Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can You Escape the Force of Gravity? [What is gravity?]
universetoday ^ | April 7, 2014 | Fraser Cain on

Posted on 04/07/2014 9:17:43 AM PDT by BenLurkin

There’s no end to it. Gravity appears to be madly greedy and long armed. Members of the Virgo Super cluster are connected to each other, and they’re dozens of millions of light-years apart. Objects in the Pisces-Cetus Super cluster complex are even connected to each other by our invisible and obnoxiously possessive friend. And they are hundreds of millions of light years apart…

In fact, you’re so popular that you are gravitationally pulled towards even most distant object in the observable Universe. And they, in turn, are linked to you. As a result, without the outward expansion and acceleration of the Universe, everything would fall inward to a common center of gravity. Newton thought that gravity was instantaneous and if the Sun disappeared, the Earth would immediately fly away. Einstein realized that gravity is distortions of spacetime caused by mass. And as it turns out, gravity moves at the speed of light.

(Excerpt) Read more at universetoday.com ...


TOPICS: Science
KEYWORDS: gravity; stringtheory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

1 posted on 04/07/2014 9:17:43 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Gravity isn't just a good idea; it's the law.
2 posted on 04/07/2014 9:22:21 AM PDT by MeganC (Support Matt Bevin to oust Mitch McConnell! https://mattbevin.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Google “gravity push vs pull”. There is a strong case that gravity doesn’t actually pull. Rather, it is actually a “push” force.

And the fact that the argument can even be made shows how little we know about it.


3 posted on 04/07/2014 9:25:01 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

This cat failed beating gravity though...

4 posted on 04/07/2014 9:25:15 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

Google “gravity push vs pull”. There is a strong case that gravity doesn’t actually pull. Rather, it is actually a “push” force.

And the fact that the argument can even be made shows how little we know about it.

It’s quite possible that gravity is quite literally the mind of God holding everything together until the day of judgement, when he just mentally says, time for a fresh start.


5 posted on 04/07/2014 9:25:45 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Gravity operates as a repulsive force at a distance and attractive near it... How would this work...

The Rubber sheet model is WRONG.

Well or not precise..

Imagine the rubber sheet stretched over an above ground pool with NO air space between the sheet and the water and sealed perfectly along the edge...

The Drop a bowling ball in there to represent the sun... Marbles will continue to orbit around it... but look at the edge of the pool.... notice anything... it is is RAISED... ie REPLUSIVE at a distance!

Morons who think up the gravity as heavy ball on a rubber sheet forgot about the other side of deformation, the repulsive part..


6 posted on 04/07/2014 9:28:43 AM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
Note this:

"The ground-based LIGO experiment might someday detect a gravitational wave, but there’s been no luck so far. The Space-based LISA experiment should detect gravitational waves with more precision. The first version will launch in 2015, but the real experiment probably won’t be operational until 2030."

Robert Forward (SF writer, scientist, all around smart guy) was searching for Gravity Waves at UCLA in the late 50's. There may have been earlier experiments. But so far we have zero evidence that they exist. Very odd. Very strange.

7 posted on 04/07/2014 9:28:54 AM PDT by InterceptPoint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gravity-waves-cmb-b-mode-polarization/

While I agree they have found evidence of gravity waves, I reject their trying to tie to the Big Bang.


8 posted on 04/07/2014 9:32:53 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (Tre Norner eg ber, binde til rota...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“Push” implies repulsion versus attraction. If that’s what gravity did, we’d fly off the earth rather than stay on it, and meteors would not land on the planet.


9 posted on 04/07/2014 9:34:25 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

I never heard the heavy ball thing before. But there is a lot of stuff about gravity actually pushing rather than pulling. It’s kinda based on something called “the ether”, an old term about space. And it does explain why light slows down when passing through water and then speeds up again once it passes through.

I imagine an infinite number of rope tows intersecting at every point in the universe. Energy grabs onto one of these and never goes as fast as the rope tow, but loses its grip a bit when passing through some items. And when a large mass blocks the rope tow, it reduces the speed further, allowing more grip on the rope tow going in exactly the opposite direction. When in stasis, the energy has an equal grip on all the rope tows passing through all the points it comes into contact with.


10 posted on 04/07/2014 9:35:16 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

11 posted on 04/07/2014 9:35:46 AM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MeganC

And it’s funny how atheistic self-described scientists want to claim that such laws write themselves. Just like the codes in our DNA (incredibly more complex than any computer code mankind ever devised) wrote themselves.


12 posted on 04/07/2014 9:36:42 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“There is a strong case that gravity doesn’t actually pull. Rather, it is actually a “push” force.”

There’s no strong case, in fact quite the opposite, which is why physicists abandoned that idea at the turn of the last century.


13 posted on 04/07/2014 9:37:30 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

I think a truer understanding of gravity and how to manipulate and use it is the key to serious space travel.

Supposedly nothing can move faster than the speed of light but gravity can overcome it. In the case of black holes I begin to wonder if there is a speed of gravity.


14 posted on 04/07/2014 9:38:01 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GraceG
but look at the edge of the pool.... notice anything... it is is RAISED... ie REPLUSIVE at a distance!

Sure, but that's because your demonstration is contained within a finite structure sitting atop a fluid medium. That said, there are the things we know about gravity which can then be used to determine some of its other properties.

But only the Almighty knows how gravity or magnetism or other forces really work. At least for now...

15 posted on 04/07/2014 9:41:25 AM PDT by Errant (Surround yourself with intelligent and industrious people who help and support each other.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

“Push” implies repulsion versus attraction. If that’s what gravity did, we’d fly off the earth rather than stay on it, and meteors would not land on the planet.


Yeah, that was how I saw it until I read the nuances in the theories.

When I was VERY young (like six), A friend of ours had one of those newfangled color TV’s. Now, my dad had actually explained to me, at a VERY high level, how TV’s worked. When he and his friend were messing around with the color TV, as a child, all I was noticing was them making the screen a full blue tint or full red tint and I remember (to this day) thinking, “Who would want a TV that gave the black and white picture a color tint?” It is because I knew that it was impossible to produce a picture that had multiple colors in it. I mean, that’s not how the electron beam worked. It didn’t come in colors.

But here we are...


16 posted on 04/07/2014 9:41:32 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The “push” theories don’t describe a force where the earth would be pushing us off the surface. Instead, they theorize that pressure is coming from all directions pushing us down to hold us against the earth. In those theories, the “attraction” we experience is a result of a graviational shadow... the earth blocks us from the pressure from one direction, so the pressure is no longer in equilibrium and we feel a pull in one direction.

The theories don’t work, but that is the idea behind them.


17 posted on 04/07/2014 9:42:14 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“It’s kinda based on something called “the ether”, an old term about space.”

The ether is another idea that was abandoned because it failed to meet experimental testing. The Michelson-Morley experiment put the nails in that coffin, and paved the way for relativity.


18 posted on 04/07/2014 9:44:17 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Gravity is basically the force of weak implosion.


19 posted on 04/07/2014 9:46:34 AM PDT by Heartlander (We are all Rodeo Clowns now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
And the fact that the argument can even be made shows how little we know about [gravity]

Al Gore used to promote global warming by stating that 'just like gravity, global warming is settled science.'

Which is deeply embarrassing to climate scientists who promote AGW, and hillarious to real scientists.

20 posted on 04/07/2014 9:51:21 AM PDT by kidd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

“In the case of black holes I begin to wonder if there is a speed of gravity.”

Well, there are really two different things going on here. There is a “speed of gravity”, that is equivalent to the speed of light, but this just means that any change in gravity would propagate at the speed of light. When it comes to gravity from black holes trapping light, it is able to do this because even the speed of light is lower than the escape velocity to get out of a black hole’s gravity well.


21 posted on 04/07/2014 9:53:25 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

The ether is another idea that was abandoned because it failed to meet experimental testing. The Michelson-Morley experiment put the nails in that coffin, and paved the way for relativity.


Yes, but this is the same as the ether that was put to bed in name only.


22 posted on 04/07/2014 10:02:30 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: kidd

Al Gore used to promote global warming by stating that ‘just like gravity, global warming is settled science.’

Which is deeply embarrassing to climate scientists who promote AGW, and hillarious to real scientists.


Good one. And good point.


23 posted on 04/07/2014 10:03:07 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

I just love biscuits and gravity.


24 posted on 04/07/2014 10:03:58 AM PDT by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

He ain’t heavy it’s gravity ping.


25 posted on 04/07/2014 10:04:53 AM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7; AdmSmith; AFPhys; Arkinsaw; allmost; aristotleman; autumnraine; backwoods-engineer; ...
Thanks BenLurkin.


· List topics · post a topic · subscribe · Google ·

26 posted on 04/07/2014 10:05:14 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

ZPE push ... see Haisch, Rueda, Puthoff on the ZPF as origin of inertial mass and thus gravitational mass.


27 posted on 04/07/2014 10:08:25 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Heartlander

Magnetism = crystalized gravity.


28 posted on 04/07/2014 10:09:33 AM PDT by aimhigh (John 14:21)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Would you like to show us where Haisch, Rueda are mistaken in their proof for F = ma can be rewritten to show the zero point field is actually the source for inertia? I’ll link you to the Physics Journal articles again, if you wish.


29 posted on 04/07/2014 10:14:23 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: colorado tanker

Whoops, thanks ct!


30 posted on 04/07/2014 10:15:41 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
The influence of Heaviside rewriting Maxwell's quaternian method is why 'sciewntists' abandoned the direction.

Here's a taste of Haisch, et al:

"...But inspite of these two limitations, our analysis yielded a remarkable and unexpected result: that Newton`s equation of motion, f=ma, regarded since 1687 as a postulate of physics could be derived from Maxwell`s laws of electrodynamics as applied to the ZPF. This implication is not an innate property of matter, rather it is an electromagnetically-derived force (or quantum vacuum derived force in a future more general derivation).

... (4) Relativistic rest mass: the relationship of the mass of a body and the total energy available by perfect annihilation of the mass in the body, that is expressed in the E=mc^2 relation of special relativity.

... One can imagine a universe, for example, in which inertial mass m_{i}, and passive gravitational mass m_{g} were different.... but then objects would not fall with the same acceleration in a gravitational field and there would be no principle of equivalence to serve as the foundation of general relativity.

... In other words, if one begins with Maxwell`s equations as applied to the ZPF, one finds from the laws of electrodynamics that f_{r}=-m_{zp}a and thus if one assumes that the electromagnetic parameter m_{zp} really is the physical basis of mass, Newton`s third law of equal and opposite forces f=-f_{r} results in a derivation of f=ma from the electrodynamics of the ZPF. That being the case, one can, in principle dispense with the concept of inertial mass altogether. Matter consisting of charged particles (quarks and electrons) interacts with the electromagnetic ZPF and this yields a reaction force whenever acceleration takes place and that`s the cause of inertia."


31 posted on 04/07/2014 10:20:57 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

My theory ... osmosis ... if I'm right, you heard it here on FR first. Now ... if only I could identify the semipermeable "membrane"-like component of matter and the "solute"-like component that permeates our universe. Then the existence of another universe, having a lesser concentration of the "solute", could be inferred. And, perhaps, not all matter contains the "membrane". It may simply be friction of the "solute" passing through us toward the "membrane" at the Earth's core that holds our feet to the soil. Perhaps only the celestial bodies have this "membrane" at their cores and have collected the debris the "solute" dragged with it to build mass. Mass may be the product of osmosis-gravity ... not the cause.


32 posted on 04/07/2014 10:26:16 AM PDT by so_real ( "The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Quote: “Google “gravity push vs pull”. There is a strong case that gravity doesn’t actually pull. Rather, it is actually a “push” force.”

I believe that Mr. Einstein proved it was a push, no?


33 posted on 04/07/2014 10:40:25 AM PDT by FlipWilson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: FlipWilson

I believe that Mr. Einstein proved it was a push, no?


That stirs a distant memory. I haven’t really read much on the subject for several years. I just like throwing it out there in these threads.

I do remember reading that “push” accounts for some odd gravitaional properties that are not explained by the pull theory.


34 posted on 04/07/2014 10:42:40 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin
One of the amazing things about gravity is how weak it is.

At this moment, the mass of the entire Earth is pulling down on me, yet I can temporarily move my entire mass away from it by exerting less than 1 calorie of energy.

Another is that because of gravity, the universe and our reality are nothing like what they appear. For example, the Earth does not have a simple elliptical orbit around the Sun. If you could actually look at it, the Earth traces a wobbly orbit around the Sun. Why? Because the Earth is locked with our moon, which is relatively large. The Earth and moon actually orbit each other, with the center of mass being what orbits the Sun.

35 posted on 04/07/2014 10:46:28 AM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“Yes, but this is the same as the ether that was put to bed in name only.”

Not really. The concept as it existed is defunct, it failed experimental verification.

There are other concepts nowadays that you could say are similar to an “ether”, such as the cosmic background radiation or the Higgs field, but these are similar only in extent. Neither actually shares the properties proposed for the luminiferous ether, which would be a prerequisite to making any theory requiring an ether to work.


36 posted on 04/07/2014 11:09:15 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

There is no gravity, the universe just sucks.


37 posted on 04/07/2014 11:18:08 AM PDT by Crusher138 ("Then conquer we must, for our cause it is just")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

“Hovercat”

I’m saving that one! Thanks!


38 posted on 04/07/2014 11:26:21 AM PDT by Dr. Bogus Pachysandra ( Ya can't pick up a turd by the clean end!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

The concept as it existed is defunct, it failed experimental verification.


Yeah. I get that. That’s why I said, “Yes, but this is the same as the ether that was put to bed in name only.”

i.e. same name. Different concept.

Kinda like dog bitch vs the other kind. :)


39 posted on 04/07/2014 11:27:43 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

You never linked me to such an article in the first place, you must have me mistaken for someone else.

Besides, you can do a great many things with mathematics, which may or may not end up reflecting the reality of the world around us, which is why physics requires experimental verification. Push gravity theories have consistently failed experimental verification, so rambling on about math can’t save them.


40 posted on 04/07/2014 11:29:48 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
Well then ,here ya go. This should get you started, unless you're just really not interested:

http://www.slideshare.net/zerofieldenergy/bernard-haisch-rueda-puthoff-physics-of-the-zeropoint-field-implications-for-inertia-gravitation-and-mass-1997

41 posted on 04/07/2014 11:35:40 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
And here's another place to catch up:

http://www.calphysics.org/articles/gravity_arxiv.pdf

42 posted on 04/07/2014 11:38:28 AM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“same name. Different concept.”

Either way, it fails experimental verification. In order for the ether to do what you need it to do for the theory to work, it has to have certain qualities, and those qualities have been determined experimentally to not be present.

You can propose a million different kinds of ethers, but the ones you need have been proven not to exist.


43 posted on 04/07/2014 11:42:12 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

“unless you’re just really not interested”

Has there been experimental verification? If not, then no, I am not really interested.


44 posted on 04/07/2014 11:43:16 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

opening myself to ridicule here.

When young, studying physics on my own, I thought through concepts I was studying regarding gravity, the Michelson-Morley experiment, etc. I noticed that the MM experiment to detect luminiferous ether was conducted in only one plane...horizontal. With a bit more thought, I realized that if LE were to be detected, it would have to be detected horizontally. With still more thought, I tentatively concluded that gravity is LE ‘falling’ to earth (to any mass, actually, but that which is ‘falling’ to earth is ‘pushing’ smaller things like me towards the earth). Reading on other experiments like those demonstrating the Mossbauer effect gave me support for my thoughts.

(I even built my own MM interferometer to play around w/ my ideas)

I still wish I could discuss this with someone willing & knowledgeable.


45 posted on 04/07/2014 11:45:49 AM PDT by mreerm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: InterceptPoint
Robert Forward (SF writer, scientist, all around smart guy) was searching for Gravity Waves at UCLA in the late 50's. There may have been earlier experiments. But so far we have zero evidence that they exist. Very odd. Very strange.

We found some.

46 posted on 04/07/2014 11:46:18 AM PDT by Lazamataz (Early 2009 to 7/21/2013 - RIP my little girl Cathy. You were the best cat ever. You will be missed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Sorry, you’re hung up on my use of a word. Ignore it.


47 posted on 04/07/2014 11:58:13 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: mreerm

Bernard Haisch, et al, have postulated that the zero point field (of what Feynman called ‘partons’ in his QED) gives rise to inertial mass by an electromagnetic van der Waals force at the quark level of mass. Think of it as a pool filled with marbles and anything in the mass of marbles is being pushed from all directions by the marbles, so if you try to move you are pushing against a resistance from the marbles and that resistance will be proportional to the effort you put into trying to move. The equation F = ma (force equals mass times acceleration) can be rewritten to show the mass as sourced in ‘parton push’, with partons sized at the Planck scale for wave form.


48 posted on 04/07/2014 12:01:46 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman
I'm wondering how you can post this with a straight face! ... "and those qualities have been determined experimentally to not be present."

First, you won't even read a new way of approaching the issues, a way that has been around in proposition since Maxwell's quaternian equations. And you certainly cannot be up to date on propositions of an 'aether' if you aren't even familiar with the theory of ZPE (even Feynman affirmed it). So how is it that you can make or choose to make such sweeping assertions, from such a limited information position?

BTW, any patents applied for utilizing anything approaching a tap into the zpe has been classified by the Government 'in the interest of national security'. Which of course protects the oil and gas monopoly that runs our planet.

I would direct you to the source of that assertion regarding patents, but since you're not interested I won't. You have a Steven Jones scent to you.

49 posted on 04/07/2014 12:14:15 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

kerping


50 posted on 04/07/2014 12:15:38 PM PDT by MHGinTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson