[Kryptid]

Ok, please tells me, how it differs with existing evidence. 

It's at odds with the inverse square law, which suggests that gravity does not have a limit to the distance over which it can act.

[Origin]

Ok, origin, if you are in a car, accelerating forward, gravity pushes you backward.  Here, we have to remember one important point that, your car engine is pulling your car frame only and this frame in turn, moves you and the gravity field within your car.  As the frame pushes gravity field, it start concentrating at the end, pushing you backward.  As the car attains velocity it once again neutralizes.

Silly me, I thought it had something to do with F = ma.  Does that mean for a rocket accelerating far from a gravity source an occupant in the rocket would not be pushed back in the seat?  Does that also mean that on the moon you would get a different force pushing you back in the seat for the exact same acceleration on earth?

[jeffreyH]

In my opinion, gravity field on earth is like water in the pond with exact boundaries and is exerting pressure on all objects.

Where are these boundries?  Is the boundary a sharp line or does the gravity fade out over some distance?  What do you mean gravity exerts pressure?

Similarly, there is a gravity field in the space, without boundary

The gravity in space is different than gravity on a planet?  Where does "space gravity" come from?  Why is "space gravity" unbounded but "mass gravity" is bounded?

it is flowing in exact path like water in canal and it is causing "inertia".

How does gravity flow?  How can "space gravity" flow in an exact path and also be unbounded?  Does the "earth gravity" cause inertia just like "space gravity".  Inertia is a property of a mass to resist a change in velocity, how does gravity cause inertia?

As an object is thrown upwards it loses kinetic energy and gains potential energy. This can be viewed as an increase in inertia. When the objects starts falling we then have an increase in kinetic energy and a decrease in potential energy. This can be viewed as a decrease in inertia. This also shows why gravitational and inertial mass are equivalent.

[jeffreyH]

BTW As clocks tick faster the further away they are from a gravitational source, this increase in inertia, as an object moves away from the source, ties in with a decrease in time dilation. Since the velocity is slowing down, this makes sense.

[jeffreyH]

Also, if an object has exactly the escape be velocity of the gravitating object it will eventually stop when it is an infinite distance away. Since it will never be an infinite distance away it will never stop. Just keep slowing down. Zeno's paradox anyone?

[jeffreyH]

Chew on that Pasala.

[pasala (OP)]

Ok, origin, if you are in a car, accelerating forward, gravity pushes you backward.  Here, we have to remember one important point that, your car engine is pulling your car frame only and this frame in turn, moves you and the gravity field within your car.  As the frame pushes gravity field, it start concentrating at the end, pushing you backward.  As the car attains velocity it once again neutralizes.

Silly me, I thought it had something to do with F = ma.  Does that mean for a rocket accelerating far from a gravity source an occupant in the rocket would not be pushed back in the seat?  Does that also mean that on the moon you would get a different force pushing you back in the seat for the exact same acceleration on earth?

Here, Einstein has a different thinking, "you woke up in a space ship, far away, in deep space, you can not differentiate whether on land or in  deep space". 

It is true that Newtons inverse square law is incorrect and Einstein succeeded in diverting our attention to Space time.  But Einstein himself could not come out of Inverse square law.  In the words of Einstein, "you are far away from gravitational mass" clearly tells how his mind is set.

His idea is, the space ship is far away, in deep space, still there is gravity, how?.

He looked at thrust of the engine as may be responsible.  It is completely wrong and there is no proof thrust of the engine increasing or decreasing gravity or affecting gravity field.

Ok, let us imagine that you are on Earth and your weight is 60 kgs.  One of your friend is on Moon and his weight is 10 kgs, original weight on earth is 60 kgs, but due to weak gravity.  Suppose both of you decided to meet another mutual friend, who is working as crew member in ISS. 

When the space ship accelerates forward, your weight continues to be 60 kgs only.  Space ship while accelerating, drags the cabin in which you are staying and in turn cabin drags you and the contents therein, gravity field.  It results in accumulation of high density gravity field at the bottom, pushing you backward.

Your friend on Moon, boarded a space ship, as it accelerates, as usual it drags the cabin, and the cabin in turn, drags the contents including gravity.  Since weak gravity is packed, additional gravity is also weak, insufficient to give any effect, even if, when compared to Earth it is just 1/6th effect only.

As both of you reaches ISS, where density of gravity field is weak when compared to Earth and Moon, gravity field inside space ships,  your  and your friend, start adjusting with that of outside.

Now, yourself and your friends decided to come back Earth.  Here we have to remember one important  point that your cabin of the space ship is locked in weak gravity field, and thus weak gravity prevails in cabin and you are in weightlessness condition.  As the space ship accelerates forward, cabin as usual drags you and the gravity field.  However gravity field is so weak that additional gravity is insufficient to push you back. 

Gravity inside the cabin of the space ship, which is in deep space, clearly tells us that gravity field can be packed and moved.  Further as the space ship reaches destination, it start adjusting with the outside gravity field.  So, it is having important quality of moving from high to low.

Gravity at a particular place mainly depends on the density of the Gravity field and it is no way related to mass. 

Yours
Psreddy

[Kryptid]

It is true that Newtons inverse square law is incorrect

Since when?

His idea is, the space ship is far away, in deep space, still there is gravity, how?.

It isn't literally gravity. It's just that the effects of acceleration on a ship are the same as the effects of gravity.

Gravity at a particular place mainly depends on the density of the Gravity field and it is no way related to mass. 

That is very wrong. Look up the gravitational constant.

[pasala (OP)]

Chew on that Pasala.

jeffreyH,
I am sure, no body, including me, has any capacity to comment or say on Einstein's effects of gravity.

[pasala (OP)]

It is true that Newtons inverse square law is incorrect

Since when?

His idea is, the space ship is far away, in deep space, still there is gravity, how?.

It isn't literally gravity. It's just that the effects of acceleration on a ship are the same as the effects of gravity.

Gravity at a particular place mainly depends on the density of the Gravity field and it is no way related to mass.

That is very wrong. Look up the gravitational constant.

Oh!, kryptid;
Any theory, including Gravity, finally one theory must prevail either Newton or Einstein.  When Inverse square law is "universal law of gravitation", what is there need to go Einstein's space time. 

[jeffreyH]

Chew on that Pasala.

jeffreyH,
I am sure, no body, including me, has any capacity to comment or say on Einstein's effects of gravity.

There are no Einstein effects of gravity, only gravitational effects. You confuse the scientist with the theory. Schoolboy error. It is astonishing what lengths you will go to to embarrass yourself.

[Origin]

Gravity inside the cabin of the space ship, which is in deep space, clearly tells us that gravity field can be packed and moved.

You do have some interesting ideas.  I have to ask this question.  If you are in a car and the car accelerates you will be pushed back in your seat, but helium balloons in the car would float to the front of the car.  Why do you think that happens?

[pasala (OP)]

Chew on that Pasala.

jeffreyH,
I am sure, no body, including me, has any capacity to comment or say on Einstein's effects of gravity.

There are no Einstein effects of gravity, only gravitational effects. You confuse the scientist with the theory. Schoolboy error. It is astonishing what lengths you will go to to embarrass yourself.

Ok, for a simple mistake, you need not go lengths.  Seeing at 3 different replies, not replies but questionnaire for entrance examination, I had suspected that you did not come for a discussion.  Now, by this simple mistake your original came out.

Mr. jeffreyH,
I think you are trying to check my qualification.  See, I am not a researcher, postgraduate, for that not even science graduate.  There is no need for me to hide anything, I am a commerce graduate.  I am proud to announce that I am a science enthusiast. 

At the early school days, I like reading science lessons like interesting stories and use to allot separate pages in the note books for my own conclusions.  In my view there are several theories incorrect and i am trying hard to prove them.

If you are interested, come join or otherwise it's ok.........

Yours
Psreddy

[Origin]

See, I am not a researcher, postgraduate, for that not even science graduate.  There is no need for me to hide anything, I am a commerce graduate.  I am proud to announce that I am a science enthusiast.

You are not really a science enthusiast.  Someone who is interested in science would learn science.  You like to make up things based on a lack of knowledge.  If you were really a science enthusiast you would ask questions here to increase your knowledge of science instead of making incorrect conjectures.  I think you are a pseudoscience enthusiast.

[pasala (OP)]

***

See, I am not a researcher, postgraduate, for that not even science graduate.  There is no need for me to hide anything, I am a commerce graduate.  I am proud to announce that I am a science enthusiast.

You are not really a science enthusiast.  Someone who is interested in science would learn science.  You like to make up things based on a lack of knowledge.  If you were really a science enthusiast you would ask questions here to increase your knowledge of science instead of making incorrect conjectures.  I think you are a pseudoscience enthusiast.

I don't know whether it is by yourself or somebody else. 

Ok, "Do good and avoid Evil".

If the owners of the "naked scientists forum" opines that mine ideas are improper then I am ready to quit.  For next 15 days I am not going to login, by that time any one of them including moderators can give their opinion.

Right, goodbye
Yours
Psreddy

[Origin]

I don't know whether it is by yourself or somebody else. 

You quoted me, so it is me.

Ok, "Do good and avoid Evil".

I will try.

If the owners of the "naked scientists forum" opines that mine ideas are improper then I am ready to quit. 

Your ideas are in conflict with the mainstream theories which yield results consistent with observation and experiments.  So your ideas are incorrect.  I don't know why you would quit though, why not ask questions and learn?
On the other hand if it makes you happy to make up stuff that's OK, there are many on this site who do just that, all I am saying is don't thinking making stuff up is science.

[MichaelMD]

Gravity inside the cabin of the space ship, which is in deep space, clearly tells us that gravity field can be packed and moved.

You do have some interesting ideas.  I have to ask this question.  If you are in a car and the car accelerates you will be pushed back in your seat, but helium balloons in the car would float to the front of the car.  Why do you think that happens?

Does your question/thought problem refer to the theoretic difference between how Helium behaves generally/gravitationally versus locally/magnetically, after the car movement breaks the local pull of both the air inside the car and the helium?

(Of course, standard physics holds that the sole effect after the car starts moving is that the air inside the car pushes the passengers backwards.) -Your thought problem seems to head in a new direction?

[Origin]

Does your question/thought problem refer to the theoretic difference between how Helium behaves generally/gravitationally versus locally/magnetically, after the car movement breaks the local pull of both the air inside the car and the helium?

No.  I don't even know what you are talking about.

(Of course, standard physics holds that the sole effect after the car starts moving is that the air inside the car pushes the passengers backwards.)

Standard physics says no such thing.  Standard physics says an accelerating car seat pushes against the passengers.

[MichaelMD]

Does your question/thought problem refer to the theoretic difference between how Helium behaves generally/gravitationally versus locally/magnetically, after the car movement breaks the local pull of both the air inside the car and the helium?

No.  I don't even know what you are talking about.

(Of course, standard physics holds that the sole effect after the car starts moving is that the air inside the car pushes the passengers backwards.)

Standard physics says no such thing.  Standard physics says an accelerating car seat pushes against the passengers.

What I was talking about was that you posted an observation of "something" interacting with an inertial system (car starting to move), associated with a differential effect on the behavior of two different gases (air and helium). -I was asking if you had a further point to make?

[Origin]

What I was talking about was that you posted an observation of "something" interacting with an inertial system (car starting to move), associated with a differential effect on the behavior of two different gases (air and helium). -I was asking if you had a further point to make?

The OP feels that gravity gets compressed or something when car accelerates so I wondered what he thought of the helium balloons in a car.  We know the balloons move forward when you accelerate a car because the acceleration causes the air pressure to increase in the back of the car.