emmit light and it is due to with the support of gravity only. 

In the case of electro magnetic circles also, we are of the opinion that they are self generated.  When electricity is supplied through copper or aluminum cable, a magnetic circle is formed around it.  How these circles are formed.  At present we are of the opinion that, due to obstruction in the passage electrons are moving out into the open area and it is forming as a circle. 

When strong gravity waves is influencing each and everything, why do not they influence these cables carrying electricity.  Strong electro magnetic circles around the cable is due to gravity only.  For the gravity waves, cables are also its objects only.  Electrons passing on the surface of the cable are influenced, looses control, joins the gravity waves and a circles is developed.

At present we are of the opinion, if we switch on a light it gives light.  But it is not at all correct.  We are sending small amount of electrons, but we are getting lot of light, and  it due to the support of gravity only.  This is the reason, why light varies from place to place. 

If strong energy beam is send into open area, a spectrum is developed.  This is also with the help of gravity only.

Light rays coming from sun and moon are not free from the influence of gravity.  After facing hydrosphere, strong light rays coming from sun are weakened.  When they enters earth gravity, gravity waves joins these weak rays and they are boosted.  This is the reason, at the centre of the earth where strong gravity waves are present, light is also more.  Where as at the poles, sun rays fails to get support from gravity waves, and light formation is weak.

Yours
Psreddy 


Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 31/10/2016 16:36:24
Quote
"Well, gravitational lens bends to the maximum light that passes closest to its center, and to a minimum light that travels furthest from its center. Gravitational lens has no single focal point, but a focal line. The term "lens" in the context of gravitational light deflection was first used by O.J. Lodge, who remarked that it is "not permissible to say that the solar gravitational field acts like a lens, for it has no focal length". If the (light) source, the massive lensing object, and the observer lie in a straight line, the original light source will appear as a ring around the massive lensing object.

The reason for light bending around a massive body is dilation of energy like a onion ring. Light wants to follow the path of dilation it was on and that path curves around the body of mass. The focal point is in the center of mass where dilation is the greatest.

On to the real focal point in astronomy using galaxy lensing were the focal point is viewable with light, astronomers use one galaxy to magnify a galaxy behind. So the focal point of dilation is available under the correct circumstances.

Quote
Even before his breakthrough in the formulation of general relativity, Einstein realized that due to light deflection it was also possible that a mass could deflect light along two different paths causing the observer to see multiple images of a single source; this effect would make the mass act as a kind of gravitational lens

Yes but you need to understand the focal point is not visible so the image rotates around both sides due to the extreme bending of a body of mass.

Quote
When the gravitational field affects strong light passing outside the earth, what about inside earth.  Earth is not free from gravity.  Why do not this gravity influences light.  If it is so means in what way and how it influences.

Light created in dilation is red shifted and follows the curve of dilation which is indistinguishable from straight for us.

Quote
Gravitational lenses act equally on all kinds of electromagnetic radiation, not just visible light. Weak lensing effects are being studied for the cosmic microwave background as well as galaxy surveys. Strong lenses have been observed in radio and x-ray regimes as well. If a strong lens produces multiple images, there will be a relative time delay between two paths: that is, in one image the lensed object will be observed before the other image".

Yes energy of space carries all spectrum signals at c. Mass causes a resistance to c and c carries the propagation wave of that resistance at c.

Quote
When strong gravity waves is influencing each and everything, why do not they influence these cables carrying electricity.  Strong electro magnetic circles around the cable is due to gravity only.  For the gravity waves, cables are also its objects only.  Electrons passing on the surface of the cable are influenced, looses control, joins the gravity waves and a circles is developed.
There are Doppler waves in SR but gravity is dilation of space. While gravity is a gradient, it is not a wave. Doppler is just a propagation wave through space same as light.

Quote
At present we are of the opinion, if we switch on a light it gives light.  But it is not at all correct.  We are sending small amount of electrons, but we are getting lot of light, and  it due to the support of gravity only.  This is the reason, why light varies from place to place. 

Light as electron propagation violates Relativity.

Quote
If strong energy beam is send into open area, a spectrum is developed.  This is also with the help of gravity only.

While you cannot have mass without gravity that is not the cause of light.

Quote
Light rays coming from sun and moon are not free from the influence of gravity.  After facing hydrosphere, strong light rays coming from sun are weakened.  When they enters earth gravity, gravity waves joins these weak rays and they are boosted.  This is the reason, at the centre of the earth where strong gravity waves are present, light is also more.  Where as at the poles, sun rays fails to get support from gravity waves, and light formation is weak.

It appears you have trouble distinguishing reflection of light from creation of light. The center of the Earth has no gravity since g=a there is no attraction. Basically weightlessness due to maximum dilation of space energy. There is no potential attraction energy at that point.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 31/10/2016 16:55:42
Mr GOC,
Thank you,
"Gravity attraction is non existent in the center of the earth".

Simple correction to your statement, if there is no gravity then the things will float.  At the centre of the earth, where dilation of energy is more, it pushes existing gravitational waves, resulting in weak gravity.  It is not due to centrifugal force but due to dilation of energy only.

For others also:
These are new ideas proposed me within the frame work of new gravity theory proposed by me.  Most of them completely deviates from GR and SR and they have no relevance at all.  If further research is taken up in this angle, most of them will be proved.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 31/10/2016 17:23:33
I am a firm believer in Relativity.

Quote
Simple correction to your statement, if there is no gravity then the things will float.

That is the consequence of no attraction to a lower energy state if you follow Relativity.

Quote
At the centre of the earth, where dilation of energy is more, it pushes existing gravitational waves, resulting in weak gravity.

Differences in dilation is gravity. In the center of dilation there is no gravity. There are no gravity waves in GR. There are Doppler waves in SR that would appear as gravity waves. GR is just a gradient attraction to the center of gravitational masses lowest energy potential. No attraction in the center. Your mass becomes the center of gravity afloat in space same as outer space but less energy more dilated than outer space.

Quote
It is not due to centrifugal force but due to dilation of energy only

Mass gravity creates a dilation curve like an onion of gradient dilation to the center of mass. Centrifugal force is the creation of mass curving through the straight lines of space energy. The space energy resistance to the curve of mass creates attraction of mass from the front to the back of the curved position wanting to go in a straight line of space. A curve is a resistance to space energy. There is no such thing as a circle in 3d space.

Quote
These are new ideas proposed me within the frame work of new gravity theory proposed by me.  Most of them completely deviates from GR and SR and they have no relevance at all.  If further research is taken up in this angle, most of them will be proved.

Since relativity has never failed to explain an observation it is the mechanics of Relativity that need an explanation not yet another relativity denier without a understanding of relativity.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Alex Dullius Siqueira on 31/10/2016 21:41:12
Mr GOC,
Thank you,
"Gravity attraction is non existent in the center of the earth".

Simple correction to your statement, if there is no gravity then the things will float.  At the centre of the earth, where dilation of energy is more, it pushes existing gravitational waves, resulting in weak gravity.  It is not due to centrifugal force but due to dilation of energy only.

For others also:
These are new ideas proposed me within the frame work of new gravity theory proposed by me.  Most of them completely deviates from GR and SR and they have no relevance at all.  If further research is taken up in this angle, most of them will be proved.

Yours
Psreddy

I'm not deep in relativity as GOC. But even so, my first insight was almost everything he described, I did not follow equations or math, its just logic, and by erroneous conclusions, I started by reaching the same weightless concept... I just not sure how the sun perform his influence over this weightless inner core...

 GOC is there any chance that the sun "somehow" due its dilatation and our existence within its horizontal plate, be converting this weightless state of almost zero gravity into acceleration?
 I also visualize a inner core that should be floating, and the rest of the planet along with it.
 My doubt is what's the role of the sun on all this system patterns we do observe? I mean, why?
 Ignoring life, why do we need suns, or are suns the only meaning of the universe and planets causality?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 01/11/2016 02:40:11
   
Quote
GOC is there any chance that the sun "somehow" due its dilatation and our existence within its horizontal plate, be converting this weightless state of almost zero gravity into acceleration?

The only issue with dilation is the ratio where the dilation between the earth and the sun is the least. Of course the dilation of the sun extends to the end of the solar system And contributes to the total galaxy dilation lens. On the Earth scale within the Earth the dilation only affects mass on the earth for gravity. The dilation of the sun affects the earth scale body. Out in space away from a planet the suns dilation gradient is very slight for the size of a human so the attraction would be insignificant to that difference in scale. Earth's dilation while slightly affected by the gradient of the sun is similar to the moons affect on the ocean lifting the ocean six inches to produce the tides. The sun only moves the apparent center of gravity slightly towards the sun. The sun does not cause gravity on the Earth.

Quote
Ignoring life, why do we need suns, or are suns the only meaning of the universe and planets causality?

Hydrogen gas expelled from super nova's could be the seeds for new star formation. A star has a life cycle. It starts with hydrogen. Then fusion produces hydrogen from space energy. The fusion produces higher elements until either a red giant or super nova is produced and the life cycle ends. It depends on the mass of the sun when first produced. That determines its end.

Half of the stars in the galaxy are binary. I suspect a difference in star pair masses cause one to blow creating planets from the blown star. I find it difficult to attribute higher elements in planets during hydrogen star formation. Our sun wobbles through space like it used to have a companion. he Earth might be part of that companion. Pure speculation.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 13/11/2016 17:42:33
Well, thank you mr.GOC

You are having excellent knowledge in GR and SR.  But i do not know why it is, my mind never accepted them and has taken a 'U' turn and a bad notion developed in my mind that if you steps into the shoes of GR and SR, then you will become a piece of a big cloth.  Actually i had not studied them perfectly.  But it is true, to wage a war you cannot do it with empty hands. 

Ok, let us discuss one simple and known incident.  Suppose if we threw an electric bulb, which contains vacuum, it break with big noise.  It is known reason that it is due to atmosphere pressure.  There is heavy pressure in the open area and it tries to occupy empty space of the electric bulb, where pressure is low. 

In another example to test the power of dark energy or vacuum, things are taken differently.  Let us take water in a bucket, close the bucket by another empty bucket.  Now remove air, in between 1st one and 2nd one.  Water in the bucket escalates.  Here we are taking the power of vacuum as reason for escalation of water. 

In the 1st instance, outside atmosphere pressure is taken as reason.  Where as in the 2nd instance it is the vacuum power  counted. In the second example atmosphere pressure is ignored completely. When air is removed, atmosphere pressure on the water is lost and it escalates.

Suppose if we take the electric bulb into space and break it, it makes no noise at all.  In the case of water also, if the same test is done in space, where outside pressure is low, there is no scope for any escalation of water.

Here we have to remember on important point that vacuum or dark energy has got no power/strength at all.  It gains strength due to the outside pressure only.
 
ABOUT BLACK HOLES:
According to General Relativity, heavier and denser objects like planets, stars, and galaxies produce a greater warp in space, in essence giving them a stronger gravitational pull. A black hole is a hole in the fabric of space-time, like a deep well into which matter and energy may fall but may never exit.

But, actually not much is known about Black holes, how they are formed, but existence is confirmed. 

In my view Black holes are also due to the reason of high and low pressure effects only.  When two neutron stars, existing nearby dilates huge amount of fundamental energy into the space, it start spreading to wide area.  These two forces, coming from different directions, tries to meet at any one place.  Here, dark energy and dark matter raises and it takes a well shape. This is the reason, how and why black holes are formed on Sun.

Ok, let us study some of the things happening on earth only.  During summer season, low pressure develops and start drawing matter and energy.  Slowly, after some time it neutralizes.  For that, cyclones are also due to this reason only. 

Actually we have to remember one important point that these low pressures are developing due to atmosphere pressure only. In fact atmosphere is not created by these low pressures, but they are created by the atmosphere.

Schwarzschild found that if you squeezed enough mass into a small enough volume, its gravity would become almost infinitely strong. It would warp the space around it so strongly that nothing could escape from it.  Here, we have to keep in mind that this is done on earth, where there is strong gravity.  When the mass is squeezed in a small volume, it start emitting fundamental energy into open area, due to gravity, a strong gravity field is developed.

So, we have to keep in mind that Black holes are not creators of this universe, but created due to the forces in the universe.  Due to the presence of strong fundamental energy, it exerts strong gravitational pull.  But its effect is limited up to certain specific area only.  Suppose if a cyclone is developed nearby England, its effect is up to England and another country adjacent to UK only.  For that, most of its effect is up to certain area only. 

Yours
Psreddy 


Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 14/11/2016 14:36:15
Quote
You are having excellent knowledge in GR and SR.  But i do not know why it is, my mind never accepted them and has taken a 'U' turn and a bad notion developed in my mind that if you steps into the shoes of GR and SR, then you will become a piece of a big cloth.  Actually i had not studied them perfectly.  But it is true, to wage a war you cannot do it with empty hands. 

Ok, let us discuss one simple and known incident.  Suppose if we threw an electric bulb, which contains vacuum, it break with big noise.  It is known reason that it is due to atmosphere pressure.  There is heavy pressure in the open area and it tries to occupy empty space of the electric bulb, where pressure is low. 

In another example to test the power of dark energy or vacuum, things are taken differently.  Let us take water in a bucket, close the bucket by another empty bucket.  Now remove air, in between 1st one and 2nd one.  Water in the bucket escalates.  Here we are taking the power of vacuum as reason for escalation of water. 

In the 1st instance, outside atmosphere pressure is taken as reason.  Where as in the 2nd instance it is the vacuum power  counted. In the second example atmosphere pressure is ignored completely. When air is removed, atmosphere pressure on the water is lost and it escalates.

Suppose if we take the electric bulb into space and break it, it makes no noise at all.  In the case of water also, if the same test is done in space, where outside pressure is low, there is no scope for any escalation of water.

Here we have to remember on important point that vacuum or dark energy has got no power/strength at all.  It gains strength due to the outside pressure only.

I have an advantage to my way of thinking. To me Electrons do not move by themselves. That would be magic. So if they do not move by them selves than quantum mechanics moves them. The dimension of quantum mechanics is below the electron. It has to be a quantum spin state because vector motion would violate relativity as Einstein pointed out. I look at the universe as motion of time is from space and not mass because energy to move electrons have to come from space. The electron and photon are confounded in every frame to produce the same measurement of light in a vacuum. This can be shown using plane geometry of vector velocity. So what ever you want to call it time, dark energy or Spacetime all energy comes from space. Unless you believe in magic of course. Time measurement begins at planks distance of motion. Motion = time = energy. Macro mass energy is a conduit from space spin energy. The space spin pattern rotates electrons in vector motion. While this is my opinion it follows relativity and combines quantum mechanics with Relativity as mechanics and not just postulates.

The pressure of atmosphere and the attraction of gravity combine to create a sphere in liquids. Gravity being a dilation of space energy to the center of mass and mass attracted to the lower energy density of space.

Quote
According to General Relativity, heavier and denser objects like planets, stars, and galaxies produce a greater warp in space, in essence giving them a stronger gravitational pull. A black hole is a hole in the fabric of space-time, like a deep well into which matter and energy may fall but may never exit.

I view this slightly different. Photons bend around black holes never falling into black holes. Photons follow the curvature of space energy. There is no energy in black holes. Time = energy so there is no time in black holes. Density of a proton to electron is a marble to a football field. A black hole is a football field full of marbles for density. Curves space to the max. But it is still the inverse square of the distance.

Quote
But, actually not much is known about Black holes, how they are formed, but existence is confirmed. 

If you look at the universe through a hammer everything looks like a nail. If you look at the universe as atoms what would you expect?

Quote
In my view Black holes are also due to the reason of high and low pressure effects only.  When two neutron stars, existing nearby dilates huge amount of fundamental energy into the space, it start spreading to wide area.  These two forces, coming from different directions, tries to meet at any one place.  Here, dark energy and dark matter raises and it takes a well shape. This is the reason, how and why black holes are formed on Sun.

My view of course is changing energy density of space. Fusion is absorbing energy of space to create electrons, protons and neutrons. Mass comes from space but not as a BB. Suns fuel themselves while creating a life cycle of heaver elements from dark mass energy by compression.

Quote
Ok, let us study some of the things happening on earth only.  During summer season, low pressure develops and start drawing matter and energy.  Slowly, after some time it neutralizes.  For that, cyclones are also due to this reason only.

 There are two sides to energy. All energy comes from space would suggest macro energy comes from friction with micro quantum energy.

Quote
Schwarzschild found that if you squeezed enough mass into a small enough volume, its gravity would become almost infinitely strong. It would warp the space around it so strongly that nothing could escape from it.  Here, we have to keep in mind that this is done on earth, where there is strong gravity.  When the mass is squeezed in a small volume, it start emitting fundamental energy into open area, due to gravity, a strong gravity field is developed.

While I agree with the affects I do not agree mass emits fundamental energy and only changes energy density of space energy.

 
Quote
So, we have to keep in mind that Black holes are not creators of this universe, but created due to the forces in the universe.  Due to the presence of strong fundamental energy, it exerts strong gravitational pull.

To me of course it is the loss of fundamental density of energy causing gravity. Fundamental energy being c.





Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 15/11/2016 17:01:59
Mr GOC
As said by you: 
"Mass gravity creates a dilation curve like an onion of gradient dilation to the center of mass. Centrifugal force is the creation of mass curving through the straight lines of space energy. The space energy resistance to the curve of mass creates attraction of mass from the front to the back of the curved position wanting to go in a straight line of space. A curve is a resistance to space energy".

It is wonder to see, when mass creates/develops gravity curve, what the space energy is doing.  Actually space energy is the least one. 

There is every need for us to discuss, how mass creates gravity curve.  Basically earth is not free from gravity. Total mass Micro to macro is being influenced by this gravity.  Our research/focus must start from zero gravity.  But Einstein started his research basing on the existing conditions.  Apple is already pushed and is not going to be pushed or may be pushed by the space energy.

Initially, Einstein ruled out attraction of mass as gravity.  He carried out number of researches and came to a conclusion that fundamental energy as the root cause of gravity.  But where is the source. Naturally he looked at space and linked it to space energy.  In fact, some of the important theories such as E=MC2 mislead him.   Actually he forgeted that this is being done in gravity field.   

It is true that:
"Physicists understand gravity in great detail and with great accuracy, but they suspect they’re missing something—something big enough to change or even unify our most comprehensive theories of the universe".

The above statement is 100% correct.  If the gravity problem is solved than it will answer so many unanswered questions.  If an atom bomb, 1 tonne is detonated so much energy is coming out, basing on this Einstein developed E=MC2.  This is possible due to gravity only.
 
Actually physicists tried to draw a straight line of research, but they have drawn a circle and where we are means, we are there only.

Yours
Psreddy.



Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 16/11/2016 00:23:59
Quote
It is wonder to see, when mass creates/develops gravity curve, what the space energy is doing.

Gravity starts with the first atom. The electron moves away from the proton into less dilated space. The proton causes dilation of space. The distance is relative. A proton being a marble compared to a football field distance the electron travels. The energy density increase beyond the football field curves the electron back to the proton.

Quote
There is every need for us to discuss, how mass creates gravity curve.

Space energy c moves the electrons of mass. In moving electrons energy is conserved by dilation of the space energy. The energy per volume of space becomes less. Less dense fundamental energy. Expanding the mass relative to the increased electron distance traveled. This allows a different tick rate of your clock but remains relative to the distance the photon travels.

Quote
Basically earth is not free from gravity. Total mass Micro to macro is being influenced by this gravity.
Micro mass is that which becomes dilated. The dilation of space (curve) tells macro mass how to move.

Quote
Total mass Micro to macro is being influenced by this gravity.  Our research/focus must start from zero gravity.  But Einstein started his research basing on the existing conditions.  Apple is already pushed and is not going to be pushed or may be pushed by the space energy.

There is a gradient pull to the center of mass. The center of mass has the highest dilation. Mass is attracted to the more dilated space. Very simple.

Quote
Initially, Einstein ruled out attraction of mass as gravity.  He carried out number of researches and came to a conclusion that fundamental energy as the root cause of gravity.  But where is the source. Naturally he looked at space and linked it to space energy.  In fact, some of the important theories such as E=MC2 mislead him.

E=c of space. C x electron movement =CM. So c x CM=    E=MC^2

Quote
It is true that:
"Physicists understand gravity in great detail and with great accuracy, but they suspect they’re missing something—something big enough to change or even unify our most comprehensive theories of the universe".

Quantum mechanics move electrons and spin at c. Quantum mechanics is the cause of Relativity. Quantum mechanics is uniform through out the universe.

Quote
If an atom bomb, 1 tonne is detonated so much energy is coming out, basing on this Einstein developed E=MC2.  This is possible due to gravity only.

 I suspect this is incorrect because in space E=c.

Quote
Actually physicists tried to draw a straight line of research, but they have drawn a circle and where we are means, we are there only.

Yes science today is traveling in circles and will until it is understood that something moves the electrons. They do not move themselves.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 26/11/2016 14:19:44
Mr. GOC,
I think we are moving away from the basic idea of "what exactly gravity is". 

Ok, let us first decide, what exactly gravity is, and then move to other things.

Gravitation is the attraction of two objects with mass.  Newton's inverse square law states:
"The gravitational attraction force between two point masses is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of their  distance. The force is always attractive and acts along the line joining them".

Newton extended this principle as Universal law of gravitation, saying:
 "I deduced that the forces which keep the planets in their orbs must [be] reciprocally as the squares of their distances from the centers about which they revolve: and thereby compared the force requisite to keep the Moon in her Orb with the force of gravity at the surface of the Earth"

It is true that any two similar masses attracts each other.  Inverse square law mainly describes the process by which it is happening.  Actually Newton generalised it and he did not specify the distance upto which this attraction works. Ok, let us assume that there are two masses, m1 and m2.  It is true that these two masses attracts each other.  But,  gravity start working only when two masses comes near to each other.   

They have named this attraction of masses as gravity.  But this attraction is least one. However it is playing key role in the existence and functioning of various things in the universe.  It is due to this force  that water molecules are keeping together,  we are able to get minerals at one place.  In fact this force is keeping the planet together. 

But its attraction is far limited.  As long as the apple is in the tree, this attractive force has no role to play.  When the apple touches earth than gravity start working. 

Newton's theory up to inverse square law  is 100%  correct.  But, universal law of gravitation  is not incorrect.  Actually Newton extended his inverse square law, as universal law of gravitation without any base.  If the Newton's universal law of gravitation is laid on a perfect foundation than there is no scope for Einstein's theory or other theories.  Einstein utilised this gap perfectly and carried out number of experiments, but he could not locate "Original source" and taken us to a different world and mesmarised scientific world with his writings.   

Einstein has taken a different approach:
As per GR:
"Gravity is not as a force but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy".

Einstein realised that attraction of masses is far limited and he did not accepted Universal law of gravitation.  He carried out number of experiments, gravitational time dilation, gravitational lensing, gravitational red shift of light.  Soon, he realised that it is the energy momentum as the reason for gravity on earth.  But he could not find the source and moved to spacetime.

01  Gravitational time dilation:  Einstien carried out number of experiments on time dilation at different places.   He found, time dilating differently at different places.  While carrying out these experiments, he ignored that he is doing this in a gravity field and he is measuring variations in gravity only.  Well, Newton knew that gravity is already working and it is pulling the apple, but Einstein looked differently and has taken relativity as the cause. 

02  Gravitational lensing:  Through his experiments, Einstien proved that light bent near the gravity field.  But he forget that we are already in the gravity field and it is influencing each and everything including light.  Gravitational lensing is going on the earth continuously.

03  Dark energy:  While carrying out these experiments also they have forget that they are doing these experiments in a gravity field and it is influencing it.  It is true that 75% of the universe is covered by Dark energy, and if it is having that much strength means, it would have been different and the very existence of universe itself will be in question.  Actually water in the bucket is not influenced by the Dark energy, but water is relaxed, in the absence of pressure and raises and pressure inside water tries to occupy the gap.

As per General relativity curvature of the space time is decided by mass. In other words mass tells space time how to curve. Newton's law of gravitation clearly says gravitation is the attraction of two masses, which is known to us, and it is appearing before us.  Where as Einstein's curvature of space time is an imagination and its presence is not known.  For quite long time it is a mystery, whether space time is a curved one or horizontal. 

CURVATURE OF SPACE TIME:
Ok, now let us discuss, on the curvature of space time.

For me, quite long time, it is a basic doubt 'how mass decides curvature of space'.  It is true that Einstein's theories are not baseless, and must have been developed taking into certain practical implications.

Well, recently while giving a reply, Mr.GOC:
"Mass gravity creates a dilation curve like an onion of gradient dilation to the center of mass. Centrifugal force is the creation of mass curving through the straight lines of space energy. The space energy resistance to the curve of mass creates attraction of mass from the front to the back of the curved position wanting to go in a straight line of space. A curve is a resistance to space energy.

How mass dilates energy:
Actually, we know how much energy mass posses.  How this small amount of energy comes out and forms as a curve.  If the energy has to create a curve means, it must be freed from the atoms.  But energy remaining within atom, a curve is formed.

We have to remember one important point that we are already in the gravity field and therefore mass acts differently.  It is fully under the influence of gravity.  It is true that earth is dilating lot of energy into the open area and there is permanent "Energy Base" or potential energy on this earth.  Due to the climate, energy dilated by earth is not moving out.  Hydrosphere present in the space is acting against this "Energy base" and it is undergoing lot of stress.  Each ray of energy is undergoing lot of stress,  and in turn it is accelerating against mass.

In fact, earth is fully in the grip of energy base.  Earth is not rotating, but being made to rotate by the gravity waves. Earth rotation means, it is gravity waves, hydrosphere and everything.  Energy rays in the open area are not present loosely, they are present with lot of stress/force. It is influencing micro to macro mass.  In fact it is penetrating deep into the entropy of the mass.  However this concentration

varies according to mass, depending upon the entropy of the mass and photon structure of the mass.  Fundamental energy in the open area, due to force, penetrates, disturbs the internal energy of the mass, and when it exceeds internal capacity, a part of which comes out, and a curve in the shape of mass is developed.  This is the gravity of the mass.

Well, atoms of the atom bomb are not free from this gravity.  Due to the pressure, gravity waves are already deeply penetrated into the atoms and electromagnetic waves are already present in that area.  When an atom is detonated, energy dilates, pushes existing energy rays and these rays gets charged.  If another atom is split, some more energy rays gets charged  at that particular place.  It results in the boosting of  energy and other atoms start detonating automatically and this is chain reaction.

At the dawn of 20th century, lot of research was going, on the explosion of atom bomb.  Einstein was surprised to see, dilation of so much energy, when an atom is split.  It is true that originally an atom contains very small amount of energy and naturally, when it is detonated,  it has no capacity to make any wonders.  But release of huge energy, surprised scientists.  Actually it is big wonder to all the researchers at that time.  Einstein presumed that there are sub atoms within the atom and they are detonated later.  Basing on this, he proposed E=MC2. 
But this is incorrect.  Actually they have forget that they are doing this research in a gravity field and it is influencing everything. 

The best way to test it, explode a grenade in the open area, check the amount of energy released by it, and explode another grenade in deep caves where gravity is weak, and now check the difference.  Suppose if you explode same grenade on the moon, where climate is weak, you cannot get similar results.  For that if you explode, same grenade in space where energy exists in free state, results are weak and also it is not straight, but spreads to all sides equally. 

This is also the best test for the "What exactly gravity is" proposed by me.

What exactly gravity is:
In my view attraction of two masses may be  termed  as "Gravity".   But the pressure/force, being experienced by us on the earth is different one and this cannot be called as "Gravity".  We have named this pressure as  "Climate force". 

Basically, dilation of energy by the earth plays key role in the formation of climate.  Due to the pressure/force of this energy, water is taking 3 stages.  Hydrosphere, in turn never allows this fundamental energy to escape that much easily.  This resulted in the formation of "Energy Base" or stored energy or potential energy.  This "Energy base" is being strengthened by the energy coming from the Sun. 

Most of the energy dilated by earth is at the centre only.  This energy in turn moves to north and south poles.  There is continuous flow of energy towards north and south poles.

The energy base is in turn creating pressure/force on the things.  At present we are studying this pressure/force also as Gravity.  But this is not correct.   This pressure/force mainly depends on the climate of a planet.  This is the reason if we move in upward region, pressure/force goes on decreasing. 

Functioning of universe:
In my view, each universe is created/started functioning individually.  Local Big bangs are the starting point for the creation of universe. Suppose if the fundamental energy remains within atoms, planets may not be controlled.  Due to Big bang, all the planets started dilating huge energy into open area and it started spreading to wide area.  One of the planets, which is in gaseous form dilated most of the energy and it started spreading wide area, and taking control of other planets.  Here also, fundamental energy dilated by the planets, developed as a "energy base" and it remained permanently.       

There is every need for us to study gravity and climatic forces separately as such and they should not be mixed. 

Yours
Psreddy.



Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 28/11/2016 14:08:42
Quote
It is true that any two similar masses attracts each other.  Inverse square law mainly describes the process by which it is happening.  Actually Newton generalised it and he did not specify the distance upto which this attraction works. Ok, let us assume that there are two masses, m1 and m2.  It is true that these two masses attracts each other.  But,  gravity start working only when two masses comes near to each other.

Distance to attraction is based on the dilation differences of space energy. The affect is the inverse square of the distance. Dilation is a gradient and the cause of gravity (Einstein's curved space). Your question becomes is there enough dilation gradient to move an object? We are attracted to the center of the Earth because of the dilation of energy is greatest in the center of the Earth. There is less energy per volume of space in the center. The suns dilation affects the Earth trying to pull it away from a straight line. The orbit is the equilibrium between gravity and centrifugal force.

Quote
Newton's theory up to inverse square law  is 100%  correct.  But, universal law of gravitation  is not incorrect.  Actually Newton extended his inverse square law, as universal law of gravitation without any base.
But there is a basis. Geometry of space. Look at everything that works on the inverse square law. Look at a ball, double the distance and the ball is one quarter the visual size. Double the diameter you get four times the mass. All spectral signals work that way including magnetism. The math of geometry follows the observations. 

Quote
Einstein realised that attraction of masses is far limited and he did not accepted Universal law of gravitation.  He carried out number of experiments, gravitational time dilation, gravitational lensing, gravitational red shift of light.  Soon, he realised that it is the energy momentum as the reason for gravity on earth.  But he could not find the source and moved to spacetime.

Yes, spacetime is an indicator of the energy state when you use a clock. What do we measure with a clock? c as the energy state of your frame. Dilation of energy in GR is an increase in distance between energy accelerators of electron motion. Electrons, protons and neutrons are attracted to greater dilation of energy. Greater dilation causes less friction to spacetime for moving electrons. Mass creates dilation of space energy and mass is attracted to a greater dilation of space energy. Its extremely simple.

Quote
Gravitational lensing:  Through his experiments, Einstien proved that light bent near the gravity field.  But he forget that we are already in the gravity field and it is influencing each and everything including light.  Gravitational lensing is going on the earth continuously.
Lensing is the visual threshold of dilation of energy between mass spacetime mc and spacetime c E=mc^2. Mass is a conduit for spcetime energy by moving electrons.

Quote
Dark energy:  While carrying out these experiments also they have forget that they are doing these experiments in a gravity field and it is influencing it.  It is true that 75% of the universe is covered by Dark energy
I suspect 100% of the universe is covered by dark mass energy (spacetime). Time = Motion = Energy

Quote
As per General relativity curvature of the space time is decided by mass. In other words mass tells space time how to curve. Newton's law of gravitation clearly says gravitation is the attraction of two masses, which is known to us, and it is appearing before us.  Where as Einstein's curvature of space time is an imagination and its presence is not known.  For quite long time it is a mystery, whether space time is a curved one or horizontal. 
Energy being point to point would be horizontal and vertical. We know it is point to point because there is no perfect circle. Just points closer together to create space. Pie is our proof.

Quote
How mass dilates energy:
Actually, we know how much energy mass posses.  How this small amount of energy comes out and forms as a curve.  If the energy has to create a curve means, it must be freed from the atoms.  But energy remaining within atom, a curve is formed.
Two completely separate systems. Think of a black hole and the rest of the galaxy. Spacetime has order mass follows the dictates of that order. Spacetime is quantum mechanics that force mass into the motions we call physical laws.

Sorry got to go.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 04/12/2016 15:23:02
Thank you GOC,

But i could not understand why "Sorry got to go".  Please give your opinion without any hesitation.  It appears that your feelings are hurt. 

Hereby, I would like to inform you that  i had no idea of critising Einstein, but presenting mine ideas only.

SOURCE OF GRAVITY:
When the apple fell on the ground, number of doubts came in the mind of Newton.  Why do not the apple stay in the tree itself, and what force caused it to came down to earth. He realised that there is certain force is working on the apple.  This idea itself is great and extra-ordinary.  But he could not found the source.  At that time he
was doing research on Inverse square law, so naturally he thought that the earth is a huge mass and it is attracting each and everything towards it.

To find out the source, Einstein carried out number of experiments.   Soon, he realised that it is the Energy momentum as responsible for gravity.  But where is the source.  For us, people on the earth sun is the main source of energy.  But, Sun energy is not raising radiation abnormally and it was ruled out as main source of
gravity.  So, Einstein looked at Space energy as responsible for Gravity.  But space energy is far limited.

Before attempting gravity, i had written number of theories but faced lot of criticism.   When i had started writing gravity, i could not get the source/medium by which it is happening and i had placed a full stop for several years.  Luckily, by virtue of blessing of god, one simple incident that happened in the early days came back to my mind.  It was a severe winter season,  Total area of the house is one compact and there are no barriers/separations.  Fire wood was used to cook food in the evening, and the charcoal continued to emit radiation upto 4 am.   This small amount of radiation, with the help of existing energy base in that area, was able to resist cool breeze up to certain area. 

It is true that Earth is not a burning firewood, but a burning charcoal only.  Earth is dilating small amount of energy into open area, and it is joining existing energy base and  is not allowing hydrosphere to occupy earth.    Hydrosphere carry's weight and it is creating pressure on Energy base and Energy base in turn accelerating
against objects.  "THIS IS THE SOURCE FOR GRAVITY". 

CLIMATE AND GRAVITY:
Suppose, if anybody ask you, why gravity is weak on moon, instantly you will reply that climate is weak.  If you threw an electrical bulb, it will break with big noise.  In this case we are saying that it is due to climate forces. These are not two different subjects and there is direct link in between these two.  Unless climate is developed
on any planet, there is no gravity at all. 

As long as the apple remains in the tree, it is fully in the grip of climate forces i.e, fundamental energy and when it comes down to earth gravity start working.   

Newton's Inverse square law is 100% correct, but without source, he simply extended this theory to Universal law  of Gravitation and thus knowingly or unknowingly he has drawn a big circle.  We are all moving in this circle.  Actually Einstein tried to came out of circle, but he could not found the source and this resulted as a setback
to his research.   

It is true that climate is exerting lot of force on the nature.  We all knew that without this force, water will not take 3 stages, and impossible to pump water from a borewell.  Here too, physicists have drawn a big circle in the name of "pressure of air" and left other things to gravity.

When i had attempted gravity, soon realised that it is the base for all other theories.  It is influencing each and everything, micro to macro mass on earth.  Whatever experiment you have done or going to do, we have to keep in mind that it is being influenced by the gravity.

Ok, i request the physicists, to break the silence, come out openly and start thinking in this angle, so that we can break this circles and draw a straight line of research.  I am sure it will pave the way for future research in big way.

Once again, Mr GOC, i had no idea of criticising anybody, please continue the discussion.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 04/12/2016 18:02:37

  You cannot hurt my feelings. "Got to go" I was late for work. I do not care whom you criticize or do not. I follow relativity, you can or cannot if you like but I use Relativity as a basis for quality of understanding. Spacetime in my estimation is the foundation energy to move electrons with angular motion as a vector. So discussing weather patterns is secondary and not the cause of gravity to my mind. Gr dilation is the attractive force to my mind. mass being attracted to the inverse square distance to the most dilated position (center of mass). This is Einstein's curved space.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 18/12/2016 15:13:27
GRAVITATIONAL LENSING:
"A gravitational lens is a distribution of matter (such as a cluster of galaxies) between a distant light source and an observer, that is capable of bending the light from the source as the light travels towards the observer. This effect is known as gravitational lensing, and the amount of bending is one of the predictions of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity"

Although either Orest Khvolson or Frantisek Link  is sometimes credited as being the first to discuss the effect in print, the effect is more commonly associated with Einstein, who published a more famous article on the subject in 1936.

Unlike an optical lens, a gravitational lens bends to the maximum light that passes closest to its center, and to a minimum light that travels furthest from its center. Consequently, a gravitational lens has no single focal point, but a focal line. The term "lens" in the context of gravitational light deflection was first used by O.J. Lodge, who remarked that it is "not permissible to say that the solar gravitational field acts like a lens, for it has no focal length". If the light source, the massive lensing object, and the observer lie in a straight line, the original light source will appear as a ring around the massive lensing object.

The first observation of light deflection was performed by noting the change in position of stars as they passed near the Sun on the celestial sphere. The observations were performed in May 1919 by Arthur Eddington, Frank Watson Dyson, and their collaborators during a total solar eclipse.  The solar eclipse allowed the stars near
the Sun to be observed. Observations were made simultaneously in the cities of Sobral, Ceará, Brazil and in São Tomé and Príncipe on the west coast of Africa. The observations demonstrated that the light from stars passing close to the Sun was slightly bent, so that stars appeared slightly out of position.

It is true that we are in a strong gravity field.  At present most of our concentration is on "how light bent near strong gravity fields" such as stars.  When this strong gravity influences outside light moving near to it, what about light withing the gravity field. 

In the evening, when the lights were switched on in the streets,  so many things came to my mind.  When the light bulb is at 10 feet, how so much of light is coming to the ground.  It is true that capacity of light bulb is very weak and it is capable of spreading light upto small area only.  To my surprise, when observed most of the light
is coming to the ground.  Actually bulb was not fully bent towards the earth, but slightly bent. 

When taken, amount of light spread by the bulb,  in my view 60% is coming to the ground.  Actually the bulb is at the height of 10 feet, and the capacity of bulb is also weak, so naturally only 20%  has to come to the ground.  But there is a gap of 40%.  This is due to gravitational lensing only.

Suppose if there is no gravitational lensing, then we have to arrange bulb near to the ground and in straight lines. 

After coming into the house, i had observed deflection of light towards the ground.  Here too, tube light was at almost 9 feet height.  But most of the light is on the ground only.  Actually gravity is weak inside the house, but deflection is going on.

Lensing of light can be observed in the case of sun light also.  In the morning and evening there is deflection of light towards ground.  Actually, when earth and sun are in straight lines, most of the sun light is to move above the surface of the earth.  But it is not happening so.  Here, most of the light is also concentrated at the plain
areas where there is strong gravity field.

METHOD OF DEFLECTION:
Basically we have to keep in mind one important point that we are already  in the strong gravity field.  Gravity is not going to be created, or may be created and it is already working on us.   Due to strong climate, there is strong fundamental energy on this earth.  This fundamental energy is influenincg each and everything including
light.   Hydrosphere is exerting pressure/force on this fundamental energy and in turn it is accelerating against things on the earth. 

For this energy, light bulb is also an important object only.  When light start coming out of the bulb, strong energy rays moving towards earth influences and takes them to ground. 

Gravitational lensing when studied on the stars, it is extra-ordinary and something interesting.  But gravitational lensing is not new and is happening on the earth continuously.

Friends, this is big circle, please break the circle and pave the way  for a straight line of  research.

Yours

Psreddy

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 25/12/2016 15:33:41
Friends this is not for criticizing anybody but for discussion purpose only.

Well, this thing happened at early school days.  Actually, the teacher, to explain the lesson in a better way, performed a simple experiment.  He lighted a candle, closed it by a glass.  When the fire was put off, he started explaining how things need oxygen to burn.  This is the simple and best experiment to show how things need oxygen to burn.  When the teacher left the class, out of interest i had started reading and understanding the lesson.  Right from starting, i am not having the habit of reading lessons seriously for the sake of exams.  I take lessons casually and go by concept only.  This type of approach badly affected my studies and turned out as an  average student and for the sake of livelihood i had to adjust with a commerce graduation and finally a clerk in a Bank.   But i did not left this habit of casual reading and understanding  gist.   I had started presenting my own ideas/theories and got lot of criticism.  Fearing criticism, i left everything and kept quiet for several years.  one of my friend who read all the theories written by me, surprised and commented that these are not ordinary and "move setters".   In fact it gave lot of confidence to me. 

After the class,  i went home and  read the lesson again and again and finally came to a conclusion that it is not the oxygen but other forces are helping the fire and the glass is coming in between them.  In my view, oxygen may burn, but it does not mean or matter that oxygen aids burning of things. 

At present we take fire as a chemical action, combustion of material when exposed to source of heat.  Once ignited, a chain reaction must take place whereby fire can sustain its own heat by the further release of heat energy in the process of combustion.

When i started writing Gravity, clarity came over fire also.  What ever i had thought at the school days is 100% correct.  It is the gravity waves that are turning out as flames.  We have already discussed that there is stock of potential energy on this earth.  This energy due to the weight of hydrosphere, is penetrating deep into the  things.  For this waves, match stick is also an important object only.  When we use force to rub the stick against box, a layer containing atoms are destroyed and energy within them is freed.  Due to pressure/force, outside energy tries to occupy the gap and freed energy joins them.  This results in boosting of energy concentration at a particular place.  Since energy is moving towards earth, concentration is high at the starting and goes on decreasing. 

However it mainly depends on two important points:
01  Stock of energy present in the outside and
02  Energy dilated by the material due to destruction.

Here, influence of gravity is indispensable and fire changes accordingly.  Suppose in a plain area, where gravity is strong, fire is also strong and it generates more heat and light.  If we move to high hill areas, where gravity is weak, fire is also weak.  To get equal light and heat, we have to use more material than what we have used in a plain area. 

Fire mainly depends on two things, internal energy of the material and presence of outside energy.  In a summer season outside energy is so strong that even simple change can cause fire and it is very difficult to put off. 

At present we are taking gravity,  as helping  fire, but we have to remember that gravity is the basic thing behind fire and not a agent supporting fire.

We are studying fire, explosions as different subjects,  but they are one and the same.  For all these activities gravity is base. 

01  If the material releases internal energy slow and study, than it is fire
02  and if the material releases internal energy suddenly and withing short time than it is explosion.

Both of them depends on the outside energy and varies according to gravity.  Gravity is having roots in number of other theories also.  Basically we are not in a position to decide "what exactly gravity is".   Newton could realise that a force is working on the apple, but he could not tell what type of force and how it is working. 
He simply extended his inverse square law, as universal law of gravitation, thereby leaving sufficient gap.

Where as Einstein has taken  "gravity not as a force but as a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass/energy; and resulting in gravitational time dilation, where time lapses more slowly in lower (stronger) gravitational potential".   

But Einstein also failed to explain "source" or medium by which it is happening.  Well, time dilation is simply a instrument to test the variations in gravity.  Suppose in plain areas, where strong gravity field exists, time dilates slowly and on all high hill areas, where weak gravity is present, time dilates at a faster rate.  This simply says that there is variations in gravity at different places on the earth.  But this never explains, how original gravity is created or working on this earth.

Here again Einstein equated mass and energy.  Actually mass never equates energy.  Huge amount of energy dilated by mass is due to outside energy only.

Suppose let us assume that there are subatomic particles in an atom than it has to dilate equal or similar amount of energy at all places.  But it is not happening so.  If you detonate an atom bomb on high gravity area, heat and energy released by it may not equate with the heat and light that of detonated in low gravity place. 

For comparison, there is no need to go atom bomb, take low explosive material and compare it. 

European institute is investing huge amount on the project "CERN" to find out fundamental constituents of matter.  Basic and main idea is how an atom dilates so much energy.  Here i would like to place simple suggestion to scientists working at "CERN", once again i would like to tell that it is suggestion only, why explosions varies from place to place according to gravity.  Suppose if you detonate an atom bomb on moon, where gravity is weak, you may not get similar results.  Any explosions mainly depends on the outside potential energy.  In my view, in this situation, scientists may not get far exceeding results, unless and otherwise if any thing, not expected is invented.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 26/12/2016 17:56:15
Quote
If we move to high hill areas, where gravity is weak,

If we follow relativity the closer we get to the center of the Earth the less gravity we feel. So a high hill would feel the attraction more not less. Pressure becomes less in higher mountains but gravity attraction becomes greater. Just the opposite of what you are suggesting. There is no gravity in the gravitational center of the Earth. In the form of attraction. There you would be weightless.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 09/01/2017 03:08:51
Well, GOC
As per General relativity  it is true that if we move to the centre of the earth, gravity comes down and if we move to the poles gravity increases and the same is proved scientifically.  But the way and method by which it is happening is different and is not as assumed by our predecessors.  They have carried out number of practical experiments which in fact mislead them and taken to a wrong direction. 

For example, we have already discussed about force/strength of Dark energy.  Actually Dark energy has got no capacity to accelerate upon other forces and to create pressure. It is due to the force or pressure of outside energy that dark energy gains strength, which we have already discussed at length.

They simply forgot that they are already in the gravitational field and it is influencing each and everything.  When we are doing any experiment on Atom means, we must keep in mind that it is also undergoing influence of gravity.  Simply thinking that if an atom is split, huge energy is generated, misleads us.  Actually an Atom contains very, very small amount of energy and when detonated, it has to dilate "similar physical quantity" only.  We have to take different options and study them.  But we are not changing our mind set, simply concentrating on Atom, and we are feeling that Atom contains sub-atoms and they are detonated later.  Well, i am not against study of atom.  I am sure that there is every need for further research.  But research is different from fact.  The fact is that there is huge gravity force working on each and everything including atom which we cannot deny it.  While studying/carrying out research we cannot omit  this fact.     

Ok, about gravity variations on Earth:
As said by you:
"If we follow relativity the closer we get to the center of the Earth the less gravity we feel. So a high hill would feel the attraction more not less. Pressure becomes less in higher mountains but gravity attraction becomes greater. Just the opposite of what you are suggesting. There is no gravity in the gravitational center of the Earth. In the form of attraction. There you would be weightless".

At present we are of the opinion:
The Earth is not a perfect sphere, but is slightly flatter at the poles while bulging at the Equator: an oblate spheroid.  A perfect sphere of uniform density, or whose density varies solely with distance from the centre, would produce a gravitational field of uniform magnitude at all points on its surface, always pointing directly towards the sphere's centre. . There are consequently slight deviations in both the magnitude and direction of gravity across its surface.

If we take Inverse square law, gravity must be high at the centre of the Earth and must decrease as we move towards poles.  But it is not happening so, the reason is Earth is rotating.  It is true that Earth is a huge mass.  It is not simply standing at a particular place.  There is a huge force, which is keeping Earth at a particular place.  Do Earth is rotating against this force.  No, in fact Earth has got no  capacity to move. 

Suppose let us assume that Earth is rotating against this force, then what happens, nothing will remain on the surface of the Earth.  We must keep one important point that Earth is not rotating, but being made to rotate by the gravity waves.  There is lot of different between "to rotate" and "being made to rotate".   If we forget this difference than everything goes waste.   Ok, let us assume that we are traveling by Bus and the same is compared to Earth.  Here, Bus is moving against gravity waves.  There is a force/pressure of gravity against Bus.  Where as in the case of Earth, which is huge in size, is being thrown to weightless state by the gravity waves.  Here, in the case of Bus, gravity waves are working against it and it is moving with lot of force. 

Gravity waves are  holding the Earth perfectly from all sides.  Earth is not rotating, but being made to rotate by this Gravity waves.  When Earth rotates, it is not Earth alone, but Gravity waves, and the hydrosphere seated against it. 

We have already discussed that there is huge "Energy base" on this Earth.  This Energy base, due to the weight of the hydrosphere is accelerating against things on the Earth.  It is true and known fact that most of this "Energy base" is contributed by the Earth only.  Since Earth is cooling from sides, most of the energy is dilated at the centre only.  Energy is having important quality of  moving from high to low area and there is continuous flow from the centre of the Earth to poles.  At the centre, energy dilated by the Earth is pushing the gravity waves and it is resulting in weak gravity.  Where as if we move to poles, as there is no ant-igravity waves, only standard gravity persists. 

Gravity at any place mainly depends on the distance between surface area and hydrosphere.  In all plain areas, the gap between earth and hydrosphere increases, and gravity waves have to bear more weight and resulting in high gravity.  Where as on the high hills, the gap decreases and gravity waves have to bear less weight, resulting in less gravity.  This is the main reason, why gravity goes on decreasing, if we move in upward direction.  This gap between hydrosphere and Earth increases in summer and comes down in winter. 

 Yours
Psreddy





Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 09/01/2017 13:21:43
What exactly gravity is ?
I have concluded in my paper that everything is electromagnetic.
The field vector E and H indicate the arrow of time. Energy is always conserved during constructive or destructive interference because if the E field cancels due to interference then the H field doubles its amplitude. 
This enables a perfect energy conservation mechanism. The electromagnetic medium seems like pretensioned to enable propagation at c.
The medium is homogeneous otherwise we would see the relativistic effects.

Because the energy conservation mechanism looks very clear, I consider that adding a third field as gravity, could destroy this ballance, hence gravity is a interaction between field values in the medium that creates the appearance of a force. Also magnetic and electric pure forces are also aparent and  not forces. The concepts of force an inertia are defined  by newtonian mechanics that assumes object in space are bodies that travel through empty space. The reality is quite different as everything in the universe propagates.

http://vixra.org/abs/1612.0239
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 10/01/2017 13:48:54
What exactly gravity is ?
I have concluded in my paper that everything is electromagnetic.

Electromagnetic is a name. What is electromagnetic?

pasala

I generally only speak in relativity terms as a physical process of which your understanding is not a relativistic understanding as I understand. Pressure is caused by gravity but gravity is not caused by pressure. I would hope you are guided by logic of examples. I will try one more time.

Consider there is a hollow tube through the earth that a sealed ball with you in it could come to rest. With air in the shaft you would come to rest in the center after oscillations caused by entropy. The center of gravity (middle) is where you would rest weightless. It is also the highest pressure of air. So this leaves us with does the pressure cause your position? Now lets seal the tube with the sealed ball and create a vacuum through the tube. You would still end up in the gravitational center weightless. This logically suggests that pressure of mass does not cause gravity.

Every time someone suggests relativity is incorrect I have found their understanding of relativity to be incorrect.

Its most difficult to find yourself in a position of understanding and find it to be incorrect. Consider main stream being incorrect. To change the mind of  the scientific community would be the same as trying to convince the Pope there is no God. I would suggest you study relativity with the understanding it is correct although the subjective opinions of other than Einstein is just an opinion. Light measured to be the same in all frames and c as a constant. Follow the math but not the interpretations of the math given by main stream. Especially the reason for contraction and time dilation. They lead you down an impossible path with paradoxes.

As a realest there is only one paradox. If it takes something to create something where did the first something come from?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 10/01/2017 15:20:43
The universe doesn't care about what the mainstream thinks.
I may be wrong, but these are my conclusions at the moment.
I admire Einstein and his work including Relativity, but unfortunately my conclusion is, Relativity doesn't quite tell the right story. However, it is a huge step forward from newtonian mechanics and  it passed numerous tests.
I'm sure Einstein wouldn't have ignored the results of these new experiments.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 11/01/2017 11:57:26
You need to understand electromagnetics before you interpret your understanding of photons. Neither are physically understood.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 11/01/2017 12:42:55
You need to understand electromagnetics before you interpret your understanding of photons. Neither are physically understood.
Yes, I'm currently looking at possible issues with Maxwell equations.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 15/01/2017 15:41:25
Friends,
In the previous reply, i had mentioned climate as the base for gravity.  If you ask anybody, why gravity is weak on moon, without taking time and thinking he will certainly reply that "climate is weak".  But for all practical applications, gravity and climate are taken as two different subjects and there is no relationship in between them.  Actually when i had taken climate as base for gravity, some of the people who were having little confidence might have lost it.  Here there is every need for me to substantiate my statement.

Initially, when i started, 'What exactly gravity is', i had taken care not to mention about climate, dark energy, dark matter, block holes and space time.  If i had done so, i would have been necked out fromt the forum without hesitation.  Slowly, i have been presenting, strength or power of dark energy, and on block holes.  Ok, now let us discuss about climate.

It is true that atmosphere on any planet is not created/developed within short time.  I think, as of now there is no exact theory that tells us how atmosphere is created/developed on any planet.  Ok, let us discuss with simple example.

Let us assume that there is a poor family from rural UK.  In severe winter, they have used firewood to raise temperature inside the house.  Suppose, let us assume that they have used four sticks and temperature raised to keep the family in comfort.  In case, they have used six sticks, temperature raises abnormally and brings in discomfort for the people living there within the house.    Ok, in case if they have used two sticks only, temperature is low and cool winds still haunts them. 

Now, let us discuss about the climate within the house and the one outside.  We have taken samples of air within the house and from outside climate and tested them.  What it will say, Carbon-di-oxide, corbon-mono-oxide and other gases increased within the house.  Here samples,  simply describes contents of air at any place at a particular time.  But it wont tell you, how temperature is raised within the house.   Suppose if we uses thermometer, it says temperature within the house is 20 degrees and outside it is 0 degrees.

It is true that north and south poles are  completely covered by ice.  At present we are of the opinion that earth is elliptical in shape and sun energy is not hitting directly.  This is untrue, suppose if there is dilation of fundamental energy by the earth at poles, there is no scope for formation of ice and it is simply evaporated into water molecules.  In the example, discussed by us, if they have not used firewood, temperature never raises.  By burning firewood sticks, fundamental energy is dilated into the open area.  This fundamental energy develops a base, and creates pressure on the hydrosphere.  Here, Hydrosphere is not moving away, without any force/pressure.  Slowly, if the fundamental energy  stored within the house weakens, hydrosphere occupy's it. 

On the Earth,  fundamental energy released by Earth is pushing the hydrosphere.  At the poles, as there is no dilation of fundamental energy, hydrosphere occupied it completely.  At the centre of the Earth, where dilation of energy is more, hydrosphere is pushed upwards to new heights.   As we move towards poles, Energy base start weakening further and further and hydrosphere bent down towards Earth.  Energy is having important quality of moving from high area to low area, consequently there is continuous flow of energy from centre of the Earth to Poles.   

Formation of climate on Earth:
In the example discussed by us, if they have used eight sticks, what happens, it is unbearable.  After huge explosion, Earth started burning like anything.  However luckily, Earth was blessed with more hydrosphere than other planets and it started cooling at a faster rate.  Hydrosphere started developing as a thick layer, and it never allowed fundamental energy dilated by Earth to escape that much easily.  It led to formation of strong climate on the Earth.  Here, suppose if there is no fundamental energy, radiation is very difficult, water never evoparates and it remains in the stage of ice. 

Ok, let us take Mercury.  Climate on Mercury is weak and sun rays hits directly and temperature raises upto 430 degree celcieus and during night time temperature drops upto -180 degrees.  Here as  climate is weak, control over the planet, by the gravity waves is lost and rotation and revolution is also slowed down.   Suppose if there is strong climate, even simple change can cause a momentum, since Planet is completely in the grip of Gravity waves.  Strong climate never allows sun rays to hit the planet directly and at the same time it also never allows temperature entering the planet to escape that much easily.  It appears that this planet is moving towards the final stages of 'death of a planet'.

Now let us take another planet, Saturn where average temperature is -288 degrees.  It is completely covered by ice.  Suppose, let us presume that if the planet dilates internal energy, then how ice remains without melting.  If the water molecules are separated, than air movement gains and paves way for formation of climate on the planet.  Since internal energy is far limited, planet is completely occupied by hydrosphere.  Here role of Sun energy is far limited and it acts as a supporting agent only. 

About Climate:
At present we are taking samples of air and testing its contents in laboratory.  We are taking this as climate, at a particular place at a time.  Actually, we are enjoying hot, wet and comfortable climate on the Earth.  How this comfortable climate is created is important.  This point is different from testing of samples at a particular place. Testing of samples, never tell you how this climate is developed. 

In case if there is no climate on earth, as is happening on Mercury, sun rays hits Earth surface directly and temparature raises abnormally.   Since Mercury is having weak climate, its gravity is also weak. 

Strong climate on any planet paves the way for strong gravity.  Actually on Earth also, once we were having strong climate which is slowly weakening and gravity is also coming down.  Climate on any planet mainly depends on its internal energy and hydrosphere. 

Even today, creation and development of climate on any planet is a mystery only and much focus is not yet laid by scientists. 

If much research is taken up in this angle, it will be soon proved that climate and gravity are not two different subjects. 

Yours
Psreddy










Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: Thebox on 16/01/2017 11:01:26
                                       What exactly gravity is

Friends, herewith i am placing a revised theory on gravity, taking into consideration ideas of newton and einstein as well.  Feel free to post your opinion.

In Newton's description of gravity, the gravitational force is caused by matter.  In Einstein's theory and related theories of gravitation, curvature at every point in space time is also caused by whatever matter is present. Here, too, mass is a key property in determining the gravitational influence of matter. But in a relativistic theory of gravity, mass cannot be the only source of gravity. Relativity links mass with energy, and energy with momentum.

In special relativity, energy is closely connected to momentum.  if energy is a source of gravity, momentum must be a source as well.  Taken together, in general relativity it is mass, energy, momentum, pressure and tension that serve as sources of gravity, they are how matter tells space time how to curve. In the theory's mathematical formulation, all these quantities are but aspects of a more general physical quantity called the energy–momentum tensor.

Newton's main focus is on matter only.  Newton's law of universal gravitation states that a particle attracts every other particle in the universe using a force that is directly proportional to the product of their masses but also inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.

Where as Einstien has taken mass and energy as key points in his study on gravity. He has also taken energy for momentum in his special relativity.  He has taken energy and momentum as one of the four dimentional aspects.

In my view matter and energy are two different things which cannot be combined while calculating gravity and it is energy alone plays key role in gravity.  There is huge amount of energy on this earth, which i had already termed it as "energy base".  Suppose if anybody says that there is no energy base on this earth than what is bearing the weight of the hydrosphere.  It is true that mass of the hydrosphere carrys weight and if there is no obstruction than it will come down to earth. 

How this energy is created:
It is true that Sun is the important source of energy.  However, see our universe which is spread to far away places and there is energy throught the universe. If there is no energy than there is no scope for planets also.  In space, planets cannot exist.  Suppose, if the energy for any reason dwindles and area comes down than planets existing at the end of the universe, gains weight, looses control and start traveling with maximum speed. 

Well, how this huge amount of energy is created.  At present most of our calculations are on the basis of existing things only.  We are forgetting one key point that without "Big bang" there is no scope for formation of any Universe including ours.  After Big bang, devastating fire started on all the planets, including sun, and energy packed within masses started coming out. This energy started spreading to far away places.  Slowly planets started cooling and climate developed against them.  At present Sun is not a burning firewood, but burning coal only.  Other planets are still burning and are in the stage of  burning coal covered by ash.

Huge amount of energy present throught the universe is not created within short time but over a period of time.  This is the "Energy base". 

First of all let me tell you one simple incident which happened in my early days which helped me to recognise this energy base. This incident happened when i was 13 or 14 years age.  Ours is a tiles house and total area, bed room, dining, cooking everything in that only.  In severe winter, i.e., may be in the month of January, that day night i could not get sleep, seeing at my suffering father called on me to come near to him and he was sleeping near to the kitchen.  When i went there, it was surprise to note that it was hot, and wet.  When asked father replied, firewood is still burning.  But i could not find any firewood burning, removed ashes and found coal in red colour.  Cooking was stopped in the evening itself, however this small amount of fire, that too deep inside ashes was able to save so much area.  In fact i did not slept that night and started measuring area. This can be compared to all our planets as well, including sun.  Ones, our planets are also firewood only, after shedding lot of energy into open area, they have cooled now.  Energy released by planets turned out as "Energy Base" and is playing key role.

Energy movement:
There is strong energy base against sun.  When fresh energy is released due to burning it adds to the existing base.  It creates pressure on the existing rays and a momentum is gained.  If the addition is small/weak than it stops further movement and in case if the addition continues than it will move to farther and farther places. Some of these rays, if pressure/force continues than it will cross our universe and reaches other universes in the space.

Energy base on the Earth:
Our earth is also ones a ball of fire only and it shed lot of heat and energy into space.  However our earth is blessed with more hydrosphere than other planets and it started cooling at a faster rate when compared to other planets. Strong Hydrosphere helped in the development of climate on earth.  Strong hydrosphere never allowed free movement of energy into open area.  This led to formation of local "Energy base" on earth.  This energy base remained permanently on earth.  It is true that earth is still burning and is releasing lot of energy into this energy base.  Energy rays coming from sun are also bringing energy and it is addition to our base. Some of the strong energy rays taking movement from earth are taking away energy from this base.

Suppose if there is no energy base on earth than hydrosphere comes down to earth.  Strong energy rays coming from sun hits earth directly.  In case if there is no climate, strong energy rays coming from sun penetrates deeply and creates pressure/force on earth.  As there is no climate, on the other side it gains weight and a momentum is gained and start moving away from our universe.

About Gravity:
Development/creation of climate itself paves way for Gravity.  It led to formation of strong Energy Base.  This Energy base is nothing but presence of energy rays.  These rays carry energy from one place to other place.  It is true that energy is of object oriented and start concentrating against earth.  For this energy even minute cells are also its objects only. 

These rays not only concentrates against objects but also penetrates deeply.  Suppose, let us think that if we are in inertial position, millions and millions of our body cells are all objects of energy rays.  Generally our body temperature will be lower than outside pressure and therefore it leads to more concentration.

Energy rays coming from sun initially faces hydrosphere, weakens and comes out into earth atmosphere.  These weak rays start gaining with the help of energy existing on this earth.  Earth is an important and huge object for these energy rays. Concentration of energy is boosted on earth and it turns out as light.  In fact light is nothing but charging of energy rays. 

In my view gravity is nothing but pressure/force applied on objects/things.  We are all living within the Energy base and for this base, earth is huge object. There is complete concentration against each and every minute cell of earth.  It is penetrating upto deep area of earth.  So earth is completely within the grip of this Energy.  Human beings living within  this base, are also its objects only.  Energy rays pools/concentrates against human beings from all sides.  Since there is continuous flow of energy towards earth, long energy rays concentrating against human beings creates pressure and pushes from upside towards earth.  This force/pressure is gravity.  It is very difficult to escape from these rays.  Since these rays are object oriented, if we remove air, along with objects than only we can escape from these rays. 

It is true that earth is still burning deep inside and releasing lot of energy into open area.  Since earth is already
cooled from sides, most of the energy released is at the centre only.  As there is continuous flow of energy, long energy rays are developed and these rays are creating upward motion on things.

Rotation and Revolution:
Due to energy pressure from all sides, earth already lost most of its weight.  Now it is in energy grip.  Let us presume that in inertial condition, long range energy rays coming from sun with the help of existing energy on earth is holding almost upto 50% of earth in its control at any point of time.  It is simply like a basket ball player, to have control he must keep his hand upto 50% of the ball, or otherwise ball may not be in his control.  Suppose if his control over ball is less than 25 to 30 percent than ball moves in opposite direction.  In case if he takes the ball with the help of both the hands than the ball is fully in his control. 

Earth is simply like a soft in electrical motor.  To move motor there must be movement of electrons.  It appears that energy rays coming from sun are not hitting directly, there is bent or curvature of these rays and are hitting in a curved manner and there fore it is causing rotation of earth.  Einstien rightly presumed this and incorporated it in his General relativity theory.  He thought that gravity is due to pressure/force created by energy in a curvated manner.  Well, when it is about revolution, it is also in the control of sun energy only.  Suppose in inertial condition, earth is simply in static condition without any movement.  Suppose when it rotates, its fresh area comes into the control of the fresh energy rays.  So, movement of revolution starts against the energy rays.  In case for any reason, if these energy rays, which are holding earth, dwindles than earth comes near to sun. Moon is not having strong climate.  It is under partial control of sun.  Suppose if it is having strong climate means it would have turned out into a independant planet.  Strong energy rays moving from earth are hitting moon directly.  In a static condition these rays decides distance of the moon from earth.  Since earth is rotating, energy rays moving from earth, are not parallel and bents in a sloped manner and creates pressure at a different place.  It is causing movement of energy and thus rotation of moon on its axis.  This rotation against  the energy rays of earth, makes it to rotate against earth.

Finally:
Newton's universal law of gravitation is a different subject.  It mainly deals with attraction in between two objects. Every point mass attracts every single other point mass by a force pointing along the line intersecting both points. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them.  So here distance plays a key role.  Newton might have thought that Earth is a huge object and therefore it is attracting moon keeping aside distance.  In my view this is not correct.  But this theory rightly explains attraction of particles.  This is root cause for the existence of hydrosphere, energy moving in the form of rays, existence of mines, for that very existence of this universe itself.  But gravity is a different one, it is due to the movement of energy/force applied on objects.

Einstein came out from this fundamental thinking and proposed that energy force/pressure is causing gravity.  However he could not recognise huge amount of energy force present on this earth. So he has taken energy force as one of four dimensions.

If we say that there is no energy base than who is bearing the weight of hydrosphere.  It is true that water carrys weight and it is not staying at that height without any support.  Energy is also key player in Fire, explosions, light and the process which we will discuss separately.

Yours
psreddy


I will just say one thing.  ''energy'' is expansive from itself, Matter and energy are interwoven to create gravity.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 16/01/2017 14:50:19
Mr Thebox,
Thank you,

I too, accept that it is Fundamental energy and matter are playing key role.  But where is the exact source and method by which it is happening.  Ok, let us not move outside our climate and see how fundamental energy plays its role.  Actually we start with uneven distribution of energy and matter, goes to space time, talk about space fabric, talk about black holes and about neutron stars.  We also look for energy dilated by Neutron stars, as a source of gravity.  When it is the source, gravity must be equal at all places, but it varies from planet to planet.  When we have equated Mass with energy, how can we attribute key role to mass in gravity.

Friends, this is not for criticizing,  but to have a meaningful discussion.  When there is no source, where ever we go, we have to come to the original place only.

We knew that gravity is weak on moon due to weak climate only.  This is scientifically proved. 

Let us start thinking about the relationship between, climate and gravity.

I once again reiterate that this is not for criticizing anybody, in case if anyone feels that i hurt their feelings, i am ready to extend 'sorry'.

Yours
Psreddy   
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 12/02/2017 13:28:22
Friends,
For quite long time, i could not understand how Einstein incorporated gravity into relativity.  Recently, i could read the following which clarified so many doubts.

As per Einstein:
"Einstein’s ground-breaking realization (which he called “the happiest thought of my life”) was that gravity is in reality not a force at all, but is indistinguishable from, and in fact the same thing as, acceleration, an idea he called the “principle of equivalence”. He realized that if he were to fall freely in a gravitational field (such as a skydiver before opening his parachute, or a person in an elevator when its cable breaks), he would be unable to feel his own weight, a rather remarkable insight in 1907, many years before the idea of free fall of astronauts in space became commonplace.

A simple thought experiment serves to clarify this: if an astronaut in the cabin of a spacecraft accelerating upwards at 9.8 metres per second per second (the same acceleration as gravity imparts to falling bodies near the Earth’s surface) were to drop a feather and hammer they too would hit the floor of the cabin simultaneously (in the absence of air resistance), exactly as would have happened if they had fallen on Earth under gravity.  That, and the feeling of his feet being glued to the ground just as they would be in Earth’s gravity, would be enough to convince the astronaut that the acceleration of the spaceship was indistinguishable from the pull of gravity on the Earth".


The above equivalence of Einstein is great. It is true that a skydiver before his parachute is opened,  unable to feel his own weight.  Here the fact of gravity is different one and the principle of equivalence is different one.  The principle of equivalence simply says, how one can escape from gravity. 

Einstein takes gravity not as a force, but an indistinguishable form due to equivalence.  Suppose let us take a person, A is standing in the elevator.  As long as he is in inertial position, he feels gravity.  When the cable is cut, acceleration speeds up and looses weight.  Here, important point is gravity is lost due to accelerat1ion only.  But, there is no change in the gravity in that particular place. 

Einstein's main idea is that the person, skydiver falling freely or the person dropping in the elevator,  if the gravity is by Earth   they should not loose it due to acceleration. 

Here for validity of Equivalence principle:
"IT IS NOT, CHANGE OR MOVEMENT OF THE PERSON EXPERIENCING GRAVITY BUT THE GRAVITY ITSELF".

Here gravity it constant whether a person is in constant position or in acceleration.  Actually the person is able to escape gravity due to his action of acceleration.  Skydiver, before opening his parachute, he is unable to feel his gravity, not due to change in the gravity but due to the acceleration or momentum.

As long as he is in inertial position, he is fully in the influence of gravity, when there is change in his position, gravity looses control or he is escaping gravity temporarily.  Here, actually an important point is that "there is no change in the gravity".  Gravity is constant at any time, at a particular place whether any person or thing is at inertial position or in acceleration. 

Einstein assumed that gravity is due to ripples of gravity waves, caused by space time.  Suppose let us assume that if the gravity is due to the ripples, than different persons in different  places must experience gravity differently whether they are in constant position or in acceleration.   One more important point is, if it is in the form of ripples, than it must be high at the starting point and decrease at the end. 

If the ripples are due to the force, whatever it may, EMF or any other  it must be strong at the starting point and must decrease as it moves.  For that we must experience high gravity in the sky and not on the ground. 

Time dilation:
This is also one of the important lab test used by Einstein for checking gravity.  In  all plain areas, where gravity is high, time dilates slowly and in all high hill areas where gravity is low, time dilates at a faster rate.  Here, interesting point is that Gravity influences our clocks. 

What Exactly is gravity:
Einstein theory of relativity helps us to understand that gravity is not due to the attraction of Earth but due to the gravity waves.  He carried out number of experiments such as time dilation, gravitational lens to find out exact source.  But he could not.  Relative theory is far better and excellent when compared to Newton gravity.   Newton simply extended his Inverse square law as universal law of gravitation.  Most of the theories, proposed by Einstein are practically proved.

However, it appears that relativity could not take a perfect landing on gravity.   Here Lab tests are different and the source is different.  Source is like a base, whatever construction you may carry out, it is very difficult to withstand in the longer period. 

Ok, now let us see how gravity works.  Let us assume that weight of Mr. A is 60 kgs, his mass weight is 10 kgs and gravity weight is 50 kgs.  When gravity is adding 50 kgs weight  to Mr. A, how can we imaging that Gravity is not due to force or pressure.  When the skydiver, dives in, before opening the parachute or after opening the parachute gravity is constant at that place.  Gravity continues to exert influence on the person, but due to his action of acceleration,  pressure or force of gravity decreases till he comes to constant position. 

The climate on the Earth is like a pressure cooker and it is being boiled by the Energy from the Earth.  When the temperature raises,
pressure/force increases on the things to be cooked.  Here temperature is high at the bottom, but pressure\force is exerted on all the things to be cooked.  Suppose if it is rice,  pressure is on all the grains.  In case if the rice grains moves upward, it may temporarily escape pressure but  it continues to be within the pressure or force.  Walls of the pressure cooker works like space fabric.  Nothing can escape from the pressure/force.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 12/02/2017 14:21:56
Pressure is a result of gravity and in no way the cause. That would be circular reasoning. Your dilation is not ripples but a somewhat non linear reduction of energy density to the center of a planet or any mass. Dilation of spacetime is an accurate explanation and the gamma term in relativity. Time is related to energy we view as tick rate. The tick rate slows as we descend a gravity well. So the available energy becomes less dense per volume (dilation). Energy moves electrons and this causes friction to energy. In more dilated space there is less friction. Mass is attracted to the dilation of less friction with energy. Mass causes its own dilation and the more accumulation of mass the more dilation in the center of mass where all mass is attracted.

Pressure causes mass to be more compact and more dense mass less dense spacetime energy. But pressure does not cause gravity. Your cooking the wrong meal.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 12/02/2017 16:17:47
Mr GOC,
Thank you,
It is true that Pressure or force cannot be created or developed out of nothing and it is gravity only. 

In time dilation, time dilates due to gravity, in other words, gravity is influencing functioning of our watches, mechanical or electrical.  In a gravity well, force or pressure of gravity on watch increases and tick rate slows down.  Any way final result is one and the same only.

Well i am trying to cook perfect meal only, but in relative terms it may not.  Today, it may not be Pasala, some body will come and prove it. 

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 12/02/2017 16:38:34
Gravity causes pressure. Pressure does not cause gravity. Dilation of energy increases the distance of the electron cycle. This slows the tick rate of clocks. c is constant in relativity. Distance for c changes in GR so your measuring stick increases to measure the same speed of light in every frame.

This is an abstract issue which the observations of pressure do not follow the relativistic nature of light.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 15/02/2017 14:47:51
Gravity causes pressure. Pressure does not cause gravity. Dilation of energy increases the distance of the electron cycle. This slows the tick rate of clocks.
If you are at a hight h1 and go down to  h0<h1, how do you explain the dilation of energy? What does energy dilation mean, energy density decrease or energy decrease?
Say we want to measure the energy of an electron around an atom.
My concept suggests the energy is constant, energy density decreases and instruments change: a meter stick will be longer by gamma(v1):gamma(v0). The electron orbiting time will increase by the same factor.γ1:γ0. I don't know the exact mechanism for the clock, because it is related to the frequency of the photon that the electron emmits during orbital transition, but it must be proportional to the same factor for my concept to work.
A stationary observer at h1 will indeed see an energy desity dilation compared to the original atom.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 15/02/2017 18:26:37
There is zero potential to measure v0. That is the basis for relativity using one dilation against another for a relative value.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 15/02/2017 23:56:03
There is zero potential to measure v0. That is the basis for relativity using one dilation against another for a relative value.
Then how do you know whether it is a dilation or not?
How do you explain Energy dilation?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 16/02/2017 17:49:03
There is zero potential to measure v0. That is the basis for relativity using one dilation against another for a relative value.
Then how do you know whether it is a dilation or not?
How do you explain Energy dilation?

The position between galaxies the furthest away from each other would have the least dilation of energy by just following relativity. Mass creates dilated energy. Called curved space as a two dimensional explanation of a three dimensional effect.

Energy dilation is energy particle expansion between particles of energy. Light has to go further and electrons have to go further to slow the tick rate of a clock. This allows equivalence between light and the electron being confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. No matter that frames tick rate. c and distance of c particles determine tick rate = to the vector velocity of light. Relativity
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 16/02/2017 20:36:37
Light has to go further and electrons have to go further to slow the tick rate of a clock. This allows equivalence between light and the electron being confounded to measure the same speed of light in every frame. No matter that frames tick rate. c and distance of c particles determine tick rate = to the vector velocity of light. Relativity
That is exactly what my model says about fermions. The helical length increases with velocity or when lower in a gravity well and causality wave (c)  that composes these fermions has to travel more, exactly like OAM light beams do. For OAM light beams, causality wave is a pure EM wave. For charged particles it is a bit more complicated to explain this wave.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: GoC on 16/02/2017 21:19:26
hen where doe your theory differ from relativity?
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 17/02/2017 18:58:11
hen where doe your theory differ from relativity?
My conclusion is that all relativistic phenomena are produced by angular momentum which creates a path length increase of the particle Poynting vector exactly like the path increase used in relativity. These paths explain both speed limit c  and time dilation with speed. Because everything happens in a flat Euclidean space, there is a different explanation for length contraction which is only relative and it is seen by the object that moves faster. In the absolute reference frame only length dilation happens.
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 19/02/2017 08:17:53
Mr. Nilak

Well, It is true that time dilates due to two important factors, gravity and velocity.  Einstein has used the clock as a lab instrument in measuring gravity variations. In other words gravity is influencing  functioning of our clocks.  When gravity influences clocks, why do not it influence mass.  Actually mass dilation of energy is due to gravity only.  In fact. think how small amount of energy, entropy comes out to form a space time. 

In normal conditions, mass is not having any capacity to dilate energy by itself, unless otherwise it is detonated or destroyed due to force.  But here mass dilates energy by itself to form a space time.  As per GR space is filled with mass and energy and mass decides curvature of space time. 

In all references, we are taking speed of light 'c' as a standard reference in all our frames.  Do light really travels from one place another place.  Suppose let us assume that, you have switched on a battery cell and light comes out.  Here, can we take that outside  is empty and a fresh ray is only created.  Here there are so many unexplored things.  When gravity influences clock,  how can we think that it is not influencing torch, battery and light.  Here important point, we have to keep in mind that light varies according to gravity.

Ok, we will discuss about velocity and time dilation later.

Yours
Psreddy

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 19/02/2017 14:19:30
Mr. Nilak

Well, It is true that time dilates due to two important factors, gravity and velocity.  Einstein has used the clock as a lab instrument in measuring gravity variations. In other words gravity is influencing  functioning of our clocks.  When gravity influences clocks, why do not it influence mass.  Actually mass dilation of energy is due to gravity only.  In fact. think how small amount of energy, entropy comes out to form a space time. 

In normal conditions, mass is not having any capacity to dilate energy by itself, unless otherwise it is detonated or destroyed due to force.  But here mass dilates energy by itself to form a space time.  As per GR space is filled with mass and energy and mass decides curvature of space time. 

In all references, we are taking speed of light 'c' as a standard reference in all our frames.  Do light really travels from one place another place.  Suppose let us assume that, you have switched on a battery cell and light comes out.  Here, can we take that outside  is empty and a fresh ray is only created.  Here there are so many unexplored things.  When gravity influences clock,  how can we think that it is not influencing torch, battery and light.  Here important point, we have to keep in mind that light varies according to gravity.

Ok, we will discuss about velocity and time dilation later.

Yours
Psreddy

Gravity actually doesn't reduce clocks rates by the strength of the gravitational field. Only if you travel from one height to another you will experience these effects, in a constant, gravitational field where all field lines are parallel. Therefore the gravitational potential causes a relative time dilation.
My concept says that if an atom travels from a height H1 to H0, the electron wavefront accelerates, and its wavelength increases. The wavelength increase is associated with a clock rate decrease. The frequency of the electron also increases relative to the initial frequency because the wavefront is faster.

The concept also explains the causality c. If the causality is constant, what happens with it within the structure of an electron or any other 1/2 spin particle? How can the electron move slower than c? Can the causality be slowed down? I believe not. Only the helical path can explain it which ensures this causality remains constant. The helix unfolded to a triangle is responsible for all the phenomena that relativity explains using the same triangle. The helical path of the Poynting vector only applies to 1/2 spin particles.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 25/02/2017 11:40:42
Mr Nilak,

Thank you for sharing,

You have said:
"Gravity actually doesn't reduce clocks rates by the strength of the gravitational field. Only if you travel from one height to another you will experience these effects, in a constant, gravitational field where all field lines are parallel. Therefore the gravitational potential causes a relative time dilation"

Well, there is every need for us to have a clear idea on what exactly is gravity and how it influences things on the earth. Ok let us discuss about needle of the clock.  Let us presume that its weight is 150 milli grams.  In this, original weight or mass of the needle is just 25 milli grams only and its gravity weight is 125 milli grams.   

Originally the metal from which the needle was cut and designed also weighed similarly only.  When the metal is cut into small pieces, each piece carried its own weight and gravity weight.  From this we can understand that nothing can escape from the influence of gravity. 

When the gravity weight of a needle is 125 mg, in a total weight of 150 mg, how can we think that needle is not influenced by gravity.  Suppose if the clock is in gravity well,  its gravity weight naturally increases.  When its gravity weight increases, it needs more energy to move the clock and tick rate slows down.  Where as on high hill areas, where gravity is weak, weight of the needle also comes down and it is able to move more quickly.

THIS IS TIME DILATION.

Here, What relativity says is about changes or variations in the time dilation due to gravity variations.   Actually time dilation, gravitational lensing are all tests conducted by Einstein to find out the source or method by which gravity is working. 

Einstein identified that the curvature of space time as responsible for gravity.  Actually, Einstein departed from the Newton thinking of Earth as responsible for gravity.  Einstein was so genius that he carried out number of experiments to find out the fact.  But he could not identify the exact source and therefore he moved to outside our universe and touched  black holes, dark energy, dark matter, and neutron stars.  After carrying out number of experiments he realised that space time is not horizontal  but curved one and it can be pushed and pulled, stretched and warped by matter.  Gravity feels strongest where space time is most curved, and it vanishes where spacetime is flat. This is the core of Einstein's theory of general relativity. 

As per Einstein, matter pulls the space time and it also pushes it.  In his view it also warps the things on the Earth.  In other words  "matter tells spacetime how to curve, and curved space time tells matter how to move".    Actually at the dawn of 20th century lot of research was going on Atomic explosion.  Scientists were surprised at the release of huge energy by the matter.  By mistake,  scientists forget that they are in the influence of gravity and what ever research they are carrying out is being influenced by it.  Originally matter consists of very small amount of energy, but when detonated huge amount of energy is released and it attracted the attention of scientists. 

It is true that original energy, entropy of the mass never changes, even if it is within the mass or released into the open area.  It has no capacity to make wonders.  It is due to the outside energy that it is gaining strength.  When the small  atom is detonated, energy freed pushes the existing energy.  One's chain reaction is started, pooling or concentration of energy at a particular place gains up.  This pooling or concentration again depends on two important things:

01  Internal energy released by the mass
02  and  gravity.

Naturally if the internal energy is weak, explosion is also weak.  Further any explosion mainly depends on the gravity and varies from place to place.


Einstein thought the Earth is rotating with lot of speed and therefore micro photons are moving out into the space and space time is completely filled by matter and energy.  But he forget that hydrosphere is existing in between and tiny matter is tangled in water molecules.  Here one more important point is that Earth is not rotating but is being made to rotate by the gravity winds.  Gravity is so strong on Earth that it is having complete grip over each and everything including minute things.  When Earth rotates, it is not Earth alone, it is gravity winds, hydrosphere and everything.  Suppose if we move anything on Earth, we have to keep one important point that it is rotating or moving against gravity winds.  So, rotation of things on Earth is different when compared to rotation of Earth. 

Einstein carried out number of lab experiments on the rotation of Earth.  Since Earth is in spherical in shape, he found micro mass moving out and also tangling in and around edges of the globe.  This paved the way, for an assumption that space time is completely filled with matter and energy.  But here simple mistake is that he forget that he is doing thing in gravity field and matter is raising not because of spherical shape alone but due to the force of gravity.


Space time is not pulled or pushed by the matter but by the internal energy of the planet.  At the centre of the Earth, where it is releasing lot of Energy, space time is pushed upward and is stretched.  But at the poles, where internal energy is almost nil, space time is pulled towards Earth.  Though presence of energy is high at the centre, but gravity is low as the fresh energy coming from Earth is pushing the existing energy waves.   

As per Einstein, your weight on earth is due to the fact that your body is traveling through warped space time.  This is also another important point which warrants lot of discussion.  Here, once again we have to remind ourselves that Earth is not rotating but is being made to rotate by the gravity winds.  It is true that out universe itself is moving towards different destination, but we experience different gravity on different planets.  If the gravity is due to warped space time, than we have to experience same gravity on different planets, but it varies. 

Well, gravity is different and it mainly depends on the internal energy and hydrosphere of the planet.  Whatever the energy, planet may release if not preserved everything goes waste.  Here hydrosphere works like space fabric and it never allows internal energy to escape that much easily.  And it leads to formation of "Energy base" on a planet.  This energy base due to the weight of the hydrosphere accelerates upon things on the Earth.  This is 'what exactly is gravity'. 

In real term, gravity is attraction of two masses.  The word gravity best suits to Newtons Inverse square law.  But this force or pressure we are experiencing on Earth is different one and this cannot be called as gravity.  Here, in this fundamental energy plays key role.  After local Bing Bang, all the planets started dilating huge energy into open area and this fundamental energy started spreading to wide area.  This fundamental energy, established a "Energy base".  This "Energy base" decided the boundary of a  universe.  Slowly, all the planets started cooling and dilation of energy also slowed down and now they are not burning firewood but charcoal, releasing small amount of energy.  It is very difficult to establish a energy base in a universe, but ones it is, it survives with the small amount of energy support for quit long time.  In my view, in this star system each universe functions independently and there is no warped space time controlling them. 

Nilak, you said:
     
"My concept says that if an atom travels from a height H1 to H0, the electron wavefront accelerates, and its wavelength increases. The wavelength increase is associated with a clock rate decrease. The frequency of the electron also increases relative to the initial frequency because the wavefront is faster".

Here, your assumption is 100% correct.  Keeping aside other things, gravity also mainly depends on the gap in between Earth and space time.  The more the gap, pressure of hydrosphere increases on the gravity waves and thus gravity increases.  If the gap is small, naturally pressure or force is low.  This is the reason, why if we move to high hill areas, gravity weakens and if we move to plain areas gravity increases. 

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: nilak on 25/02/2017 12:20:41
Mr. Psreddy

Mr Nilak,

Thank you for sharing,

You have said:
"Gravity actually doesn't reduce clocks rates by the strength of the gravitational field. Only if you travel from one height to another you will experience these effects, in a constant, gravitational field where all field lines are parallel. Therefore the gravitational potential causes a relative time dilation"

Well, there is every need for us to have a clear idea on what exactly is gravity and how it influences things on the earth. Ok let us discuss about needle of the clock.  Let us presume that its weight is 150 milli grams.  In this, original weight or mass of the needle is just 25 milli grams only and its gravity weight is 125 milli grams.   

Originally the metal from which the needle was cut and designed also weighed similarly only.  When the metal is cut into small pieces, each piece carried its own weight and gravity weight.  From this we can understand that nothing can escape from the influence of gravity. 

When the gravity weight of a needle is 125 mg, in a total weight of 150 mg, how can we think that needle is not influenced by gravity.  Suppose if the clock is in gravity well,  its gravity weight naturally increases.  When its gravity weight increases, it needs more energy to move the clock and tick rate slows down.  Where as on high hill areas, where gravity is weak, weight of the needle also comes down and it is able to move more quickly.
It is not a question of mechanical clocks. This is about fundamental processes, about how particles travel. A mechanical clock is not a reference for measuring time. The atomic clocks are.
According to GR, only gravitational potential matters, it is not my concept. My concept explains the same thing.
Quote


Space time is not pulled or pushed by the matter but by the internal energy of the planet.  At the centre of the Earth, where it is releasing lot of Energy, space time is pushed upward and is stretched.  But at the poles, where internal energy is almost nil, space time is pulled towards Earth.  Though presence of energy is high at the centre, but gravity is low as the fresh energy coming from Earth is pushing the existing energy waves.   

I think we can view it like a space pulled by mass but not spacetime pulled by mass because spacetime is static.


Quote
     
"My concept says that if an atom travels from a height H1 to H0, the electron wavefront accelerates, and its wavelength increases. The wavelength increase is associated with a clock rate decrease. The frequency of the electron also increases relative to the initial frequency because the wavefront is faster".

Here, your assumption is 100% correct.  Keeping aside other things, gravity also mainly depends on the gap in between Earth and space time.  The more the gap, pressure of hydrosphere increases on the gravity waves and thus gravity increases.  If the gap is small, naturally pressure or force is low.  This is the reason, why if we move to high hill areas, gravity weakens and if we move to plain areas gravity increases. 

It is not about Hydrosphere. We analize particles in free space not in air which contains atoms and influence these motions.

Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 25/02/2017 15:04:22
Mr.Nilak,
Well, of course do you think that an atomic clock is not influenced by gravity.  In fact it is more influenced than a mechanical clock.  I had just referred it as an example. 

At present most of our concentration is on explosion of atom bomb and amount of energy released by it.   An atom contains very, very small amount of energy only.  Even if an atom bomb of 1 tonne is detonated, total energy released by it is small and it has no capacity to make any wonders. Actually this is an important subject left out by the scientists.  Suppose if we cross our universe and detonate an atom bomb, what happens, nothing. 

It is true that there is strong gravity on this Earth and it is influencing Atoms of the bomb also.  When an atom is split, gravity waves try to occupy the gap and the energy coming out from the atom, pushes the existing gravity waves.  And when other atoms start detonating, energy waves start getting charged further and further and radiation raises and chain reaction starts.

For that, any explosion mainly depends on the external energy.  Suppose if we  take an atom bomb, outside our Earth climate and detonate it, what happens.  Here Energy in the open area is not present with force or pressure as it is happening on the Earth climate.  For energy in the open area an atom bomb is also an object only and there fore energy start concentrating from all sides equally and creates pressure.  If detonated, it takes time and energy start moving in all sides equally. 

At present we are of the opinion that mass dilates energy and a gravity curve is developed against it.  Actually without detonation how mass dilates energy.  It is wonder to see where the energy is coming from to form a gravity curve.

Finally, Nilak i would like to tell the world that Gravity is influencing each and everything,  explosions, fire, light and almost all the important activities in our daily life.  Any research, off the gravity misleads and takes us to fighting in darkness. 

Even after another 100 years, if we look back, progress may be marginal or nothing and where we are means there only. 

Here, whatever i say may not be 100% correct, but there is something, and hereby i appeal everybody to come out to break these circles and to draw a straight line of research.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 25/02/2017 16:46:37
Mr. Nilak,
Ok, let me tell you that i myself is a bank employee and right from the early education, out of interest i use to read science theories.  But i do not accept any thing that much easily.  Some of the incidents that have happened in early days helped me to write all this. 

Actually, right from the starting, i want to carry out a practical test and to prove the world that the theories written  be me are correct. 

At present, we are depending on alternative current, which in my view is not at all correct. In future in my view direct current is going to rein the world.  Based on the theory written by me, i had drawn a sketch or method by which it can be implemented. 

Due to the constrains, job on one side and lack of practical instruments, i could not complete it.  From your posts, it appears that you are having knowledge and interest in electronics and there fore if you are interested i want to hand over the same to you and your team for practical implementation.

Awaiting positive response.

Yours
Psreddy
Title: Re: What exactly gravity is?
Post by: pasala on 26/02/2017 11:57:02
Friends,
Here, one of my friend questioned me, "how can you think that space time is not filled with matter and energy".

Ok, once again let me clarify that Earth is not rotating.  Suppose, if you rotate anything in this gravity field, due to the force or friction of gravity, it start moving with great difficulty.  Due to the force of gravity on the upper layer, dust particles start raising.  Right from Newton, they have designed the  globe and rotated them with maximum speed and noted dust particles raising.  Since Earth is in spherical in shape, they have observed most of the light mass particles accumulating at that place.

Einstein was so genius that after carrying out number of lab tests, he disproved universal law of gravitation.  But he could not found the method or way by which this gravity is working.  At that time lot of research was going on atomic explosion.  Behavior of matter attracted the eyes of Einstein.  Einstein noticed matter raising sharply, when globe is rotated with great speed.   So, finally Einstein came to a conclusion that matter is playing key role in space time. 

We should not forget that Earth is not rotating by itself and it has no capacity to rotate.  It is the gravity winds, which are having strong hold over Earth are moving the Earth.  These strong gravity winds, never allows matter to escape that much easily.  Only small light photons and dark matter can escape this gravity waves.  These small amount of matter and energy present in the spacetime has no capacity to decide the curvature of space time. 

Yours
Psreddy