how gravity works

[Grumblenuts]

LOL

 

[Grumblenuts]

Maybe not to a general relativity scientist, but for me I believe those fields are morphing of space. I believe space and matter are the same substance and that is the only way the two can act on each other. Also space is a little like a giant piece of matter and therefore creates a density in which we can have energy that moves around based on the medium having solidness.

The aether is a field ay? and other fields are a morphing of that field? You and I seem like were on different paths in the same direction. I doubt we will deter each other too much since we're both stubborn, but maybe we can learn something from each other.

Fair enough. I mean I have nothing against everything being relative, but GR "space-time" can go suck an egg. Since space possesses no properties it simply cannot "warp." The entire notion is desperate and insane. Yes, fields overlap and possess countless properties, most doubtless far removed from the Aether, but due to it ultimately. Also, since you find a sort of equivalence between space and matter, study the dielectric and counterspace to learn something new. Capacitance, induction, impedance..

A real piece of naturally crystallized bismuth^

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Check out this. Gravity visualized. Pretty fascinating stuff

Neat; thanks.

Matter warps space-time.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Fantasy will never match Reality:

 

[Grumblenuts]

Check out this. Gravity visualized. Pretty fascinating stuff

Yes, nice presentation of gravity for the kiddies. But only adults bent upon pushing or swallowing the farce of "spacetime" need to have gravity's effects "visualized" for them. We've been witnessing the exact same motions directly from nature for eons. Oooo.. basic 2 and 3D trig plots.. look out!

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Fair enough. I mean I have nothing against everything being relative, but GR "space-time" can go suck an egg. Since space possesses no properties it simply cannot "warp." The entire notion is desperate and insane. Yes, fields overlap and possess countless properties, most doubtless far removed from the Aether, but due to it ultimately. Also, since you find a sort of equivalence between space and matter, study the dielectric and counterspace to learn something new. Capacitance, induction, impedance..

A real piece of naturally crystallized bismuth^

Dr. Nuts,

I feel like those who discard Einstein tend to lean on the theories of Nikola Tesla, would you agree?

 

[Dadoalex]

Yes, but I see it as the Aether getting compressed, not space or time. Space has no properties so no potential to do anything. Space and counterspace are necessarily comprised of the Aether. It provides the medium, thus the basic potential for all energy exchange, as water is obviously required to produce water surface waves.

Indeed, I see gravity as a relatively weak force field resulting from matter somewhat displacing The Aether, rarifying its average local density. The weak resultant vacuum causes The Aether to push toward the center ("anti-field") of all masses, building up (being compressed) around surfaces and experiencing loss of inertia there. Le Sage theory. This Aether build up distorts light around massive objects.

Closest so far I think.
Space and time are the same thing, indistinguishible.
The universe, absent all matter, is just space and time.
Imagine, for the discussion an empty universe that resembles a giant transparent ball.
No mass, just energy. No mass = No Gravity.
Now take some energy, convert it into mass and place it in the ball.
The "space" around our newly created object must "move" out of the way to let the object exist
Thus, the object warps space and therefore time in its locality.
But, not just in the locality. The gravitational waves generated by the new object ripple across the universe.
Now add more and more objects and eventually our perfectly round ball shaped universe begins to look something like a weirdly dimpled golf ball.
As would be expected, the more mass the object carries, the greater the warping of space and time in the locality thus the behaviors we see near black holes and neutron stars.
As we move away from large masses the warping effect diminishes normalizing relative time in the locality.
Said simply as
The observable effects of gravity on space-time warping is directly proportional to the mass in the locality.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Dr. Nuts,

I feel like those who discard Einstein tend to lean on the theories of Nikola Tesla, would you agree?

Einstein was no dummy, but Tesla's true genius and Austro-Hungarian origins intimidated the hell out of the elites. More than anything that explains why the physics community has abandoned the Aether with such a vengeance even though Einstein never really did. Jealousy. Einstein stole practically everything he proposed from others, but was clever enough to get away with it. Too goofy to stay mad at for long apparently. To answer your question though, yes and no, but there's no need to discard either if one finds their works helpful. Many others to lean on as well.

 

[justinacolmena]

Gravity is a universal force.

F = GMm/r^2

The decay factor of 1/r^2 with distance r is proportional to the surface are of a sphere with any given radius r.

Therefore the total gravitational field is unweakened as unbroken field lines extend from all matter throughout the universe.

Any object in the gravitational field of another object experiences phenomena of "mass defect" and "time dilation" to some degree, due to mass-energy equivalence and the curvature of spacetime.

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Einstein was no dummy, but Tesla's true genius and Austro-Hungarian origins intimidated the hell out of the elites. More than anything that explains why the physics community has abandoned the Aether with such a vengeance even though Einstein never really did. Jealousy. Einstein stole practically everything he proposed from others, but was clever enough to get away with it. Too goofy to stay mad at for long apparently. To answer your question though, yes and no, but there's no need to discard either if one finds their works helpful. Many others to lean on as well.

I get a lot of science news headlines about scientists have proven this guy theories with this technique. Basically the most mind melting crap. I don't even bother with a lot of it. If gravity can't be explained without math's and 300 page textbooks, then they probably don't have an explanation yet. That's why I have a hard time with people referring me to something they've read or name dropping, because I know the right answer is no answer. I do find people that agree with the OP but usually they end up going on about how space is made of jelly!

 

[Grumblenuts]

Tesla developed his ideas through endless experimenting and amassed hundreds of patents proving his stuff actually worked. Whereas, Einstein read other's works and played around with the math until some combination of things seemed new and intriguing, at which point he'd propose a theory based upon his thinking ("thought experiments"), then leave it to others to actually test them experimentally. The former builds practical knowledge that improves life for all. The latter ("theoretical physics") is for the establishment's true believers who generally couldn't find the business end of a screwdriver without Googling first.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Closest so far I think.
Space and time are the same thing, indistinguishible.
The universe, absent all matter, is just space and time.
Imagine, for the discussion an empty universe that resembles a giant transparent ball.
No mass, just energy. No mass = No Gravity.
Now take some energy, convert it into mass and place it in the ball.
The "space" around our newly created object must "move" out of the way to let the object exist
Thus, the object warps space and therefore time in its locality.
But, not just in the locality. The gravitational waves generated by the new object ripple across the universe.
Now add more and more objects and eventually our perfectly round ball shaped universe begins to look something like a weirdly dimpled golf ball.
As would be expected, the more mass the object carries, the greater the warping of space and time in the locality thus the behaviors we see near black holes and neutron stars.
As we move away from large masses the warping effect diminishes normalizing relative time in the locality.
Said simply as
The observable effects of gravity on space-time warping is directly proportional to the mass in the locality.

The Original Substance Split Into Space, Energy, Matter, and Light

You beg the question by starting with empty space, but space and matter originated in the same substance. This is similar to the fallacy that icebergs melting would cause the seawater to rise—they merely replace the solid space with liquid space with the same area (or that ice in a drink would make the glass overflow when it melted).

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Basically the most mind melting crap. I don't even bother with a lot of it. I do find people that agree with the OP but usually they end up going on about how space is made of jelly!

Jelly Is on a Roll

Do those nerdy freaks call spacetime "Smucker's"? With a name like Smucker's, it's got to be weird. Just like the Quantum Quacks are. Their motto is, "If it's weird, it's wise."

 

[trevorjohnson83]

Tesla developed his ideas through endless experimenting and amassed hundreds of patents proving his stuff actually worked. Whereas, Einstein read other's works and played around with the math until some combination of things seemed new and intriguing, at which point he'd propose a theory based upon his thinking ("thought experiments"), then leave it to others to actually test them experimentally. The former builds practical knowledge that improves life for all. The latter ("theoretical physics") is for the establishment's true believers who generally couldn't find the business end of a screwdriver without Googling first.

Interesting way to put it. I've heard most of that before. And I was thinking about your comment about capacitance. I know a little electronic engineering, but don't see what a capacitor has to do with gravity, could you explain?

 

[Dadoalex]

The Original Substance Split Into Space, Energy, Matter, and Light

You beg the question by starting with empty space, but space and matter originated in the same substance. This is similar to the fallacy that icebergs melting would cause the seawater to rise—they merely replace the solid space with liquid space with the same area (or that ice in a drink would make the glass overflow when it melted).

Sigh...

How much matter was in space before the big bang?
The empty space was to allow for a clearer visualization not a claim about, well, anything.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Interesting way to put it. I've heard most of that before. And I was thinking about your comment about capacitance. I know a little electronic engineering, but don't see what a capacitor has to do with gravity, could you explain?

Yeesh. Not really, but I'll stab at it a bit. Still learning myself. Never ends. In a nutshell, gravity is a spatial or magnetic manifestation, whereas capacitance springs from the dielectric or counterspace.

Gravity is virtually the same as static cling. An anti-field. Look up the Casimir Effect, but ignore any QM BS. Point being, the metal plates form a capacitor that charges itself directly from ever-present micro-polarizations within the Aether. Though manifesting from the magnetic, the "charge" disappears into the dielectric. We call the maximum voltage induced without shorting capacitance. Voltage is the dielectric, current is magnetism.

The magnetic is force, induction, loss of the dielectric, providing us space, matter, and time. What we consider reality yet only half the equation. The dielectric is capacitance, the Aether under torsion, examples being gyroscopic precession, a tornado. The magnetic is the Aether under polarization, the simplest form being dipoles, battery poles, temperature differences. The dielectric is force inverted. Ground. Loss of the magnetic. Hope that helps some.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

How much matter was in space before the big bang?
.

Sealed Bulge

There was no space, and no matter, before the Big Bang. We are an extension.

 

[Grumblenuts]

How much matter was in space before the big bang?

I gather black holes had devoured practically all the matter and much of the space leaving way too much counterspace, this huge imbalance annoying the Aether no end. Something had to give. Perhaps the last little black hole transformed into a proton, then another formed to keep it company and, pretty darn soon,.. KA BLAMO!

 

[trevorjohnson83]

gravity is a spatial or magnetic manifestation, whereas capacitance springs from the dielectric or counterspace.

I ve heard people say that they think gravity is a magnetic effect. Sorry not a believer. Magnetic effect is due to energy, gravity is do to matter. Although they may influence each other, that's just evidence that they both have an effect on the space medium or 'aether' as you call it. Did you read my post 'magnet fan analogy'? I'd like to hear your thoughts on that matter as well Dr. Nuts.

 

[Grumblenuts]

You can just call me Nuts. Found your "magnet fan analogy." At least you're thinking somewhat outside the box.

Magnetic effect is due to energy, gravity is do to matter.

The magnetic is the Aether's spatial component, producing practically all we can sense or measure as space, matter, and time. But the driving power always springs from the dielectric. With no place to go, all so-called "energy" or potential force is moot, powerless. Current is spatial but requires voltage to actually get any work done.