TimAllen.com
 FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 

Is Gravity Instantaneous or does it Have Velocity
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TimAllen.com Forum Index -> The World of Quantum Physics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Guest






PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 7:12 pm    Post subject: Is Gravity Instantaneous or does it Have Velocity Reply with quote

It was once thought that light travelled instantaneously but we now know it travels at a particular velocity. What about gravity? For example, if an object blinked into or out of existance in space would the gravitational pull it exerts on other objects be felt or missed instantly or would it take time to travel through space?
Back to top
Jeff Hampton
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2006 4:40 pm    Post subject: Dont Know Reply with quote

I have asked the same questions, And ive had many answers.
Tim if you read this I need to talk to you, its extreamly personal. Email me at ride.the.lighting@gmail.com I have a story that I want to tell you. Or just leave a post in here and I will type the message in here. I am checking this post everyday waiting for a responce.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 4:34 am    Post subject: Gravity, light and electricity Reply with quote

Guest,

I'm afraid there is no clear answer for your question. No one seems to know for sure if gravity 'waves' exist at all.
The problem with measuring gravity is the method of measurement.

When large stars die suddenly many different 'waves' are emitted, electric, magnetic, light, atomic, heat and gravity are all emitted at once.
Being able to separate each effect then measure is not an easy task.

Measuring gravity is much more difficult. A reference is needed that is not effected by the 'wave' you would want to measure.
Gravity doesn't appear to be a wave (per se) it's more of a spherical emmination because it's effects are not limited to a single plane.

Gravity is curved space (as Albert would say) so is all electromagnetic energy. Natural gravity seems to be a net effect of mass but I'm sure the mechanizim goes deeper than that.

There is an interesting experiment that proved the link between electricity and gravity by Floyd Sweet's triode device. Tom Bearden worked with Sweet for a while and purpose the experiment based on Flod's original design.

http://www.rexresearch.com/sweet/1nothing.htm

Re: instantaneous speed of light
The speed of light is not instantaneous, it finite but the effect of traveling at the speed of light by the traveler is appears to be instantaneous becasue no time passes. Even though it would take one year to travel through one light year of space it would appear to be an instantaneous experience for the traveler.

K
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Apr 18, 2006 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest (Not me, the other Guest who posted the answer) Thankyou for your response. Though I won't pretend to understand all of the article I get the gist of it. By studying a vacume you are studying the nature of space itself.

I was doing some thinking about gravity since the last post. The more I thought about it, the more I think about it (Yogi Bera is my favorite philosopher). I was unable to rationalize about how to make a gravity experiment so I summized an object simply popping into or out of existance and measuring the time it takes for its effects to be measured on other objects. However I thought of one that might work: take an object and move it or change its direction and then measure how long it takes to effect for the objects around it to change course gravitationally.

Gravity seems to radiate inward unlike light that radiates outward. So it seems the nature of gravity is the opposite of light. If you reversed time gravity would operate like light and light would operate like gravity (not that the two are opposite). In otherwords light starts from a point source and radiates forever outward (to infinity and beyond!). But gravity's nature is inward so if we are looking for the origin of gravity perhaps we are looking in the wrong place: not on the inside but at the edge of the universe then focusing in on a single point.

That's hard to imagine!

So in theory the inward collapse of gravity may be what creates mass.
(See this is why I like studying physics: you'll never need to do drugs.)

Its almost like a thought from God focusing on something creates the particle itself isn't it? Like God thought of something and brings it into materialization. Hence each particle has its own share of the universe's consciousness.

God: "I have thought of something!"
Archangel: "What is it?"
God: "Let me show you."
God thinks of something and it materializes.
Archangel: "Wow! How did you do that?"
God: "Its complicated."

Which raises another question: What if the universe itself is alive? That is it is the physical embodyment of God himself. Thought is the cause and the physical is the result.

If you were to ask a butterfly sitting on a leaf if the tree he was sitting on was alive he may answer, "No. In my life (3 weeks) this tree has done nothing to show that it is alive. How it got here and its chemical functions can all be explained scientifically. It is just obeying the laws of physics, it is not alive."

What if the universe itself, or God, wants to know to what its own nature is, that is, God is asking, "Why am I here?" So God creates a diagnostic tool that he may look, listen, measure, feel and experience the universe, all that He has created, through. To use its eyes and ears to see and hear through, its mind to think with, its heart to feel with and its hands to create with.

That tool is man.

And if God created man in his image, and man's deepest thought is, "What the meaning of life?", wouldn't it make sense that the Creator had the same question in mind?
After all Jesus said, "As it is on Earth, so it is in Heaven."
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Thu Apr 20, 2006 4:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest,

Please identify yourself.
You ask good questions and reason with good (mind)spirit.

Although I must take opposition to your hypothesis of how gravity works
there is an element of that idea to discuss.

K
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 8:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
So in theory the inward collapse of gravity may be what creates mass.
(See this is why I like studying physics: you'll never need to do drugs.)


Very good point on the second. The first--how, then, would an object of mass be stabilized enough to remain constant? Would that be like skin, or maybe now I should say penguins, that the external is somehow constantly renewing itself by rotating inward?
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Fri Apr 21, 2006 3:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gravitation, or gravity, is the tendency of objects with mass to accelerate toward each other:

F = g*m(1)m(2)/r

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity for full description.
Back to top
emrad
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:01 am    Post subject: THE SKY IS FALLING! Reply with quote

My thoughts about gravity tend to resonate with some of the ideas in the above posts. My own contemplations of gravitation have led me to this way of looking at things: in trying to understand what is happening with gravitation, it seems insufficient to work only with measurements of the movements and accelerations of "objects with mass", relative to each other; one must also take into account the accelerations of objects, relative to the space time fabric they happen to be occupying at any given instant. Perhaps the curvature of the space time fabric spoken of is, in nature, an acceleration curve; meaning that, as two objects in space are observed to fall, or accelerate towards each other, it's actually the fabric of space time that's doing the accelerating. That might explain why falling objects feel weightless; rather than being the balancing of two forces, there is no force, since the falling object is actually at rest, in a region of space that is "falling". Viewing things from this perspective; all of us residing here on the surface of the earth are actually accelerating, or, more to the point, the greater mass of the earth is causing space time fabric to accelerate "through" us, at a rate of 32 ft. per sec. squared, hence, the very real evidence of an energy interaction in the form of a "force", measurable as weight; while a falling object would be, comparatively, more at rest. The falling object feels weightless because it's not accelerating... relative to the space time fabric it's in... no relative acceleration: no weight.
This has strange implications, in my opinion, most particularly with respect to the possibility of travel at faster than light speed, where, instead of trying to accelerate something THROUGH space, as is now done with rockets, the answer would be to figure out a way to accelerate the fabric of space itself, in and around the object one wanted to transport.
CAN space time fabric be accelerated over the value of the speed of light... ask a black hole.
Why, it could be that objects with matter, or mass are continuously gobbling up the fabric of space time, or draining it off... to point sources unknown. They say the universe is expanding, and with it, the very fabric of space and time itself. If space time can expand, one would think it also capable of contracting. Perhaps something in matter requires a constant diet of this "fabric" to maintain it's existence; the fuel that runs the machinery of matter, so to speak.
emrad
Back to top
Guest 4?
Guest





PostPosted: Wed May 03, 2006 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Einstein's view of gravity suggest that gravity travels at the speed of light and is propagated by fundamental particles known as gravitons. These being the only force mediater particles that nobody has been able to find evidence to support as yet.

Also suggesting that gravity is merely the warping of space-time. Reading the other response, i felt that people weren't answering the question really. Just going off on a tangent of other theories ignoring basic relativistic and quantum principles. Not that they're right, but they're the most accurate reliable ideas so far.
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 4:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Guest4?,

Heir Enistien's theories on the nature of gravity are original becasue the prevailling thought was that gravity was thought to be similar to a wave...like radio. Even Newton thought it was a force...like magnetizm.
Albert determined that it was neither, simply it is how all objects act in curved space.
As mass increases, it curves space. An object attains an orbital position by trajectory and speed. The rest of the orbit is performed by 'falling' thru curved space. If the curved space didn't exist, it would require constant nudges to keep it in a curved path around the planet.

The curving or the curling of space also curves or curls time, another of heir Einstien's products of original thinking.
Space and time are welded together.. as it were. Unable to be thought of or worked separately.
Curl space-time enough and wierd things happen. The laws of physics become by-laws. Space-time becomes compressed, over-unity becomes an everyday event. Traveling thru time instead of space is the norm.
Not that one would travel to the past or the future, but to places, in an instant of time.

So is there a thing called a gravity wave? At best it would be a distortion of space-time, if it was allowed to probagate outward. There is the possiblity it would not probagate far but be re-absorbed by space-time itself over distance.
How would it be measured? This is the question to answer. If a practical method cannot be developed, it's our nature to think it doesn't exist.

The answer to all of our questions concerning physics is found at deeper and deeper level of space-time. This 'material' is what all else is suspended in, that we currently know about.
Yet it is not physical, not measureable and it cannot be dismissed because we can't measure it directly, however all of our current thinking in physics and philosophy are effected by it.

To conclude, gravity is an effect of mass on the fabic of sapce-time. Mass curves space-time producing the effect. I prefer to call it an effect and not a force.

Having said that... electricity flowing in a wire produces the same effect of curving space-time.
Perhaps that is best left for another time.

K
Back to top
Evropej
Guest





PostPosted: Fri Jun 09, 2006 9:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

finally a good question and nice discussion
Cool

this is my thought in this topic and in general, nothing is instantaneous
therefore, there is no such thing as impulses in real life
even though they are great mathematical models
but remember relativity, that makes things interesting and seem instantaneous
bah enough said


ps i would love to see the ip address of each reply
Shocked
Back to top
Guest






PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 10:49 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

i just saw a special on tv that pointed to einstein saying that gravity travels at the speed of light, thats how he came up with the idea of space being bent
TBS special i believe, the topic was on string theory
Back to top
bivia



Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Posts: 5

PostPosted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 5:36 pm    Post subject: This Is Only A Test Reply with quote

I am testing some new settings on the boards.

I figured that I should post under such a weighty topic, and see if the response is instantaneous.

Gravity travels and is not instantaneous. This causes frame dragging, which is fancy talk for space itself spinning when a large mass (a planet) spins. GPS satellites need to take this into account, and early GPS satellites were programmed two ways: one, if gravity were instantaneous and relativity wrong, and the other if Einstein was The Man.

Einstein is The Man, and half the GPS programming was turned off.

Thanks for reading.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lunar Hotel



Joined: 15 Sep 2006
Posts: 350

PostPosted: Tue Nov 21, 2006 5:47 pm    Post subject: Gulliver travels Reply with quote

"Gravity travels"

I agree.





________________________________
LunarLodge: "The Last Best Space"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TEsp



Joined: 13 Mar 2007
Posts: 1
Location: Boston

PostPosted: Tue Mar 13, 2007 7:21 pm    Post subject: Gravity is one of the weakest forces. Reply with quote

Shocked Gravity may be an aberation of time. It is perceived as having the weakest of the forces. Multidimensional theories suggest it may have more effect in another plane besides the 3 we are friendly with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TimAllen.com Forum Index -> The World of Quantum Physics All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.