Defying Gravity, and the laws of physics

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Sarkus, Mar 24, 2014.

  1. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    And so is the moon , moving away from the Earth for that matter
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    ...and so is every object in space moving away from their core.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    So it is
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    GR has it that matter is 'made to swerve towards the gravitating body' by the curvature in surrounding spacetime. At NO stage does GR have a 'pulling' force in its construct/visualization. Got that?

    And as for your PERSONAL/CHOSEN POV 'perspectives' non-explanations is concerned, please see my above post #141 telling you that the ONLY 'POV that MATTERS to reality is the REALITY POV of what is doing what to what and how it is doing it. Your own personal impressions from personal/arbitrary/abstract 'unreal reciprocal' analytical constructs are neither her nor there.

    Has that sunk in? Good. I would appreciate it if you didn't just troll the same uncomprehending impressions ad nauseam like you accuse certain others of doing, hey mate? Thanks.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225


    Of course this forum over time, has grown to realize that what you say is not Gospel...Got that?

    And yes we all realize that space/time curvature causes masses to come together, which can be looked on as a pull as well as a push...Got that?

    My personal opinions are not generally personal, at least not with regards to this subject...They are the opinions supported by mainstream in general...Got that?


    And of course you cherry picked the examples I gave and didn't explain all of them from your own opinion/Interpretation.

    Now stop whinging and whining, and learn to accept that your generally crap notions about cosmology are not mainstream, and in my view/opinion/Interpretation, probably never will be.
    There goes your ToE...like dust in the wind.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    Goats, even less so.
     
  10. Motor Daddy ☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼☼ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,105
    But they don't go Baaaaaaa like you do.
     
  11. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    You have the 'face' to talk about 'cherry picking' when you just 'chopped out' from that quote the factual content that explained where you are wrong, and now you post a lamebrained opinionated drivel 'reply' while ignoring the facts already posted to you? Unbelievable the extent to which hypocrites and trolls will go to make themselves sound relevant when they are just avoiding being frank with themselves and admitting they are wrong and silly to keep on trolling 'paddo noise' all over the place. I bet your 'mates' in the new man-cave are getting an eyeful of how silly you've been acting on here.

    Break. Start afresh, mate. Good luck.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225
    The last ratbag that I knew on another science forum, ranted continually about ESGT [Electrodynamic Spin Gravity Theory] Planetary ejection theory [planets born by being ejected from the Sun] claimed there was no push, only pull, claimed SR/GR and the BB were fabricated fairy tales, claimed all the establishment/society was metal poisoned and at one time physically attacked the P.M of Australia.....
    He was known as Zarkov, and I'm beginning to see reflections of that nutball here of late.
     
  13. Aqueous Id flat Earth skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,152
    Not me. Brahe, Kepler & Newton. Yes, Einstein followed their lead. Of course he was not concerned with the gravity of planets but the effects of gravity on electromagnetic propagation, so his work has little or nothing to do with your immediate questions.

    A vector is a pair of numbers, a magnitude and a direction (such as an angle of bearing). The numbers you are familiar with -- which don't have the twin angle -- are called scalars. The magnitude of the Earth gravity vector is the scalar 9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup]. The vector can be written several ways: -9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup]z or 9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup]∟180°, for example.

    The Earth is moving away from the Sun until July and then it starts moving toward the Sun. More importantly, the Earth is moving around the Sun.

    There is nothing imaginary about the gravitational field, which has the magnitude you are aware of (9.8 m/s[sup]2[/sup]) and also the direction (pointing toward the Sun) which you seem to be unaware of.

    if not for the gravity vector the Earth would fly off out of the solar system on its present heading instead of constantly turning toward the Sun. There are two vector forces acting on the Earth: one is due to the Sun's gravitational field, which points toward the Sun, and the other is due to Earth's kinetic energy, which points in the direction of its heading.

    Who is this "they"? I'll assume it means some people on the beach near your ball. If they are standing on Earth, they are not moving with respect to the Earth, but they are moving with respect to the Sun. If they are standing still on Earth, then they are not travelling any distance from the Earth. But every second they stand still on Earth they travel about 19 miles around the Sun. Yes, 19 miles is greater than zero.
     
  14. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,034
    Hi, Undefined.
    Methinks you missed my request in post #143:
    When you get a chance, please can you respond.
    I know how busy you seem, but would appreciate it.
    Thank you.
     
  15. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    Sorry, mate, I will be doing that as part of the ToE I am finishing/publishing, so I can't go into any more detail at this stage. But I have already posted some comments that should put those that understand the matter as explained on the right reality POV track, and not just any arbitrary 'reciprocal POV' abstraction from which to consider the actual real forces not the 'perceived effect' result based on 'pseudoforce' POV.

    Cheers and bye for now, Baldeee; enjoy your further discussions!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225

    ???
    His query has nothing to do with your ToE.
    He want's to know why and see references re your notion of no pull, only push.

    An incorrect notion anyway.
     
  17. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    I already said I posted comments on that issue to others. Baldeee has only to check back to the relevant posts where I gave examples of the nature of micro/macro scale push forces when the reality POV is taken instead of arbitrary 'reciprocal' POV.

    I explained why I could not do more at this stage because of my ToE work/publishing, as any courteous interlocutor would.


    And while you are 'making noises' again, how about YOU support YOUR claim that there are pull forces in reality mechanisms/processes.....and not just 'pseudo-force' and abstract/unreal 'notional POV' and 'paddo-opinionated' pull-the-other-one 'forces'? Go on, do some real science discussion instead of just 'me-too-ing' and 'coat-tailing' on others fro a change.


    And please do leave out the usual mindless links and quotes that are irrelevant and/or un-argued by YOU based on proper objective factual not 'beliefs' based facts. OK? Go to it, mate!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,225

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!






    I've already given four or five examples...go check...I recall you tried to dispute one of them.



    No, I will not. As I have already informed you, I will post whatever links I see fit, to refute your dribble.
    I could very well direct you to do the same, and anyone else, but I,m not that arrogant and or child like.

    Suffice to say again, that both pull and pushes do exist, and some can be readily referred to as either...others not so.
     
  19. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,410
    Undefined, I'd have to agree with others, in that it seems to be just a convention. But I'm not sure its worth getting too worked up over.
     
  20. Baldeee Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,034
    Thanks for responding, and good luck with your ToE.
    Unfortunately your responses to the others seem to merely be a matter of convention.
    I guess the convention is that "push" is when the direction of force is away from the cause.
    And that what might initially appear to be a "pull" (using this convention) is better described as a push once the actual causes are better understood, is it still not just a matter of convention?
    This was why I asked for some support of the notion that it is more than this.

    Sure, the descriptions will help people better understand what is going on if one adheres to the convention, but if one considers a force to be merely a magnitude and a vector, then the description just a matter of efficiency driven through convention.

    So maybe, as Sarkus suggests, it is not worth getting to worked up over.
    But if you could provide any actual support, that would be great.

    Thanks.
     
  21. Undefined Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,695
    Thanks mate.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Not at all, it is the reverse. It was the others that took the arbitrary 'reciprocal POV line, not me. I always and only presented/explained the REALITY POV which is the ONLY view the objective universal phenomena inherently has. The universe doesn't 'reverse time' or 'reverse its position' to 'take a different view' in abstract 'perception' terms which us humans do.


    Anyhow, since you have been polite and intelligent in your approach and discussion with me, I shall leave you with one more clue as to the reality of whether forces push or 'pull' in physical reality POV terms:

    Consider the mainstream HYPOTHESIS of Big Bang, Inflation and Expansion, and now, Accelerating Expansion. Consider further the implications of that hypothesis for the nature and effect of the primordial (called unified in mainstream jargon) force before it allegedly 'differentiated' into the currently active 'separate' forces.

    I ask you, IF the BBang unified feature contained all energy, and even after the Inflation stage, all that energy was EXPLOSIVE and 'pushing' everything apart, then how can one speak of a 'pulling' force at all unless in arbitrary/abstract/philosophical/mathematical modeling/thinking terms ONLY?

    See? Even in the mainstream 'beginnings' HYpothesis, there was never anything but a 'push' force; and that hasn't changed just because the force has differentiated into lesser/distinct push forces at the micro and macro scales.

    Sorry I have to leave it at that now. Bye and good luck in your own explorations into reality physics, Baldeee!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page