[Starlight (OP)]

Nothing can only increase 

Energy is attracted to nothing because nothing has no temperature 

[Bored chemist]

Nothing can only increase 

Energy is attracted to nothing because nothing has no temperature 

Did you intend that to make some sort of sense?

[Starlight (OP)]

Nothing can only increase 

Energy is attracted to nothing because nothing has no temperature 

Did you intend that to make some sort of sense?

Can't you understand simplicity ? 

An ''empty'' point of space has the maximum gravitational potential.  ALL matter would be attracted to this hypothetical point because the laws of thermodynamics require all things must naturally reach ''room temperature'' .  The natural nature being gravitational potential and the long awaited answer that solves quantum mechanics .

 


5abeb76f-81bb-4a70-84b0-8b710a2e363a.png (46.86 kB . 468x360 - viewed 8289 times)

=F(G)

[Bored chemist]

An ''empty'' point of space has the maximum gravitational potential.  ALL matter would be attracted to this

Matter is attracted to other matter, not to empty space.
It doesn't help that something is simple, if it is also wrong.

It might be better if you learned some stuff.

[Starlight (OP)]

Matter is attracted to other matter, not to empty space.
It doesn't help that something is simple, if it is also wrong.

It might be better if you learned some stuff.

Mass attracted to mass (Newton classical gravity) , is one affect of gravity , not a complete ''picture'' .  There is also space-time curvature (Einstein modern mechanics ) and additionally which I have pointed out , there is spatial gravity .

An apple falls to the ground because the apple has less energy and inertia than the ground .  Spatial field lines are curved because they have less energy per volume than spatial bodies .  The linear force of gravity of the bodies curving field lines towards the mass . The Universe is expanding because the energy of the visual  universe is attracted to the gravity of the unseen universe .  Quite clearly you need to go learn some stuff !

[Bored chemist]

additionally which I have pointed out , there is spatial gravity

... which is an imaginary thing you made up.

Quite clearly you need to go learn some stuff !

OK, so the first thing you need to learn is how science works.

[jeffreyH]

The farce of starlight is growing exponentially. Maybe you should climb to the top of the leaning tower of Pisa and drop your ideas over the edge. As they plummet earthwards you can contemplate the wonder of science and how it continues to elude you.
Darn science and its rationality. If only the world were made from fairy dust and wishes.

[Kryptid]

The natural nature

Does natural nature come from the Department of Redundancy Department?

This absolutely must be a troll account.

[Starlight (OP)]

additionally which I have pointed out , there is spatial gravity

... which is an imaginary thing you made up.

Quite clearly you need to go learn some stuff !

OK, so the first thing you need to learn is how science works.

For a forum that supposed to represent a great university such as Cambridge , your knowledge of actual physics is considerably poor !

You are practically denying a very simple fact that things reach room temperature , basic thermodynamics !

A single point in space-time that had a 0 energy level would as required by thermodynamics try to reach room temperature . All energies attracted to this single point until the equilibrium of temperature was reached .

[Bored chemist]

For a forum that supposed to represent a great university such as Cambridge

It isn't.

Now, what was that you were saying about poor knowledge?

[The Spoon]

The natural nature

Does natural nature come from the Department of Redundancy Department?

This absolutely must be a troll account.

Of course it is. It is thebox posting crap as per usual.

[Bored chemist]

Of course it is. It is thebox posting crap as per usual.

It could be some other tosser.
They all sound the same.

[evan_au]

E0=F(G)

TheBox can't think outside the box...

[The Spoon]

E0=F(G)

TheBox can't think outside the box...

Yep. Those nonsense equations are a bit of a trade mark, as is the use of English...

[Starlight (OP)]

For a forum that supposed to represent a great university such as Cambridge

It isn't.

Now, what was that you were saying about poor knowledge?

''The Naked Scientists (@NakedScientists) | Twittertwitter.com › nakedscientists
Based at Cambridge University, we make science radio programmes for the BBC and other broadcasters and host a website and podcast. Cambridge UK. ... The Naked Scientists''

That certainly looks like it reads Cambridge to me !

[Starlight (OP)]

The natural nature

Does natural nature come from the Department of Redundancy Department?

This absolutely must be a troll account.

Of course it is. It is thebox posting crap as per usual.

How rude of you to say my work is crap ! 

My work is factual unlike the garbage science would like us all to believe !

My work is well liked elsewhere so your opinion is crap  .

[puppypower]

An ''empty'' point of space has the maximum gravitational potential.  ALL matter would be attracted to this

Matter is attracted to other matter, not to empty space.
It doesn't help that something is simple, if it is also wrong.

It might be better if you learned some stuff.

A lump of mass, at maximum distance from another lump of mass has the highest gravitational potential per uint of mass. The gravitational potential lowers as matter get closer and closer. Force, like energy, goes from higher to lower potential. In the case of gravity, the center of gravity of the two lumps of mass, at maximum potential, could be located in empty space.

Relative to space-time, since the separated masses are at highest potential, and each mass separately, curves space-time less than when the two masses has combined, this implies that the expansion of space-time is heading in the direction of higher gravitational potential. Expanded space-time, where time runs faster, is at higher potential than when time runs slow. The speed of light reference is at lowest potential since it implies time runs the slowest of all.

Ironically, with special relativity, as we increase velocity toward C, time slows, which means we are lowering potential via space-time. This is became C is the ground state of the universe.

If gravity is a force, since it acts like a force by creating pressure on matter, and the lowering of potential is hooked into the conservation of energy, what is the exothermic output of the gravitational force when the gravitational potential lowers energy? Is it dark energy? It is not going into the local space-time  since slow time is at lower potential.

When a force lowers potential, for example the EM force, it gives off energy to reflect the change of potential; energy conservation. The energy output quanta released can reverse the EM force elsewhere. Isn't this what dark energy does with respect to the gravity of the universe?

One important  thing that the exothermic output of the gravitational force and dark energy have in common is nobody has seen either one in the lab. Is this a coincidence or a correlation? Both will add up to the same affects.

Galaxies rotate and do not collapse, even with central black holes, because star formation and other means to lower gravitational potential are exothermic. This release of energy from the lowering of the gravitational force reverse gravity elsewhere. The affects will be opposite of what is needed for a collapse. While the excess energy that leaves the galaxy and enters space expands the galaxies relative to each other.

Dark energy is a double imaginary variable, since it cannot be measure in the lab and has no tangible source seen in the lab. The exothermic output of gravity is a single imaginary variable that does the same things but has a force source. This is an upgrade. I am sorry if it spoils the double imaginary math game engines.

There are spirial galaxies in the universe with more turns that should be, based on the time available and existing theory. If we add the exothermic output of gravity, this is not a big deal. It would reflect a very rapid star condensation occurring very early in the universe. Dark energy needs too much faith in an imaginary thing that stems from an imaginary thing. I tried t get rid of one of the imaginaries for you.

[Starlight (OP)]

An ''empty'' point of space has the maximum gravitational potential.  ALL matter would be attracted to this

Matter is attracted to other matter, not to empty space.
It doesn't help that something is simple, if it is also wrong.

It might be better if you learned some stuff.

A lump of mass, at maximum distance from another lump of mass has the highest gravitational potential per uint of mass. The gravitational potential lowers as matter get closer and closer. Force, like energy, goes from higher to lower potential. In the case of gravity, the center of gravity of the two lumps of mass, at maximum potential, could be located in empty space.

Relative to space-time, since the separated masses are at highest potential, and each mass separately, curves space-time less than when the two masses has combined, this implies that the expansion of space-time is heading in the direction of higher gravitational potential. Expanded space-time, where time runs faster, is at higher potential than when time runs slow. The speed of light reference is at lowest potential since it implies time runs the slowest of all.

Ironically, with special relativity, as we increase velocity toward C, time slows, which means we are lowering potential via space-time. This is became C is the ground state of the universe.

If gravity is a force, since it acts like a force by creating pressure on matter, and the lowering of potential is hooked into the conservation of energy, what is the exothermic output of the gravitational force when the gravitational potential lowers energy? Is it dark energy? It is not going into the local space-time  since slow time is at lower potential.

When a force lowers potential, for example the EM force, it gives off energy to reflect the change of potential; energy conservation. The energy output quanta released can reverse the EM force elsewhere. Isn't this what dark energy does with respect to the gravity of the universe?

One important  thing that the exothermic output of the gravitational force and dark energy have in common is nobody has seen either one in the lab. Is this a coincidence or a correlation? Both will add up to the same affects.

Galaxies rotate and do not collapse, even with central black holes, because star formation and other means to lower gravitational potential are exothermic. This release of energy from the lowering of the gravitational force reverse gravity elsewhere. The affects will be opposite of what is needed for a collapse. While the excess energy that leaves the galaxy and enters space expands the galaxies relative to each other.

Dark energy is a double imaginary variable, since it cannot be measure in the lab and has no tangible source seen in the lab. The exothermic output of gravity is a single imaginary variable that does the same things but has a force source. This is an upgrade. I am sorry if it spoils the double imaginary math game engines.

There are spirial galaxies in the universe with more turns that should be, based on the time available and existing theory. If we add the exothermic output of gravity, this is not a big deal. It would reflect a very rapid star condensation occurring very early in the universe. Dark energy needs too much faith in an imaginary thing that stems from an imaginary thing. I go tried of one of the imaginaries for you.

Respect to you sir , this is the sort of post I expected on this forum !  I'll give your post some thought before I break it down and reply , great stuff to think about thanks !   

[Starlight (OP)]

A lump of mass, at maximum distance from another lump of mass has the highest gravitational potential per uint of mass. The gravitational potential lowers as matter get closer and closer. Force, like energy, goes from higher to lower potential. In the case of gravity, the center of gravity of the two lumps of mass, at maximum potential, could be located in empty space.

Hello Puppypower , can we please start with this section ?

You explain a mass at a maximum distance apart from another mass has the highest gravitational potential .  I personally see that the totally opposite , a mass at a maximum distance apart from another mass has 0 gravitational potential as it would be beyond the gravity influence of the other mass . However , this depends on what you mean exactly by a maximum distance ?

If you mean  within an inertia reference frame then I still disagree with the highest gravitational potential .  The mass would have the highest force potential in a collision . 

By gravity potential I am referring to magnitude , the gravity strength i.e the earth has a stronger gravity than the moon because the mass is greater .

Can you clarify that which I have questioned please so we can be sure we can understand each other ?

Thanks .

[Bored chemist]

My work is well liked elsewhere

Got evidence?

My work is factual

No, it's not.
Stop being silly.