wstrege

i will go do as you say, and see if i can find fabric of cosmos, because there has been nothing on this site to disuade me from the fact that i think my idea would account for all observations

i don't think that is true, while i do not have all the fact right i am sure, but i believe that einstein's theory of relativity tells something of time differences. like if one were to travel away from the earth at a high speed and come back, only like a year passed for you but 100's of years for earth.

but my theory specificly addresses the acceleration you speak of. but instead of a negitive energy pushing us out, there is a time flow difference that make objects appear to be accelerating. all the evidence out there supports my claim as well.

as mass is closer to the core, the mass at that depth and all mass above that specific depth is being pulled down at at some constant acceleration. at the surface of the earth it is 9.8 m/s/s . as you travel deeper into the earth that number will lessen, approaching 0.

YT, your truck example is good. you remove the person tied to the ropes, just tie the trucks together with an infinitely strong rope. now put the two trucks apart by the length of the rope. now both trucks pull in opposite directions at the same time and the rope will not move at all, because the net force is 0

i understand current theories, but i believe they are flawed because they do not consider varying degrees of gravity as one approaches the core.

science has not proven that it is accelerating. only bservations show that it is accelerating. my theory explains why we observe acceleration, when there is acually a constant velocity.

those are theories scientists have came up with, but with proof as much as i have...i think. i hope a physics expert hops on here and reads my things

once again, i am challenging the current theories of the internal structure. you still have to account for the lack of gravity in the center area. remember the closer to the center of the mass you get the less gravity pulls you toward it.

thx, but i am proposing a new theory in opposition to those that you pointed to. i had read that source and multiple others coming in, and believe my solution is more plausable and likely to cause the same red shifts we observe, thx for your comments though

imagine stripping off the 1/2 of the earths mass. so you are left with a mass with half the gravity, right? now pile all that stuff back on top; yes that stuff is being pulled down too but at the same rate you were at that level. remember that the mass above you is also acting on you, pulling you up, to a lesser extent, but still acting on you and the ground that was just covered up...

there only reason there is pressure at all is because of gravity itself, it wouldn't matter how much stuff there is if there is no force acting on it, as i propose. if anything, stuff closer to the center would have the gravity of all the materials surrounding it pulling it toward the surface

i read somewhere about dark energy and acceleration in the universe... i may have a better solution. now i don't know much of anything in physics but i am assuming that time can flow at different 'rates' else where in the universe. with that said, instead of actual acceleration; i propose a perseaved acceleration due to time differences. for example: locally we see a ball travelling a constant 3 m/s, at a different place there is another ball travelling 3 m/s. here, in 3 seconds we have seen the ball go 9 meters. now the other ball also travels 9 meters in 3 sec but the other time could be described as a function of our time x = local time and y = other time as function of local. lets say(extreme case) y = x^2(wherein reality it may be something less extreme like y = x^(1.004) ) therefore we would see the object travel: in the first sechere first second there: 3 meters second local second/4th other second: 9 meters 12 total third local second/9th other second:15 meters 27 total fourth local second/16th other second:21 meters 48 total looking like it is accelerating (6 m/s)/s when in fact it has a constant velocity of 3 m/s

first,i am not a physics study, though i did have a class in high school 5 years ago. with that said, i am wondering why it is a common belief to think of a solid nickel-iron core at the center of the earth. gravity is the attraction of matter to matter. so the all the matter of the earth is pulling us down. well, if i were at a point where there is matter pulling equally(or close to it) in all directions there would be effectively no gravity. this point/area would be near the center on the earth. Therefore there would be no pressure there and no reason for a solid mass in the center.