It would have been nice to have been told we where wrong though David
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Yes. Gravitrons may explain how the gravitational force is communicated. But how would that force be able to impart a force that is orthagonal to it?
Vector calculus. You could work orthogonal vectors to suit what you wanted to measure.
Mr S, I do understand vectors, and it is quite impossible to derive any force that is orthogonal to another force by vector analysis, vector calculus or anything else. This is not a math problem.
I'll give you a model and you can try to knock it down:
Attach a string to a pebble. Now swing the pebble around your head. It orbits around your hand. Easy! Right?
Now try to repeat the experiment without moving your hand in a circle. It's impossible because you cannot impart any rotational movement to the pebble.
Think of gravity as the string and your hand as the center of mass of the earth. Unless the center of mass of the earth executes a circular path relative to you (and it doesn't), it can do nothing to propel you.
did any of you get into fights at school? you have the same effect, a kid wants to beat you up, and all of a sudden there a ring of kids watching you surrounded by the blood thirsty buggers does any one lift a finger.. nop
i got into a little altercation with a little ****head on the metro, loads of adults, big buggers as well, watching me get my head kicked in by 5 angry dwarfs (well they were 18 perhap and short).
so battered and bruised i get up dust myself of and a man comes up to me and sais... "someone should do something about them". i said "yes, why not you?"
All I want to knwo is what your "repulsive principle" is. When I asked for details, you made the claim that any force that is repulsive is an antigravitational force. Given the recent evidence from cosmology, this not only includes electromagnetism, it includes gravity too!
But that can't be all that there is to your proposal, because now you seem to be claiming that antimatter, despite being seemingly no different from ordinary matter except for charge, actually acts against gravity. Or perhaps you are arguing that antimatter is not opposite charge, it is acually opposite gravity.
I simply do not know what your principle is and when I ask you to rephrase whatever your principle is, you refuse. Given your poor spelling and grammar, it is difficult for me to understand the meaning of your long oridinal post, so I would really like to see it in more direct language than already given.