To discover anti-gravity we should know how gravity works on us not on space or other planets

[SBIDAH]

I personally feel like the idea of gravity is being confused or it is made complicated by trying to define it using space and other celestial bodies. According to my research gravity is influenced by two things that is the rotational speed around its axis and the diameter of the planets cores. For instance the sun has a largest core of about 864,000 km and it's rotation around it's axis is about 1.9km/s, thus making the sun to have a strong gravitational pull. And if we were to compare it to a black hole we all know that black holes surpass the sun in both rotation and diameter therefore making the gravitational pull very strong. As we know that mercury and mars have a bit similar gravitational force while mars rotates faster than mercury, Mercury makes up for it because it has a larger core than that of Mars that is why the gap is small. So that because we now know what causes gravity even if it's just a theory we can use this to discover way to make artificial gravity in space because we now that if a large mass rotates the is a high chance that it will pull objects towards it's center, so it's just a matter of knowing how much mass and rotation is required underneath the spaceship........

 

[Seymour Flops]

I personally feel like the idea of gravity is being confused or it is made complicated by trying to define it using space and other celestial bodies. According to my research gravity is influenced by two things that is the rotational speed around its axis and the diameter of the planets cores. For instance the sun has a largest core of about 864,000 km and it's rotation around it's axis is about 1.9km/s, thus making the sun to have a strong gravitational pull. And if we were to compare it to a black hole we all know that black holes surpass the sun in both rotation and diameter therefore making the gravitational pull very strong. As we know that mercury and mars have a bit similar gravitational force while mars rotates faster than mercury, Mercury makes up for it because it has a larger core than that of Mars that is why the gap is small. So that because we now know what causes gravity even if it's just a theory we can use this to discover way to make artificial gravity in space because we now that if a large mass rotates the is a high chance that it will pull objects towards it's center, so it's just a matter of knowing how much mass and rotation is required underneath the spaceship........

Do you have a link to any of that? My understanding has always been that it is mass, not rotational spin, that produces gravity.

 

[para bellum]

Yep. Mass.

Gravity is not a force like the other 3. At least not with the current definition. No force carrying particle.

It is a distortion of spacetime caused by the presence of mass. e.g. the planets do not travel a curved path in space- they travel a straight path, it is the space that is curved.

Also gravity and acceleration are the same thing. That's why you can't tell them apart. Yeah, I know....

 

[SBIDAH]

Still we can argue that mercury has less mass than mars but how come mercury's gravity surpasses that of mars?? about the link i actually read books and articles

 

[para bellum]

Still we can argue that mercury has less mass than mars but how come mercury's gravity surpasses that of mars?? about the link i actually read books and articles

Mercury has a higher density and smaller diameter than Mars. Gravity is measured at the surface, the smaller diameter of Mercury is the reason the gravitational force at the surface is nearly the same.

Gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the radius. Larger radius for a given mass means a lower surface gravity.

 

[Cougarbear]

I personally feel like the idea of gravity is being confused or it is made complicated by trying to define it using space and other celestial bodies. According to my research gravity is influenced by two things that is the rotational speed around its axis and the diameter of the planets cores. For instance the sun has a largest core of about 864,000 km and it's rotation around it's axis is about 1.9km/s, thus making the sun to have a strong gravitational pull. And if we were to compare it to a black hole we all know that black holes surpass the sun in both rotation and diameter therefore making the gravitational pull very strong. As we know that mercury and mars have a bit similar gravitational force while mars rotates faster than mercury, Mercury makes up for it because it has a larger core than that of Mars that is why the gap is small. So that because we now know what causes gravity even if it's just a theory we can use this to discover way to make artificial gravity in space because we now that if a large mass rotates the is a high chance that it will pull objects towards it's center, so it's just a matter of knowing how much mass and rotation is required underneath the spaceship........

You finally included "mass." As far as your research on gravity and rotation of the earth or sun on their axis is incorrect. Rotation doesn't affect gravity. Only the mass does. Nor does the diameter of planets cores. The mass is what decides the gravitational force. A black hole with a diameter the length of a car has more mass and gravitational acceleration. No?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Also gravity and acceleration are the same thing. That's why you can't tell them apart. Yeah, I know....

Yes. Love it.

But we can confound out gravity from observing a system because it relies on distance. I.E., observing many particles, not just one.

 

[Orangecat]

Do you have a link to any of that? My understanding has always been that it is mass, not rotational spin, that produces gravity.

From what I understand, the centrifugal force generated by rotational spin would actually lessen gravitational pull, especially on the equatorial areas. I don't think anyone actually knows what causes gravity. It's all theory.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

From what I understand, the centrifugal force generated by rotational spin would actually lessen gravitational pull, especially on the equatorial areas. Since this is not so, I doubt gravity is associated with spin. I don't think anyone actually knows what causes gravity. It's all theory.

How you observe this depends on your frame. If you are standing on Earth, yes, you weigh less at the equator than at the poles. And not just because it is further from the center. Taking out that small difference: gravity is not less, you just weigh less on a scale. In line with what you said.

If you are, say, stationary above the earth at distance watching it spin beneath you, you don't feel that centrifugal force. You stand on a scale at any spot equidistant from earth's center, and you weigh the same amount.

That isn't the case, if standing on the surface of earth.

 

[Orangecat]

If you are standing on Earth, yes, you weigh less at the equator than at the poles.

I didn't know anyone had ever tested that theory.

 

[Oddball]

Do you have a link to any of that? My understanding has always been that it is mass, not rotational spin, that produces gravity.

There is theory which claims that time has a hand in creating gravity

 

[fncceo]

Do you have a link to any of that? My understanding has always been that it is mass, not rotational spin, that produces gravity.

That is correct. Spin produces centripetal force, not gravity.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

Gravity is created by time dilation

 

[toobfreak]

According to my research gravity is influenced by two things that is the rotational speed around its axis and the diameter of the planets cores.

That is wrong. You are confusing other forces like centripetal force as a function of gravity.

For instance the sun has a largest core of about 864,000 km and it's rotation around it's axis is about 1.9km/s, thus making the sun to have a strong gravitational pull.

Wrong. The size of the core and its rotation has NO effect on the pull on the Earth from the Sun.

And if we were to compare it to a black hole we all know that black holes surpass the sun in both rotation and diameter therefore making the gravitational pull very strong.

Wrong. Black holes can have any rotational speed and their diameter is unknown, quantified as a singularity while its effects defined by the diameter of the event horizon. Gee, maybe you should stop worrying about gravity and first concentrate on basic physics?

As we know that mercury and mars have a bit similar gravitational force while mars rotates faster than mercury, Mercury makes up for it because it has a larger core than that of Mars that is why the gap is small.

Way, way off.

So that because we now know what causes gravity

Really? You know what causes gravity? Hoo Boy.

if a large mass rotates the is a high chance that it will pull objects towards it's center,

ANY large mass will pull objects in regardless of rotation. Is this thread a rib?

so it's just a matter of knowing how much mass and rotation is required underneath the spaceship........

Yeah right, time to beam yourself up to your spaceship.

 

[toobfreak]

Gravity is not a force like the other 3. At least not with the current definition. No force carrying particle.

Correct. There is no known bosonic force carrier as with the Strong, Weak, and EM Forces because gravity is a FIELD.

It is a distortion of spacetime caused by the presence of mass.

At least that is the EFFECT of gravity as we see it.

 

[para bellum]

At least that is the EFFECT of gravity as we see it.

I would say gravity is the label we give to the effect. And I should correct to say that it is the presence of matter, not mass. Mass is just a property of matter and gravity is relative to mass.

The yardstick is light. That is to say the speed of light (in GR) defines a spacetime geodesic- the shortest path between two points. We can measure gravity by measuring the curvature of light in the presence of matter. Since light travels in a straight line, it must be the space that curves.

Dimensions are stretchy, but light is constant.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I didn't know anyone had ever tested that theory.

Only every time we launch a craft into space...

 

[Orangecat]

Only every time we launch a craft into space...

You think we only launch from the equator?

 

[toobfreak]

I would say gravity is the label we give to the effect.

What else would it be?

And I should correct to say that it is the presence of matter, not mass. Mass is just a property of matter and gravity is relative to mass.

Mass and matter are inseparable qualities. The controlling agent here is the dark matter behind it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You think we only launch from the equator?

Doesn't matter where we launch from. In controlling those objects while they are in orbit, we don't have to account for centrifugal forces from the rotation of the Earth. Because those forces don't exist for those objects.