Gravity Problem Solved

  • 163 Replies
  • 48936 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #100 on: 22/09/2008 20:09:08 »
OK CSC, here are the numbers.
For two balls of steel (stop giggling at the back) each with a mass of 1 Kg and separated by a distance (between their centres) of 10 cm, the force is 6.67X10^-11 Newtons.

Now do what you said you would, or shut up.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline lindsaylee22

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #101 on: 23/09/2008 05:20:15 »
I repeat the crucial question:

                     WHY IS THE MOON MOVING AWAY FROM THE EARTH??

To answer this question one must understand what happened to create the moon/effect that it has on this planet.. you might look into the history of the moon and of earth as celestial bodies.  There has been talk relating the ancient stories of greek goddess Thea, the mother of the moon with the creation of our only satelite, along with giving the earth the tilt that allows for seasons and the properties that are vital in creating and sustaining life. 

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #102 on: 23/09/2008 10:23:47 »
OK CSC, here are the numbers.

I was thinking more of the surface gravity of a steel ball. If this could be determined in the lab and given a specific value for a given size then this should be able to be scaled up to the size of the Earth to give 9.8m/s/s. I'm dubious to whether this could be achieved. Also the experiment should ideally be done away from any other possible influences i.e. in space, on a big a steel ball as possible. I also noted from the Wikipedia entry that the Cavendish experiment and results don't appear quite as clear cut as you may like to think.

Trying to convince people that there is a fundamental problem with gravity is never going to be easy. My main piece of evidence is the mammoth data provided by Charles Hapgood. If you could do me the honour of looking at Sciforums.com in the Astronomy section, 'Did Giant Comet Help Hobbits Reach Flores' to see a lively considered debate over this fascinating subject of a Core-Centered Theory of Gravity, then I will look further into the Cavendish experiment and the concept of big G.

Try and be a little open-minded about my claims for just a bit longer.
« Last Edit: 23/09/2008 10:42:13 by common_sense_seeker »

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #103 on: 23/09/2008 10:50:30 »
On sciforums.com someone has responded that the Sun's gravitational influence has been measured to be 0.1 grains (force) greater on a 150lb person at noon rather than at midnight. It is just that it is such a small amount that we can't notice it.

My reply is that why is the Sun's gravitational influence on 150lb of seawater so many more orders of magnitude greater than this? We can see the effect of the rise of the seawater by the Sun with our eyes.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #104 on: 23/09/2008 14:16:04 »
I've just thought of the answer. The Earth's surface gravity of 9.8m/s/s is only for baryonic (or everyday) matter. For dark matter it is much greater. I am proposing that dark matter (DM) exists at the center of the Earth, the Moon and the stars. Therefore all the calculations of their weight using the Cavindish value of G, the universal constant of newtonian gravitation are underestimates. This is therefore a solution for the Missing Mass problem as well! It all fits.
« Last Edit: 23/09/2008 14:17:41 by common_sense_seeker »

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #105 on: 23/09/2008 14:53:10 »
Why are you wasting your time and everyone else's by bringing in all these red herrings to explain an effect which isn't there in the first place? Are you just an attention seeker?
You really need to establish some bona fide by showing us some calculations and figures. Quoting 'some bloke' is not likely to convince anyone.
I suggest that, in fact, you don't know enough of basic Physics to come to a conclusion one way or another.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #106 on: 23/09/2008 15:56:25 »
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but it is my life's work in one respect. I instinctively knew that someone in the history of science had made a mistake from a relatively early age. It's just something that's happened. It makes perfect sense to me. You can't please all of the people all of the time.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #107 on: 23/09/2008 18:12:46 »
And you can't prove everything every time. But just a bit of it might earn some sympathy.
Instinct is a really poor criterion for judging Scientific Theories.
Wasn't it 'obvious to everyone' that things 'just fall down'?
« Last Edit: 23/09/2008 19:14:31 by sophiecentaur »

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #108 on: 23/09/2008 19:27:40 »
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but it is my life's work in one respect. I instinctively knew that someone in the history of science had made a mistake from a relatively early age. It's just something that's happened. It makes perfect sense to me. You can't please all of the people all of the time.
Then get a better life.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #109 on: 24/09/2008 13:13:20 »
Dear BC and sophiecentaur, I've answered your criticisms with a good explanation. I don't expect you to acknowledge that of course.

A couple of references to justify my theory of a temporary land bridge between the American continent and Australasia due to a giant comet near-miss pulling on the Earth's inner core of dark matter around 40,000 B.P are:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Siberian_American_Aborigines

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/430944.stm

http://www.centerfirstamericans.org/research.php

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #110 on: 24/09/2008 14:25:31 »
Quote
I've answered your criticisms with a good explanation.
Really? I can't recall seeing anything which could be classified as an explanation. Where are your model, your maths and your data?
I shan't bother reading links until you actually commit yourself to something more substantial than mere assurances.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #111 on: 24/09/2008 14:35:09 »
I did read them and found they merely pose the question about how certain primitive peoples moved around the Earth.
There is even a perfectly reasonable suggestion that they traveled by BOAT. Well, there's a novel idea - much more attractive than massive distortion of the Earth's crust. After all, we've seen lots of boats and never seen the Lithosphere pounding up and down by more than a few cm for a few minutes (and that constitutes a very violent Quake).

I thought the main point of this thread (indeed, the TITLE) is about a 'new theory of gravity'.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #112 on: 24/09/2008 19:09:25 »
Talking about the title, I'm still waiting to hear what evidence there is that shows that there is a problem with gravity. OK there's the "pioneer anomaly" but that's a tiny effect, It's hard to be certain that it's even real.

Before you solve a problem you have to identify it; so go on CSC- tell us what you think the problem is.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #113 on: 25/09/2008 10:12:21 »
BC, see the BBC TV webpage devoted to Brain Cox's programme "What On Earth Is Wrong With Gravity?". He's the expert, and he says there is a problem.

sophie, there is no evidence of boat building expertise anything like this far back. It goes against all known scientific trends for this ability.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #114 on: 25/09/2008 18:46:46 »
Is it likely that any evidence would remain of 'boats', used at that time? They would be more like rafts, in any case and would be much less likely to survive than other signs of civilisation.
And whilst we are talking about 'going against all known scientific trends'??????

Brian Cox's idea of 'something wrong with gravity represents a very low level of modification of present ideas. Relevant, of course and could well be true but it would not propose that the existing model is 'totally wrong'. I think he is in a better position to explain it than css, who seems to be more intent in proving the present system to be wrong than making an incremental step in the right direction.

Would Brian Cox go along with the Land Bridge idea, do you think?

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #115 on: 25/09/2008 20:52:45 »
CSC
The presense of people in places that they could only have reached by boat is evidence that they had boats.
Dr Cox' TV show talks about tiny changes to "gravity as we know it" ; things like the pioneer anomaly.
Did you not notice that I already accepted those?
Now please tell us what evidence you have for there being a problem with gravity.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #116 on: 26/09/2008 11:05:10 »
BC and sophie, see "Does Earth/Moon Model Show Cavendish Is Wrong?" in the Physics section.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #117 on: 27/09/2008 10:51:27 »
I'm currently working through the maths for my alternative idea of gravity. Dark Matter At The Center Of The Earth Theory. It would also be a solution of the Missing Mass Problem of cosmology.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #118 on: 27/09/2008 15:29:14 »
Starting another thread doesn't absolve you of the responsibility to answer the question.
What's the evidence of a problem with gravity (in particular an problem thst your fanfifull notions solve).?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #119 on: 30/09/2008 10:32:52 »
BC, it requires lateral thinking. If you're so negative you won't begin to understand what I'm on about. The main reason for thinking there's a problem with gravity is that a Theory Of Everything hasn't been achieved. This is despite the billions of cash poured into the search, the hundreds of thousands of science experts, and the ludicrously large amount of computing power and technology at humanity's disposal. Still everyone is confused. Also a lack of a mechanism for gravity is a tell-tell sign of ignorance.

What about the Earth's lower equitorial gravity? This is counter-intuitive, there's more mass due to the bulge! Yet another clue to Newton's law of gravitation being simply too basic, and that it is only applies to objects near the Sun's ecliptic plane which are baryonic in structure.
« Last Edit: 30/09/2008 10:36:31 by common_sense_seeker »

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #120 on: 30/09/2008 14:52:34 »
Quote
What about the Earth's lower equitorial gravity?
Did you know the Earth rotates? Are you aware of the forces involved with circular motion?
If you are going to replace conventional Science with some stuff of your own, the least you could do is to learn about the official stuff. The measured difference in weight at different points on Earth is perfectly explained by Newton's laws of Gravity and Motion. Try the sums - they work!
Are there any sums to support you theory?

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #121 on: 30/09/2008 14:55:26 »
I notice that you say BC doesn't understand what you are talkikng about.
Do you understand? You certainly don't appear to.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #122 on: 30/09/2008 19:11:36 »
Css, before you try lateral thinking, try the ordinary version.
Spending cash doesn't produce a theory- there is a deffinition that says a mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. Perhaps we need better coffee in physics departments.
One thing that we have a plentiful supply of is speculative nonsense like yours.

As for your comment the "Still everyone is confused.", speak for yourself.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #123 on: 01/10/2008 13:33:12 »
The lack of a coeherent Theory of Everything is proof enough that my theory should be given a chance. The reply by Professor Murty of the University Of Ottawa said just as much. Ii will never happen with you two, I know. I've not that put out by the situation. The maths proof is coming along just fine. I plan to publish a professional paper in the Nexus, if I have to.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #124 on: 01/10/2008 19:51:29 »
"The lack of a coeherent Theory of Everything is proof enough that my theory should be given a chance. "
Bollocks.
Since your theory is demonstrably wrong (in predicting where the high tidees are for example) it doesn't deserve anything more than to be laughed at.
Also, since you don't even understand the current theroty at school level it's not realistic to think that you will improve it.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #125 on: 03/10/2008 23:54:51 »
Quote
I plan to publish a professional paper in the Nexus, if I have to.
That would merely prove that Nexus are prepared to publish 'anything'.

Possibly Prof Murty was just humouring you. Did he catch a glimpse of the wild gleam in your eye?

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #126 on: 04/10/2008 16:34:02 »
Who or what are "Nexus" anyway?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #127 on: 09/10/2008 09:11:51 »
Who or what are "Nexus" anyway?

A magazine that covers alternate issues which can be against the mainstream. When I have read it in the past, most were of no interest to me, but occassionally there was a good article.

BTW my theory of matter at the center of Earth having a lower entropy and so a higher gravitational force of attraction would increase the effect of a gravity gradient. This is the effect which creates the ocean tides by a flexure of the lithosphere. If my theory is correct then the tidal force calculated due to the Sunīs gravity gradient should be too low to actually create the observed flexure. Iīm currently working on the mathematical calculation from the bottom up, assuming nothing. The discovery of this discrepancy would help in my explanation of how a giant cometīs gravity could raise the seafloor by over 6 km. This is because the effect of a gravity gradient is greatly increased by small bodies with a high gravitational field being at close range.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force

My theory would also increase the gravity gradient effect which produces tidal heating. The internal heating of Jupiterīs moon Io is currently not very well understood and something of an enigma. Yet another clue to the validity of my new idea? Iīm convinced it is.
« Last Edit: 09/10/2008 09:19:58 by common_sense_seeker »

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #128 on: 09/10/2008 17:57:47 »
Validity?
Do you realise that, not only do you need to justify your new idea but you have to show that the normal gravitational laws actually DON'T apply. That would be very hard in the face of all the perfectly good evidence in their favour.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #129 on: 09/10/2008 19:22:42 »
For a start, "alternate" is a verb, not an adjective.
Anyway, perhaps you could oblige us by pointing out the web address of this publisher. I'm sure we would all like to judge for ourselves (thne laugh)
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #130 on: 09/10/2008 20:08:30 »
Validity?
Do you realise that, not only do you need to justify your new idea but you have to show that the normal gravitational laws actually DON'T apply. That would be very hard in the face of all the perfectly good evidence in their favour.

Iīve found some data and calculated that the pressure needed to flex the crust by 0.2m due to the load of an ice sheet is 727kg/m/m. The calculation to find the internal pressure due to the Sun is a lot trickier. Iīm assuming that this pressure will be a lot less than the figure above, which will lend credibility to my theory. Iīm still working on the maths.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #131 on: 09/10/2008 20:54:33 »
What do you mean by "the internal pressure due to the Sun "?
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #132 on: 09/10/2008 22:09:53 »
What do you mean by "the internal pressure due to the Sun "?

You really need to read up on the current theory of ocean tides. Itīs the pressure produced from the gravity gradient of the Sun. Simple in concept, the side facing the Sun is slightly closer and so therefore experiences a greater force of gravitational attraction. Iīm saying that this effect is too small to produce the flexure of the lithosphere of around 0.2m. The pressure would have to be around 727kg/m/m.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #133 on: 10/10/2008 00:12:35 »
Really, BC, you should read more of the fringe Science press. Don't you keep up with 'current theory'? I regularly read Nexus, Viz and the Beano so I am well ahead on this new stuff.

It strikes me that the 'new theory doesn't seem to have an explanation for the fact that we have TWO HIGH TIDES every day.
Gosh darn - we may have to go back to the old theory after all.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #134 on: 10/10/2008 08:15:00 »
Really, BC, you should read more of the fringe Science press. Don't you keep up with 'current theory'? I regularly read Nexus, Viz and the Beano so I am well ahead on this new stuff.

It strikes me that the 'new theory doesn't seem to have an explanation for the fact that we have TWO HIGH TIDES every day.
Gosh darn - we may have to go back to the old theory after all.

Itīs just the same as the current theory, of course. An effect due to the gravity gradient produces a bulge on either side of the Earth. Hence two tides a day.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #135 on: 10/10/2008 10:26:28 »
Quote
due to the gravity gradient

Would this be from the Sun or the Moon?
Do rotational forces play a part?
Which bits of the conventional gravitational forces are you claiming not to exist? How massive does an object need to be to have gravity?
These are but a few of the questions which you haven't fully addressed yet.
I would advise you to prepare a much more complete theory about this before you go public. Wouldn't that make 'common sense'?
"Fools rush in", as they say.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #136 on: 10/10/2008 10:34:29 »
Quote
due to the gravity gradient

Would this be from the Sun or the Moon?
Do rotational forces play a part?
Which bits of the conventional gravitational forces are you claiming not to exist? How massive does an object need to be to have gravity?
These are but a few of the questions which you haven't fully addressed yet.
I would advise you to prepare a much more complete theory about this before you go public. Wouldn't that make 'common sense'?
"Fools rush in", as they say.

Iīm just considering a simple Sun-Earth system without rotation. I wish to calculate the pressure on the crust induced by the Sunīs gravity gradient. Itīs very simple in concept.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #137 on: 10/10/2008 23:25:57 »
Quote
Iīm just considering a simple Sun-Earth system without rotation.
Isn't some sort of ORBIT involved?
And, as the Moon contributes most of the tidal effect, perhaps your theory should include that?
Your Science is somewhat lacking, I fear.
(However subtle you like to think it may be.)

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #138 on: 11/10/2008 13:39:46 »
"Itīs just the same as the current theory, of course."
Then shut up about it.
"Itīs very simple in concept. "
I think it was Einstein who said
"Theories should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler."
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #139 on: 13/10/2008 14:18:11 »
No orbit is needed because tidal forces are the same thing as spegettification in principle. Although the surface of the Earth is moving at 465m/s, it's effects can be ignored due to Einstein's inertial frame of reference .i.e it isn't accelerating. The science is coming along just fine. It's getting technical now with mathematical equations using TeX in another forum where people are just a notch higher in their ability than you guys.

Funnily enough I will be comparing this now calculated force with the force producing the equatorial bulge. This will take into account the viscoelasticity of the mantle for a more accurate comparison and give an additional figure to the ice sheet deformation calculation. Coming along just fine.

 

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #140 on: 13/10/2008 18:47:42 »
It would be a high school level question to ask how long, if there were no orbit, it would take for the earth to fall into the sun.
CSS is under the delusion that this doesn't matter.
(BTW, rotating frames of reference are accelerating; please learn some physics)
And this "It's getting technical now with mathematical equations using TeX in another forum where people are just a notch higher in their ability than you guys." is too funny to take as an insult.
I could use a laugh and perhaps an education; please tell me where I can find these grandmasters of tex.
(I tried serching for them, but the results didn't seem helpful; they all thought I couldn't spell latex.)

Incidentally, when you have consulted these demigods and done your calculation, what are you going to do if it gives the wrong answer?

After all we already know how much the land moves from things like GPS measurements.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #141 on: 13/10/2008 23:38:53 »
Why should using a lame notation be something to be proud of? Tex is perhaps the only way of getting things across when all you have is the medium of text. There is little else to recommend it.
Conventional Maths notation is a lot more useful for showing patterns and doing manipulations. Why do you think it was developed?
If you really want to impress everyone just come up with some real maths which 'proves' your theory. That should be very straightforward for someone who has mastered Tex.
 

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #142 on: 14/10/2008 09:54:15 »
Incidentally, when you have consulted these demigods and done your calculation, what are you going to do if it gives the wrong answer?

After all we already know how much the land moves from things like GPS measurements.


You're still missing the point, as usual. The simplest way for my theory to have credibiliy is by showing that the resistive viscoelastic force due to the mantle or outer core has been underestimated. This would then mean that the tidal force calculated due to the gravity gradient of both the Sun and Moon is actually lower than needed to produce the observed deformation of the crust. Hence the idea of a core which is more gravitationally attractive than baryonic matter becomes viable, since this would increase the effect of a gravity gradient, which is necessary to overcome the viscoelastic forces.

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #143 on: 14/10/2008 12:44:53 »
I don't think you know what a gravity gradient is. Could you just give me an idea of what you mean by it and include some numbers please?

BTW, that wasn't a 'typo'; it was incorrect and confusing grammar. There is a difference.

Apart from introducing the 'new word' "tex", what do you know of it? I notice you have no reply to my comments.

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #144 on: 14/10/2008 19:16:06 »
CSS.
I have made a profound observation about the viscoelastic properties of the crust; I believe it is sufficient to rather severely undermine your conjecture. I have pointed it out before but you seem not to have realised the importance it holds. Here it is again - sorry it's not in TeX.

Water is runny; rocks are stiff.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline LeeE

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 3382
    • View Profile
    • Spatial
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #145 on: 14/10/2008 20:49:35 »
I think that CSS has a bet on with a friend to see how long (s)he can keep his/her topics bumped-up in the forum listings.  There's certainly no scientific merit in his/her postings and (s)he is not responding to questions posed, in an effort to resolve anything, by other forum members.  Personally I'd like to see this thread closed - it has achieved nothing and is just a waste of life.
...And its claws are as big as cups, and for some reason it's got a tremendous fear of stamps! And Mrs Doyle was telling me it's got magnets on its tail, so if you're made out of metal it can attach itself to you! And instead of a mouth it's got four arses!

*

lyner

  • Guest
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #146 on: 14/10/2008 22:15:51 »
Quote
Water is runny; rocks are stiff.
That's a bit technical, BC!

*

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 8847
    • View Profile
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #147 on: 15/10/2008 07:05:16 »
That was the idea.
Anyway, if CSS can't provide a link then I aggree that this thread should be put out of its misery.
Please disregard all previous signatures.

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #148 on: 15/10/2008 12:19:53 »
I don't think you know what a gravity gradient is. Could you just give me an idea of what you mean by it and include some numbers please?

A gravity gradient is the effect which gives us the ocean tides. It is simply due to the side of the Earth which faces the Sun being in a slightly stronger gravitational field compared to the side away from the Sun. This is because (as we all know) the gravitational field strength of the Sun falls of by 1/r(sq). The wikipedia explanation is very good, the link of which I have already posted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_force

*

Offline common_sense_seeker

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 213
    • View Profile
    • Believers In Gravity Shielding (BiGS)
Gravity Problem Solved
« Reply #149 on: 15/10/2008 12:24:12 »
CSS.
I have made a profound observation about the viscoelastic properties of the crust; I believe it is sufficient to rather severely undermine your conjecture. I have pointed it out before but you seem not to have realised the importance it holds. Here it is again - sorry it's not in TeX.

Water is runny; rocks are stiff.


This just shows your ignorance of the subject. All matter can be flexed, it's just the amount of pressure required that is a factor. Stating the obvious bears no hindrance to my theory what-so-ever. Can you explain why you think your comment has any relevance?