Pinch Paxton

The original forming of planets would be where waves meet together..vibrate in all directions. You can imagine explosions, and radiation, and all sorts of vibrations that would collide in a central position. Atoms carried to these positions would form the first planets. Then things slowly become logical. As a planet forms, it flattens a wave, and now it is a mightier force. This is hard to picture in 3D. Imagine that the waves are now less resistant. If the waves in space are treacle, then the waves around a planet are more like water, so any space objects are heading into the least resistant area that they can. This is what light would also do if it came upon a migty force like a black hole. It would be travelling fast through treacle, then it would hit a place with little resistance, surrounded by an area of high resistance. Pincho.

Human,Chimp,Gorilla,Orang utan......are there any more? Also, I doubt that 1 hybrid would cause that. I'm more ready to think of mass mutation. Not evolution for survival, but evolution due to triggered mutation as a cycle of life. Like our genes break down over many generations. All humans carry 5 mutated genes, what if the number rises over time?

Well a 3D trough is actually a bubble, and I am talking about 3D space, and not flat space. I am talking about waves meeting from all directions at the point of a bubble, then drifting the atom into the bubble. The atoms then spinning around inside the bubble until they fill it, and then they start to squash it outwards. It might be easier at this point to imagine a liquid space rather than a wave through air or something. Or maybe think of it as a message being passed along.

I make computer games, and my avatar is of a game I was making.

Two objects colliding in opposite directions at the same speed, with the same weight create zero velocity, but objects traveling on waves must meet in a wave trough to measure the same velocity. The wave trough is the starting point for a planet to begin its existence. Then as it grows it flattens the wave. This is a slow process. Now after all this time we have some planets.

I guess, based on simularities between species, then a gene comparison.

The monkey wasn't half human in the end, but I think that each species reaches a mutation stage, a stage where the species all suffer from matching gene mutations, at this time in their evolution, they might be able to mate with many similar creatures. We would be required to mate with chimps, but I believe that we will not reach our mutation cycle due to cloning. If it is true that we reach a mutation stage to evolve, then us humans are never going to evolve any further than the point that we have reached now. We are not likely to mate with chimps, so we are not likely to evolve into anything else. This is just another of my wild theories to be ignored. Pincho.

I'm a Voyager fan really, I even wrote a script for it, but my FAT on my Hard drive got messed up, and I lost it. I only had 5 pages left to write before sending it off. They paid £10.000 per script. Best TNG...The Best Of Both Worlds 1/2 Then 'Data's Day', and '1001100' whatever it is. Pincho.

It would dampen it between the tightly compacted atoms. It's hard to test gravity inside a block of uridium, or simply just metal. Around the planet you would still get a sloping wave. After the wave sloping towards the planet, you would get a wave sloping away from the planet, then another wave after that which I call anti-gravity because it pushes you backwards. Over short distances. like from here to Mars, these waves are hardly even there. But between galaxies, they could be quite strong. The larger the expanse of space the higher the peaks.

Guitar strings do that when you vibrate them, and put your finger on 1 end you get a more intense vibration in the middle that goes to no vibration where your finger is pressing. But my wave is 3D so it can be flattened out in all directions. Only a large object could flatten some of the vibrations though.

The anti gravity is a hump in the middle, the rest of the distance is normal gravity. The hump is flattened as you approach it. A smaller object than the earth might not flatten the hump completely. A smaller object might be repelled slightly by the hump. NASA scientists have to make a course correction of their satellites between planets that they can't explain. I think that this would be a small hump of anti-gravity. Even that picture I posted of balls spinning around on a cloth that is dipped in the middle would have a bump created where the ball passed around it. It would in effect have some anti-gravity. Imagine the cloth dipping where the Earth is situated, you would get a bump between it, and the sun.

Oh that! Well I find it so simple to understand, that it's hard for me to imagine that you will ever follow it. I mean, I had to work from nothing upwards, but you have been given all of the facts, so you have a massive head start over me.

Wow there are a lot of sites about pushing gravity, but none of them use the same idea as me, and none of them have the anti-gravity. I thought that the two things would be related every time.

I am rejecting the current theory but I need an analogy of the understanding that is required to make scientific people understand my own theory. I need to know what you can understand, before I can tell you what you need to know.

Explain....What's the current cause of gravity? I'm saying that the cause of gravity is a wave that pushes atoms. A wave that all things travel on including photons. A wave that can be stimulated by photons, and magnets, and held still by heavy objects like molecules.

I thought that I would have another attempt to explain this with some more drawings. I think that the vibrations would be due to some sort of shockwave. Maybe to do with the big bang.

It would be great if someone who knew what I was talking about stepped in ever!

Because the explenation re-enforces the theory, it's a self-perpetuating argument. The dip in the picture is downhill, and gravity makes it work. But actually waves make it work, and there is no downhill in space.

This isn't the wrong thread, I'm allowed to defend my theory. That gravity picture as you call it, uses gravity to explain gravity, you aren't allowed to do that. Once you come to the conclusion that gravity is a push force then the picture works better as an explenation of a force occuring exactly at the point that an object meets gravitational forces as a wave.

I'm biting my tongue, must not be tempted to say...w.... or to draw any pictures...LOL!

Yes I want to hear the science version...

It worked for me but I didn't have time to finish the experiment. Anyhow, monitor sync speeds would probably alter the outcome. I was having to choose between one or the other, but sometimes it was either. If I had either I would click Horizontal, it was not accurate.

I thought it was demonstrating the bending of space? Using this explenation as some sort of fumble, but then not explaining why space would bend in the first place. Space doesn't bend, the waves just get higher away from the planet. Higher waves push harder against an object causing the objects path to take the easiest route. So in a way you get a bend, but it would actually be possible to take the direct route if you had enough momentum and size. Light has the momentum to tackle most waves, but not the size to flatten the wave like a bunch of atoms could. Light must travel in a huge arc over long distances.

Well to me it looks like water going down a plughole, which is an inward direction causing a dip, and a bend. Light would still bend in other words, things would still spin. Everything would still look the same. Water going down a plughole is a push force, because the weight of the water on the outside is greater than the stuff going down the hole.

Even the standard diagram used to show how gravity works seems to demonstrate pushing rather than pulling. It oddly uses gravity as an explenation of gravity which is silly.