[lafroste]

I rarely say it, but I have what appears (to me at least) to be a coherent theory of gravity. SImply put, mass is it's own dimensional phenomenon and remains at all TIMES constant. Spacetime warp is simply a function of mass and absolute velocity (implying, of course that a set of absolute zero conditions, including velocity, exists). As a mass moves through this time wrp, it's apparent 4th dimensional energy state is altered in such a way as to keep its 5th dimensional "q" constant.

The theory has a lot of fascinating corollaries, and even suggests a method for building anti-gravity engines. Interested parties, see my tagline.

[Marie]

Could you point me to your novel, please? :)

[TenthAmendmentChampion]

Did you post an article back in 2005/2006 timeframe about how gravity is misunderstood? I have tried several times to find the link to it. If you are the writer, I would love to read the article. Thanks in advance.

I’m a writer too, with a couple of novels. The excerpts are posted at writing.com.

http://www.writing.com/authors/vdavisson

You might try posting your novel there, I have received tremendous feedback!

[Yardstick]

I heard a very clever theory of gravity once, probably here on FR, and I have not forgotten it. It is that what appears to us as gravity is actually just the result of all things getting BIGGER. The resulting displacements are observed as gravity. Sounds crazy but the logic holds (at least some) water.

For instance, if you were standing on the surface of a planet that is rapidly growing, its growth would cause it to apply an outward force on you that would accelerate you away from its center and would feel just like gravity. Of course, you wouldn’t perceive the planet as growing because you would be growing too. You would be no way to distinguish the effect of things getting bigger from the effect of gravity.

Pretty wild, huh?

[aNYCguy]

Your summary of your theory isn't coherent. But the one thing which seems fairly clear is that you dispute even Special Relativity, which puts you in a pretty difficult place regarding agreement with experimental evidence.

You'll have to explain, for example, where the energy of a nuclear bomb blast comes from if not liberated from mass. You'll have to explain why particles accelerated to near-light speeds are observed to gain mass. And your postulation of an absolute coordinate system implies a variable speed of light, which will cause you some big problems.