# Is gravity forced motion of differential mass ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

#### Mark Turner

##### Banned
Banned
An object or gasses mass is its entirety of volume and field mass emitted . We all know mass equates to energy and energy equates to mass. Can we assume energy is attracted to energy as mass is attracted to mass ?
One assumes we can and in consideration of further thought , we've already discussed the "cold fusion" of atoms but have not mentioned heat energy being a sort of "anti-matter" , not in the traditional context of anti matter of course . We know when things are heated they expand , some things breaking their molecular bonds and showing anti-gravitational properties .
In further consideration let's consider why mass is attracted to mass ! We know in physics of only one natural phenomenon of where things attract , this being the laws of opposite polarities .
What happens when two opposite pole magnets join ? The fields remain and both fields will still attract a neutrally poled needle .
Could we say that the neutrality of combined fields attracts the neutrality of the pin?

Is the neutrality of mass attracted to the neutrality of other mass ?

It would seem an apparent gravity mechanism .

Mass is a measurement of how much stuff is present of what you are considering and counts as a property

Inertial mass is a measurement of how much force is required to move said mass

Mass is a measurement of how much stuff is present of what you are considering and counts as a property

Inertial mass is a measurement of how much force is required to move said mass

Indeed , mass is a measurement denoted in kilograms !
I always consider the whole universe and the hidden elements we can't see that are beyond our visual range . I believe the whole of space what we can see wears a cloak of invisibility that prevents us seeing the gravitational field between masses such has an assumed Higgs field .
I think it is possible there is a maximum range of field that we have not yet detected yet and beyond this maximum is who knows but guesses.
How can we detect something we can't see that has an assumed 0 interaction with matter ?
Perhaps we could some how increase the density for all purposes of an assumed Higgs aether detection in experiment in an empty vacuum .
I'll leave my thoughts at that for a while , I hope you enjoy reading what I write and my future writings.

Well , I've had a very disappointing evening so decided to give some more thought on gravity . Einstein's space time curvature of gravity explains the effects of gravity rather than any sort of mechanism . Quite clearly it would be a big shock to just openly reveal the mechanism . I've personally played enough science games to last a life time, become more expert than a novice.
Well folks I've expressed my thoughts on neutrality attracted to neutrality , I thought there'd be more response , quite disappointing indeed.
I'm presently considering the gravity of the sun and considering that hot things may be repelled by the sun as hot things tend to expand.

An object or gasses mass is its entirety of volume and field mass emitted .
I don't know what that means.
We all know mass equates to energy and energy equates to mass. Can we assume energy is attracted to energy as mass is attracted to mass ?
Energy is not a substance. It is not attracted to mass.
One assumes we can and in consideration of further thought , we've already discussed the "cold fusion" of atoms
That is wrong.
have not mentioned heat energy being a sort of "anti-matter" , not in the traditional context of anti matter of course . We know when things are heated they expand , some things breaking their molecular bonds and showing anti-gravitational properties .
That is absurd. Do you seriously think that ice cubes melting in your glass of lemonade is anti-gravity?
In further consideration let's consider why mass is attracted to mass ! We know in physics of only one natural phenomenon of where things attract , this being the laws of opposite polarities .
That is wrong. How about the strong force?
What happens when two opposite pole magnets join ? The fields remain and both fields will still attract a neutrally poled needle .
That is wrong.
Could we say that the neutrality of combined fields attracts the neutrality of the pin?
Of course not.
Is the neutrality of mass attracted to the neutrality of other mass ?
Neutrality has nothing to do with it.
It would seem an apparent gravity mechanism .
No, not even a little.

If you are interested in physics, I highly recommend that you try studying physics and stop making wild guesses.

Energy is not a substance. It is not attracted to mass.
Light is a form of energy, and light gets bent by gravity (because of the attraction).

No light is not energy. Photons carry energy. A rock can carry PE or KE but a rock is not energy.
There is no such thing as a photon , it is all made up .

A candle flame gives off light, and it gives off heat, what we sometimes call radiant heat.

Is heat a form of energy?
You feel heat

Heat is the transfer of translational kenetic energy from hot to cold.

In the case of radiant heat the energy is transferred by photons.

Photons are not defined as energy by mainstream science.
Photons don't exist , there is no such thing as isolated , everything is converged into one singularity. We feel heat , a rock doesn't feel heat , heat is a sensory experience , don't you know anything ?

don't you know anything ?
I know a fool when I hear one. Bye-bye sockpuppet troll.

I know a fool when I hear one. Bye-bye sockpuppet troll.
If you knew science , you'd know very well that temperature is not the same as heat .

Yes, heat is a form of energy.

As is electromagnetic energy, for instance in the magnetic field created by a current flowing in an electromagnet.......or in a photon.

Energy is one property of a photon, alongside its other properties, including momentum, spin and frequency. Just as heat content is one property of any material object.

Energy is also a property of a sound wave, in that case from compression and rarefaction of the air, away from the equilibrium value of the air pressure. Nobody would say that sound "is" energy, though. That would be a fairly useless description of it.
You're another one! Heat is not a form of energy , it is a sensory experience .

[click]

Moderator notice:

The user Mark Turner has been identified as a sock puppet of a user who has been previously permanently banned under several different names. Although we have been aware of this for some time, we have allowed this user to post, to see if he has changed following a lengthy absence from the forum.

It has become clear that this user returned here mainly to troll other members. The pattern of behaviour is consistent - post nonsense statements that sounds like naive foolishness, then sit back as well-intentioned members post responses in an attempt to help the troll to learn some basic science. When one issue has wasted enough time, divert onto a new and unrelated topic. Rinse and repeat.

This behaviour preys upon the good will of our general membership. It is not fair that this kind of troll be allowed to remain here. Thus, we have taken the decision to reinstate the pre-existing permanent ban of this member.
----

The following is an instructional example:

Photons don't exist , there is no such thing as isolated , everything is converged into one singularity. We feel heat , a rock doesn't feel heat , heat is a sensory experience , don't you know anything ?
He starts with a provocative claim "Photons don't exist", which he knows will immediately attract the attention of people who know some physics. He hopes they will be angry about this completely unsupported claim.

Follow up with a nonsense claim: "there is no such thing as isolated, everything is converged into one singularity". Again, this is completely unsupported, not to mention poorly punctuated and unrelated to the previous statement about photons (despite being apparently part of the same thought).

Follow that with a statement of the bleeding obvious, again disconnected from anything that has gone before. In the process, make another claim that dismisses precise definitions (this time of the term "heat", as used in physics).

Wait for the inevitable responses as the troll bait sucks people in. Then go on about the Sun for a while, then move on to the next unrelated troll bait. etc. This has been the pattern ever since this user returned to the forum under this latest sock name.

Status
Not open for further replies.