|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
On Apr 12, 11:02*am, "N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\)"
wrote, And more importantly, how do you see this as having the power to result in a supernova? Separate issue. Ahem. Separate issue NOT! A supernova is one of the most dramatic and DIRECT displays of gravity-in-action. A *real* force (not a pseudo or 'fictitious' force) POWERS the stellar collapse that powers the fusion that rebounds as a SN blast. Unless and until the prevailing theories of gravitation can explain the literal _acting mechanism _ that POWERS a supernova, those theories are worthless. It's crunch time :-), time for those theories to put up or shut up. The two competing theories a 1.) geometry and 'curvature' of 'Something that is yet Nothing' and 2.) "gravitons". So how does either theory explain the real _mechanism of causation_ driving a supernova, and in train, the causal mechanism of gravity itself? Per Occam's razor, the most obvious answer would be: a spatial medium under a state of pressurization exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic nucleus.. and the pressure-driven FLOW of that medium into the core of every atomic nucleus.. and that herein lies unification of gravity and the strong nuclear force. And yes, it is a PUSH force. And no, it is not a Le Sage theory. The resemblance is only superficial. Le Sage proposed a "shadowing" effect of sorts, and had no concept of the hyperpressurized state of the spatial medium or of its FLOW into all atomic nucleii, thereby sustaining and perpetuating all nuclear processes AND the action-at-a-distance effect we call "gravity". Either gravity is exactly what it appears to be and behaves as (i.e., the pressure-driven, accelerating flow of the spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink), or it's angels, imps and Sky Pixies. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
On Apr 15, 6:59*am, oldcoot wrote:
On Apr 12, 11:02*am, "N:dlzcD:aol T:com \(dlzc\)" wrote, And more importantly, how do you see this as having the power to result in a supernova? Separate issue. Ahem. Separate issue NOT! A supernova is one of the most dramatic and DIRECT displays of gravity-in-action. Unquantified assertions ot the contrary, people have been crushed to death by other people trying to get through a confined space. No single person can crush another one to death (not including some world record holders) "Traffic jam" is sufficient to provide the pressure to achieve the conditions necessary to form heavier nucleii in a supernova. A *real* force (not a pseudo or 'fictitious' force) POWERS the stellar collapse that powers the fusion that rebounds as a SN blast. * * * * * * * * * * *Unless and until the prevailing theories of gravitation can explain the literal _acting mechanism _ that POWERS a supernova, force =/= power those theories are worthless. It's crunch time :-), Quite literally. time for those theories to put up or shut up. The two competing theories a 1.) geometry and 'curvature' of *'Something that is yet Nothing' and *2.) "gravitons". Still not observed. So how does either theory explain the real _mechanism of causation_ driving a supernova, and in train, the causal mechanism of gravity itself? 1) the choices of "forward" tend to favor "towards a mass concentration", for the host of assembled particles. Including the hundred trillion or so "behind" you. 2) gravitons are virtual exchange particles, like the virtual photon that provides the effect of "electric field". Don't place too much faith in a praticle that seems to have a mass / energy larger than most molecules. Per Occam's razor, the most obvious answer would be: a spatial medium under a state of pressurization exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic nucleus.. and the pressure-driven FLOW of that medium into the core of every atomic nucleus.. and that herein lies unification of gravity and the strong nuclear force. And yes, it is a PUSH force. And no, it is not a Le Sage theory. The resemblance is only superficial. Le Sage proposed a "shadowing" effect of sorts, and had no concept of the hyperpressurized state of the spatial medium or of its FLOW into all atomic nucleii, thereby sustaining and perpetuating all nuclear processes AND the action-at-a-distance effect we call "gravity". You still describe Le Sage. And your model also still has issues. Either gravity is exactly what it appears to be It appears to be curvature. Witness "corilois effect". Witness curvature requires no "action at a distance", all forces are contact forces. and behaves as (i.e., the pressure-driven, accelerating flow of the spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink), or it's angels, imps and Sky Pixies. Occam's razor does not favor your position. You should not rely on it. David A. Smith |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
On Apr 15, 7:59*am, dlzc wrote:
1) the choices of "forward" tend to favor "towards a mass concentration", for the host of assembled particles. *Including the hundred trillion or so "behind" you. And so what POWERS the inexorable inward force of all the stuff "behind" you... ...except the obvious : the hyperpressurized state of the spatial medium venting down to the lowest pressure-state at the core of every atomic nucleus? The prevailing theories of gravitation are predicated on space being a universally-isotropic 'void-nothing' all the way back to the Big Bang. This premise of space being functionally void (the void-space paradigm or VSP) necessates ad hockery such as 'exchange particles', 'virtual particles', 'flying photons', 'gravitons', geometry-as-the-cause-of-gravity etc. But what if space is NOT a void but a universe-filling Plenum, a hyperpressurized, highly mobile Fluid that's amenable to expansion/ compression and density gradients? Only this model offers a compelling explanation of the mechanism POWERING the collapse of a massive star down to a black hole, popping off a supernova in the process. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
On Apr 15, 7:59*am, dlzc wrote:
It appears to be curvature. *Witness "corilois effect". *Witness curvature requires no "action at a distance", all forces are contact forces. Take this analogy: you have a bathtub full of water. The plug has been pulled so the tub is draining. At the far end of the tub away from the drain a rubber ducky is floating. The duck is observed to be moving inexorably toward the drain, slowly at first, then faster and faster, *going with* the accelerating flow. Note that the duck is not being "pulled" but is being PUSHED along by the flow. This is the essence of gravity's 'action at a distance', wherein a gravitating mass is the flow sink or 'drain'. The "attraction" of gravity is a pseudo or fictitious force like "vacuum", "suction", "centrifugal" force, corialis effect etc. If the flowing-space model of gravity is bunkum, it *is* interesting is that increasing numbers of people worldwide, independantly and without collaboration, are deducing essentally the *same* mechanism. Their models differ only superficially, but all are seeing the same accelerating, omnidirectional 'reverse starburst' flow of the spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink. It's a no brainer like "Doh! The Earth really is round and revolves around the sun." |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
Dear oldcoot:
On Apr 15, 10:08*am, oldcoot wrote: On Apr 15, wrote: 1) the choices of "forward" tend to favor "towards a mass concentration", for the host of assembled particles. *Including the hundred trillion or so "behind" you. And so what POWERS the inexorable inward force of all the stuff "behind" you... Momentum. To move off teh geodesic takes energy / momentum other than what it has. David A. Smith |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
oc As i've pointed out Gravity being a push force rather than a pull
like static electricity and magnetizim creates more problems. You relate it like a drain. I posted you could put holes in the bottom of a fish tank and the fish will be "pushed to the floor" Virtual photons can be made to act like a push force,and still come out of two objects giving them mutual gravity. Outside space push has been theorized for over 200 years. You say space curve is baloney because who can show the curve. I could come back with in push gravity "What particle or wave is doing the pushing? You see oc push or pull Concave and convex "curves" does not give us the mysteries of the force of gravity. Reality is no one knew that better than Einstein. He spent the last 30 years of his life on that quest,and in vain. He knew GR could not work in th3e microscopic realm. That is why you read "quantum gravity" That is is the reason for my "Spin is in theory" to help solve the mystery of gravitation Bert |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
On Apr 15, 1:16 pm, oldcoot wrote:
On Apr 15, 7:59 am, dlzc wrote: It appears to be curvature. Witness "corilois effect". Witness curvature requires no "action at a distance", all forces are contact forces. Take this analogy: you have a bathtub full of water. The plug has been pulled so the tub is draining. At the far end of the tub away from the drain a rubber ducky is floating. The duck is observed to be moving inexorably toward the drain, slowly at first, then faster and faster, *going with* the accelerating flow. Note that the duck is not being "pulled" but is being PUSHED along by the flow. This is the essence of gravity's 'action at a distance', wherein a gravitating mass is the flow sink or 'drain'. The "attraction" of gravity is a pseudo or fictitious force like "vacuum", "suction", "centrifugal" force, corialis effect etc. If the flowing-space model of gravity is bunkum, it *is* interesting is that increasing numbers of people worldwide, independantly and without collaboration, are deducing essentally the *same* mechanism. Their models differ only superficially, but all are seeing the same accelerating, omnidirectional 'reverse starburst' flow of the spatial medium into mass with mass synonymous with flow sink. It's a no brainer like "Doh! The Earth really is round and revolves around the sun." Your duck to drain theory has some merit, especially if the horrific outflow of photons and gravitons is what's pushing ducky along. However, it could still be the drag or pull of that fast moving stream of photons/gravitons as gravity that's zooming past ducky, if not the stellar wind like friction aspects. Why not consider all of the above as having something to do with moving ducky towards that drain (there's also a negative slope to consider, in space possibly an upward or positive drainage slope), as then we get back to salvaging what little is left of Earth before it's too late? .. - Brad Guth |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
Bert wrote,
You say space curve is baloney because who can show the curve. Never said it was baloney, Bert. "Curvature" is a cryptic but brilliant metaphor of the _acceleration rate_ of flowing space. It is GR's 'accelerometer readout'. If there is no acceleration component to a flow, there is no "curvature of space", no gravity, no momentum imparted to matter embedded in the flow _irrespective of the actual velocity of the flow_. I could come back with in push gravity "What particle or wave is doing the pushing? No particle or wave. As stated mucho many times previously, the hyperpressurized state, the 'supra-cosmic overpressure' (or SCO) of the spatial medium itself "does the pushing" into the lowest pressure-state at the core of every atomic nucleus. The SCO demonstrates a pressure-state far exceeding degeneracy pressure of the atomic nucleus in its (the SCO's) ability to crush a massive star down to a BH, often popping off a supernova while so doing. It demonstrates one Flow, driven by one Force, the SCO, unifying all the fundamental forces _including gravity_ in the Unified Field of Spatial Flows. And it don't take one iota of math to understand it. :-) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
Your duck to drain theory has some merit, especially if the horrific outflow of photons and gravitons is what's pushing ducky along. However, it could still be the drag or pull of that fast moving stream of photons/gravitons as gravity that's zooming past ducky, if not the stellar wind like friction aspects. Why not consider all of the above as having something to do with moving ducky towards that drain (there's also a negative slope to consider, in space possibly an upward or positive drainage slope), as then we get back to salvaging what little is left of Earth before it's too late? Mythical 'exchange particles' aside, what you've more or less outlined is the 'spagettification' effect one would experience falling into a BH due to the extreme accelerational gradient of the inflow (the inflow of the spatial medium itself). Such an extreme gradient would be true of a several-solar-mass BH. But a supermassive, galactic- scale BH would exhibit a much less severe gradient and you wouldn't get 'spagettified' crossing the event horizon. And as mentioned several times previously, a "pull" aspect could be envisaged in the spagettification effect if one is still a fan of the "pull" model of gravity, |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)
Addendum to last sentence
...as mentioned several times previously, a "pull" aspect could be envisaged in the spagettification effect if one is still a fan of the "pull" model of gravity. Think of the venturi in your carburetor. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .) | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 17 | April 28th 08 08:46 PM |
[WWW] Gravity Probe B has anomalous data. Could this be caused by gravito magnetism? | Supertech | Research | 0 | April 26th 07 02:57 PM |
A fluxuating variation in a propelled gravity field may have caused dino extinction | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 8th 07 12:43 AM |
Dark matter and dark energy are caused by only gravity and the boyancy effect | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 3 | April 16th 06 06:40 PM |
Dark matter and dark energy are caused by only gravity and the boyancy effect | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | April 12th 06 08:03 PM |