[pasala (OP)]

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

 

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

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...

[pasala (OP)]

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

[pasala (OP)]

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

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

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....

[Thebox]

                                       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.

[JoeBrown]

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.

[Thebox]

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.

[pasala (OP)]

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

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

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?

[Thebox]

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.

[pasala (OP)]

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   

[pasala (OP)]

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

[LB7]

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.

[pasala (OP)]

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 
   

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

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...

[pasala (OP)]

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

[Alex Dullius Siqueira]

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?

[GoC]

   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.

[pasala (OP)]

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