Gravity and falling objects

First of 6 parts. Feynman comes in at about the 6 minute mark.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Agreed. Best to get the Newtonian picture straight first and only then move on to Einstein.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The force of gravity is the weakest of the 4 fundamental forces of nature. Particles would be held together mostly by the strong force. The force of gravity really doesn't play a significant role on the quantum scale. Also, asteroids can be torn apart, because the force of gravity can pull harder on part of the object than another part, like what happened to the impact that hit Jupiter several years ago...

You could try a different experiment. Get a dumbbell and lift it. Then add some more weights to it. Lift it again. It will be harder to lift the second time. It would also take more force to lift it by adding more weights...

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The Tautochrone curve has an interesting relationship with gravity and Cycloid arcs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tautochrone_curve#.22Virtual_gravity.22_solution

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Newtonian gravity is often misunderstood or misrepresented. Sometimes even in college textbooks.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0310049.pdf

 

A couple of unimportant, but I hope interesting comments on Post 21 video from a guy who spent 5 years at Cornell:

The opening bell music is the alma mater*, from the Library tower's top which officially begins:
Far above Cayuga's waters,
With its waves of blue,
Stands our noble Alma Mater,
Glorious to view. ...

But there is an un-official version that begins:
Far above Cayuga's waters,
There's an awful smell,
Some say it Cayuga's waters,
But I say its Cornell ...

Now to get more to gravity:
The lib tower is tall with a square spiral stairway to the top.
Years before I was there, rumor had it that known jester
lead a cow to up to the top in the middle of the night.
Then tied the Cow's lead rope to the clapper of a bell.
That bell rang all night as cow struggled to get free.
But when it was, it would not walk down the step stairs.
It got down, thanks to gravity, but in separated pieces.
- - - - - - -
* Cornell's beautiful Alma Mater is the best known in the world - only one in a famed list of 500 best known songs.

 

If it has a +-mc^2 density(a little bit more and or a little bit less), then it has a gravity. No matter how fleeting a time even the Diracian action reaction has an amount of force-density-time so during the virtual particle oscillations a 'gravity'-'density' existent state would exist. Which implies a background g, different from compressed compression pressure density in the near term of mass/force/density/per volume area/gravity/ size, but may just be a natural state within resonance of extremely larger size property. i.e. Diracian. etc.

 

Magical, here is an alternative that may help you. http://www.sciforums.com/threads/gravities-mechanism.145277/

 

Your alternative hypothesis does not stand up to scrutiny and you were dishonest in the first place by posting it in science.
The simple point of the matter is that Gravity increases an objects downward velocity at 9.81 m/s...... it accelerates everything at exactly the same rate.

By the same token gravity needs to pull harder on heavier objects than lighter objects to attract them both by similar amounts.
On Earth though, we have air resistance affecting that.

 

That was my very first visit to your forum.

And my hypothesis doesn't do exactly that? Science's solution for gravity is the graviton? Wow.

 

Hmmm, OK.

No, wrong......the graviton is a hypothetical particle.

 

And it is wrong for us commoners to come up with hypothetical ideas?

 

Not at all. As long as you remember that it is hypothetical, and as such will undergo scrutiny to see how this hypothetical fits in with known physical law and discoveries. The graviton though still hypothetical, does have some "reason" behind it.

 

Paddoboy, you and I both know the graviton was created simply because they could not unite gravity with QM. We desperately need to rid our selves of this problem so why not at least consider the idea a little deeper?

 

It's clear YOU don't know much about any of this. Until you do you might find something better to do with your time.

 

No, but don't expect anyone to take them seriously. You have as much chance of guessing something new in physics as you do guessing a cure for cancer.

 

You're linking total bullshit, yours, as if it was science. It's not. For example time dilation has nothing to do with acceleration. It's relative velocity for the SR component. For an accelerating vehicle it's the change in instantaneous relative velocity during the acceleration. Since we can detect acceleration it confirms what's being accelerated is in motion.

 

Your right brucep, since I'm not as smart as you I might as well use my time somewhere else but thank you for your brilliant and somewhat lost remarks.

 

There isn't really anything wrong with "guessing" a cure for cancer.

In 1980 I fell victim to exposure to the same chemical (1,1, trichloroethane) which also resulted in an epidemic of cancers in Love Canal, New York, as the result of dumping 20,000 gallons of that chemical into a location where it seeped into the local water supply.

Here's a guess about how to cure cancer. Stop poisoning our environment with chemical waste. Then talk about guessing how to treat those who are unfortunate to become afflicted with cancer. In my case, that treatment cost me a spleen, a thyroid gland, and about 3/4 of what might have been a fuller life.

This is only a guess. Call my case anecdotal if you wish. My exposure was possibly more severe than most of those at Love Canal, but could be traced to the same basic cause, which is my own stupidity in handling that chemical that was compounded by that of my former employer's in terms of not providing the proper employee education on the dangers of using it. The case of Love Canal however, is a well documented medical case study in what caused those local cases of leukemias and Hodgkin's disease.

 

Dan your way-off topic...but this is Sciforums.com so who knows..

That's prevention of some forms of cancer not cure.

Are you saying you let LAYMEN make a guess about taking those parts out?
Dan I'm NOT mocking you.