Layman's attempt at gravity

Xelasnave.1947

Xelasnave.1947

Valued Senior Member
1. I am not a scientist and although I did very well at school in science unfortunately was not able to follow it as a career path.

I enjoy astronomy and astro photography but that is as close as I come to any practical application and it is a hobby.

I read as much as I can and have a limited understanding of the philosophy of science such that I at least understand a theory is regarded more as fact than the view of the average layman who thinks theory is no more than a casual idea.

I have started this idea in this section knowing that what I will go on to deal with is not a theory and perhaps this post should go in "free thoughts" or elsewhere but hopefully not the cesspool.

I understand and accept The Theory of General Relativity is our best model to date and that it is well tested and delivers the predictions required of a scientific model.

Many years ago I wanted to know how gravity worked, which seems outside of the gambit of science to me now, however over time I came up with the idea that gravity could be explained very much along the lines of what is commonly known as "push gravity".

I thought about and developed my idea for some five years before someone pointed out that Le Sage first presented the idea in 1745.

His idea never achieved the high status of theory and although the idea was around for a long time apparently was never highly regarded.

I suppose I came around to think a push mechanism was viable simply because from my simple approach I could not work ....more to come....
Alex
 
2 .how attraction could work.
It seemed to me that between two masses there would have to be a message sent and returned as it were to effect the force we call attraction.

I concluded attraction may not exist and that all particles may do is interact very basically such that rather than convey a message they simply may bounch off each other and gravity may be the result of more particles coming from one direction than another.

I could rationalise that gravity was perhaps a form of pressure or an outside force as opposed to an attraction coming from within a mass.

We observe dark matter via rotation curves of galaxies which as our models are built upon an assumption gravity works via attraction.

General relativity however I believe models gravity as a bending of space without need of a force.

However it is a model and I wonder that if gravity was regarded as an external pushing force would that approach not be more likely to produce the rotation curves we observe without a need for dark matter.

In other words would, on the face of it, in a pressure style or push environment would not our observations be more consistent with a force from outside than from inside the galaxy.

The only science principle I could invoke may be ...for every force there is an equal and opposite reaction.

Has anyone else here thought about this along similar lines...more to come
Alex
 
I don't think GR is wrong but can't help but think as it does not offer explanation as to how mass tells space how to bend I would like to think of my idea as no more than trying to work out a physical mechanism which may eliminate the need for dark matter.

Could a model that addresses the physical nature of gravity at some sort of particle level take us further.
And if there is any merit in the idea how could one develop it as a hypothesis.

I did think the Pioneer craft would slow but because I had no math could not predict by how much and since then a mechanism has been generally accepted to explain the slowing .

Also I don't think the other craft that got through the heliosphere slowed when my prediction should apply to all craft exiting the solar system.

Some may accuse me of being a crank which is reasonable in one respect but please remember I am only investigating an idea by asking, rather than asserting I have a theory better than our current model.

It is a mere idea.

I suppose the main question is how does attraction work and could what we see as masses being attracted really be them being pushed together.

If that doesn't get Paddoboy back I have no idea what will.
Alex
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
I don't think GR is wrong but can't help but think as it does not offer explanation as to how mass tells space how to bend I would like to think of my idea as no more than trying to work out a physical mechanism which may eliminate the need for dark matter.

Could a model that addresses the physical nature of gravity at some sort of particle level take us further.
And if there is any merit in the idea how could one develop it as a hypothesis.

I did think the Pioneer craft would slow but because I had no math could not predict by how much and since then a mechanism has been generally accepted to explain the slowing .

Also I don't think the other craft that got through the heliosphere slowed when my prediction should apply to all craft exiting the solar system.

Some may accuse me of being a crank which is reasonable in one respect but please remember I am only investigating an idea by asking, rather than asserting I have a theory better than our current model.

It is a mere idea.

I suppose the main question is how does attraction work and could what we see as masses being attracted really be them being pushed together.

If that doesn't get Paddoboy back I have no idea what will.
Alex
Click to expand...

I can't work out how gravity works (big surprise :) )

However I also had / have the idea of gravity acting as a push mechanism

I have looked up (Googled) articles on the subject but frequently the maths involved lost me

To simplify my idea I imagine all the objects in the Universe (for the moment I leave out Black Holes and meteors) as being encased within a force, somewhat like atmosphere, which is pushing OUT, somewhat like a magnetic force

Yes I understand magnets have a positive and negative and gravity only one

Also, again like atmosphere, the force diminishes further from Earth

Now fill space with all the items we currently observe and give every single one a speed to carve out a pathway

You can imagine something like a pan full of boiling water

So how does this repulsive style of gravity attract things to fall down?

Why when the apple falls from the tree does it not fly into space?

Obviously the apple does have gravity (all mass does - its a property) but the gravity it totally enclosed within the Earth gravity

You might even say the apple gravity contributes to the Earth gravity

For objects in space coming towards Earth

If fast enough they just punch through the repulsive Earth gravity

If slower and graze the outermost gravity repulsive field both the Earth and object field neutralize each other at section of contact

This neutralize section means a absence or a decreased gravity repulsive force of both objects (a gravity vacuum if you like)

From all the surrounding space the repulsive gravity pushes Earth and object closer together into this vacuum

Eventually the smaller objects repulsive gravity becomes totally within Earth's gravity and, like the apple, blends into Earth's

I'll wait for comments to see if I will put more into this thread

Cheers

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
I have looked up (Googled) articles on the subject but frequently the maths involved lost me
Click to expand...
I think the first problem is there is no math.
Michael 345 said:
So how does this repulsive style of gravity attract things to fall down?
Click to expand...
Think of it this way.
From above the Earth we have a flow of particles or energy.
Through the Earth the flow is diminished such that it is less than that from above resulting in a net downward flow ... The greater flow down is gravity.
Michael 345 said:
Why when the apple falls from the tree does it not fly into space?
Click to expand...
More stuff flowing downward.
Maybe pushing the apple down is the idea.
Sorry for my inability to describe the idea.
Every object "radiates"but the "radiation" from outside will always be greater because the outside is "radiation" from everything else in the universe.
There is stuff on the net but if you are interested look up LeSage, that is the general idea, rather than the variations folk are coming up with.
Also google to find reasons against.

Thank you for attempting to grasp the idea and taking the time to provide a reply.
Alex
 
It is much like Jan's God...I can imagine it and am only at the stage...push is.

Hopefully I can add a few more words to make at least a word picture that describes what I imagine.
As I said its an idea and really what I am trying to explore is will thinking of gravity as an external force rather than an attraction force explain the rotation curves.
Alec
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
Think of it this way.
From above the Earth we have a flow of particles or energy.
Through the Earth the flow is diminished such that it is less than that from above resulting in a net downward flow ... The greater flow down is gravity.

More stuff flowing downward.
Maybe pushing the apple down is the idea.
Alex
Click to expand...

If you talk of pressure then cross section area also comes into picture for force calculation, that means force on the objects with same mass will be different if cross section area is different. Galileo will be out who said that two objects fall together irrespective of mass.

Then the direction of these pressure particles, why should it be radial only?
 
The God said:
Then the direction of these pressure particles, why should it be radial only?
Click to expand...

Thanks for even looking at my idea.
The flow would be in every direction.
Consider say all we deal with are neutrinos.
They radiate from every star so at any point in the universe they travel thru that point along every trajectory... And each point would experience the same.
Sorry to be so cumbersome I did not think it would be so difficult to describe the idea.
Thanks for taking your time.
Alex
 
From a geometric point of view would not the number of trajectories passing through a single point in space be enormous perhaps infinite?

And could not each and every point in the universe be viewed exactly the same.

Space flowing in all direction at once is how I imagine the result .

So although very much more complex would not this simple mental picture suggest a pressure or for the want of a better term, push environment.

And so that is the way I have come to view an effect originating from outside a galaxy or indeed a cluster of galaxies rather than some form of, to me, unidentified form of attraction.

I have no idea how to describe the idea mathematically so I cant even developed it to quantify the magnitude.

As I said if you can think of all the neutrinos there is no trajectory they don't follow they will be everywhere coming from everywhere.

Maybe I should quit now I don't feel capable of describing what I am thinking.

Alex
 
Xelasnave.1947 said:
Through the Earth the flow is diminished such that it is less than that from above resulting in a net downward flow ... The greater flow down is gravity.
Click to expand...

Is flow diminishes because it is absorbed?

or

neutralize from the Earth gravity field pushing up?

:)
 
Michael 345 said:
Is flow diminishes because it is absorbed?

or

neutralize from the Earth gravity field pushing up?

:)
Click to expand...

The push up , which is the push down from the other side, meets the push down from space which has not diminished.

The push up is less because energy is lost, maybe in the center of the planet...If there is anything in this idea I predict the inside of the planet will be very hot:rolleyes:
Alex
 
Push is everywhere but some push is greater than the opposing push we experience the greater push as the direction a falling body moves due to gravity...
Can you imagine if this goes 60 pages when we are even now well past push is.

Alex
 
The God said:
If you talk of pressure then cross section area also comes into picture for force calculation, that means force on the objects with same mass will be different if cross section area is different.
Click to expand...
Maybe not.
With neutrinos I expect it would be determined by mass not surface area.

There presumably there is a ratio of what they hit andcwhat hey miss relating to mass not surface area or volume.

On the positive to become a theory we need to be able to faulsifyyb but please wait a while before tryingvtovdo that.
Alex
 
I have a model for a universal ether that can account for gravity (as well as quantum entanglement.) The model starts with the idea that prior to the formation of a universal ether, there existed a First World in which elemental "point localities" oscillated, after which oscillational fatigue led "Yin and Yang" elemental points to transition to a vibratory (as derived from the oscillatory) ether. As they vibrate outwardly, these elemental units of the ether form transitory connections, and further multiple connections produce entrainments, leading to larger and larger energy units, up to the scale of quantum and atomic units.

Since quantum units are made up of elemental ether units, they retain an ability to connect vibrationally with elemental units that constitute the surrounding ether in space (in addition, of course, quantum units also have a well known capability to interact with each other, via spin, vector, and wave mechanisms.) -In quantum entanglement, when a pair of closely related quantum units are separated, even across great distances, they appear to have "communicated" with each other, in some mysterious way. -The above ether model can readily account for quantum entanglement, as representing radiated packets of etheric energy having the same vibratory pattern, with the elemental "building blocks" of the two quantum units being able to communicate with each other, through the ether.

With this model, underlying our quantum atomically-structured world, there exists an unstructured ether matrix, basically comprising a sea of elemental ether units. In this model, the force of gravity between two solid bodies would involve a constriction 0f the ether, in an "auric zone" which exists between the two bodies. Each dense body, like everything else in our world, would consist of the same basic "elements," i.e., they are made up of elemental ether units, and these units would radiate into space, near the bodies, as an etheric "aura," and would form connections with the elemental ether units in space, as part of a universal elemental-ether-continuum. As the elemental units resonate, or connect, with each other, an intervening space between each pair of units would be erased, and, overall, the ether in the auric zone would contract, compared to the ether outside of this zone, producing a gravitational attraction between the two bodies.
 
Xelasnave. 1947 I'm not sure I understand your premise. You mention a "push" force or pressure I suppose and it is reduced due to the Earth.

Is it gradually reduced by the Earth or is it reduced only when it comes into contact with the Earth. In other words is it like the Bernoulli effort on a wing where low pressure result in lift due to the air having to travel further on one surface than the other.

The idea here would be that Earth interrupts some pressure flow and increases as you get closer to Earth where it interferes to a greater extent. Or does the interference occur just when the Earth is reached?

I'm also unclear how any of this potentially explains away dark matter?
 
Seattle said:
I'm also unclear how any of this potentially explains away dark matter?
Click to expand...

Not sure that it is trying to explain away dark matter

If this and / or my partly thought out proposition grows strong legs though further effort checking testing etc there will come a time when the proposition will bump into dark matter

That's the time to test the idea

KISSES applies (Keep It Simple Slowly Explore Science)

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top