Generating Gravity

[Theredbarron]

I'm claiming that the 300 miles of air above our heads is whats holding us down due to the effect that is happening at the edge of our atmosphere. take this mountain for example. see how the air is appearing as if the mountain is moving. That's because it is. if that mountain passed you at the speed that it is traveling right now and you were standing still. By still I mean not moving with the surface. The speed differential would be 1kmph or more depending on the speed of the surface where the mountain is. You can feel a semi pass you at 60mph. Why wouldn't you feel the mountain in that same case?

Electro magnetism is invisible. We can create it. So why not go down this road and see. 

The differential from space to our atmosphere is where this is happening.

I do have calculations. You just wont accept them so I'm not going to show them. If you cant answer my questions explaining why instead of just saying its not possible then you dont have an answer is what I'm getting at. I dont want whatever math you are doing. This is purely basic. If the math is something that I can use not to only reason it but actionable information then I will use that. I'm not that far into developing a theory yet to try and use equations to explain. I have to have something concrete to go off of to use my calculations. Not just an assumption .  If this is so simply not gravity then tell me why with demonstrable evidence.  I'm going to bring demonstrable evidence. Documents that clearly demonstrate what your saying or video of examples. You can use things like what I just used. I'm still developing this theory so I dont have all the answers. I came here to try to find some other logic that I can use to try to eliminate things. Like the static charge that I'm going to test. As far as my theory goes this is what I'm going to call it till I'm shown otherwise because by my theory's definition this would be considered gravity. This does not mean that I'm saying its fact. Its a Theory. Can you solve math without even understanding the equation? How can you solve this without even understand the equation? simply dismissing it is not solving it.

You dont have to solve it. I just wanted to know what you think it might be. Not what you think it isnt

Edited August 22, 2018 by Theredbarron
verbage

[Strange]

34 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm claiming that the 300 miles of air above our heads is whats holding us down

There is no atmosphere on the moon but there is still gravity. 

36 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I do have calculations. You just wont accept them so I'm not going to show them.

You (and we) don’t know if we will accept them unless you show us. 

37 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

If this is so simply not gravity then tell me why with demonstrable evidence. 

That’s not the way it works. It is up to you to provide evidence that it is gravity by eliminating all other causes. 

39 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I just wanted to know what you think it might be.

You have been given several suggestions. It is up to you to refine your experiment to eliminate those possibilities. 

[DrP]

30 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm claiming that the 300 miles of air above our heads is whats holding us down due to the effect that is happening at the edge of our atmosphere.

You can claim what you like - it is wrong.

31 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

 You can feel a semi pass you at 60mph. Why wouldn't you feel the mountain in that same case?

You dont have to solve it. I just wanted to know what you think it might be. Not what you think it isn't

It doesn't need solving as we already fully understand what happened when fluids are displaced by moving objects like large vehicles and fans in tubes. There are equations for it and everything. Why not take a course in physics or something if you are serious about learning about how it works? Your way looks like it might lead to confusion and total misunderstanding.

Newton was congratulated on his theories and he claimed to have only got there from 'standing on the shoulders of giants'.  What he meant was that he got to where he did by taking the work of many hundreds of people before him across centuries and extended the knowledge further through testing reality and measuring what he saw with precision.  He didn't just see an apple drop from a tree and work it all out in a flash of thought. If you want to start from scratch with knowledge and ignore centuries of learning then you will die before you are even close to misunderstanding what an atom is.  Or you can read a book and ask questions on sites like this and listen to the answers people give you.

 

[Theredbarron]

Maybe I should take a science class so I can learn to ignore suggestions in a speculations forum

[Ghideon]

4 hours ago, Theredbarron said:

Have you seen smoke in a vacuum chamber on earth? It moves to the bottom.

Cool, I had not seen that experimental setup before.

4 hours ago, Theredbarron said:

My wheel being above in the chamber should pull the smoke up into the area where it would act as an atmosphere around the wheel. 

This is a better explanation of what you expect to be the outcome of the experiment, thanks. Now lets move on with some ideas. If you do not use smoke but instead put something small and solid in the vacuum chamber, do you expect the machine to be able to pull it up? For instance small pieces of paper or some dust? Again, preposing that static electricity, vibrations etc has been eliminated. 

4 hours ago, Theredbarron said:

I dont want whatever math you are doing

I understood that. That is why I try to figure out though experiments or modifications to your setup that you may begin to learn from in your own pace. Then you might start questioning your ideas and try to figure out why your observations may differ from what you expected. 

[Theredbarron]

23 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

 

This is a better explanation of what you expect to be the outcome of the experiment, thanks. Now lets move on with some ideas. If you do not use smoke but instead put something small and solid in the vacuum chamber, do you expect the machine to be able to pull it up? For instance small pieces of paper or some dust? Again, preposing that static electricity, vibrations etc has been eliminated. 

 

Would it make sense to put a different wheel in that does not support my theory like a perfect sphere? Would that still create static electricity? Also my other question would be if I were keep everything the same and run it with a different wheel that does not support my theory and it does not pull the paper towel to it, would that mean that the force is relative to my wheel?

[koti]

4 hours ago, Theredbarron said:

I'm claiming that the 300 miles of air above our heads is whats holding us down due to the effect that is happening at the edge of our atmosphere.

 

So you think that the air is what's holding us down on the surface of the earth?
Fun fact - 62 miles above the earth's surface there is no air.
 

[Theredbarron]

I am going to get a wheel made that doesn't vibrate one of these days to eliminate the vibrations?

2 minutes ago, koti said:

So you think that the air is what's holding us down on the surface of the earth?
Fun fact - 62 miles above the earth's surface there is no air.
 

Are you claiming that there's no gaseous matter past 62 miles above our head? This is what I refer to as air so what I mean is gaseous matter it doesn't matter what it's made of.

[koti]

15 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I am going to get a wheel made that doesn't vibrate one of these days to eliminate the vibrations?

Are you claiming that there's no gaseous matter past 62 miles above our head? This is what I refer to as air so what I mean is gaseous matter it doesn't matter what it's made of.

Yes, the Karman Line which is at 62 miles is accepted as the line above which there is no air. Ofcourse there is no accurate way to pinpont a line where the armosphere ends and there are particles even at higher orbits than 300 miles but that doesnt mean there is air at 300 miles, because there isn’t.

Could you answer my question ?:

„So you think that the air is what's holding us down on the surface of the earth” ?

[beecee]

1 hour ago, Theredbarron said:

Maybe I should take a science class so I can learn to ignore suggestions in a speculations forum

You are obviously ignoring all those here that have taken science classes and more, and as a result coming up with more and more inane suggestions such as the air holding us down on the surface of the Earth. When I was a young bloke, I would be in fits of laughter watching the three stooges. Your suggestions and claims do them proud.

[Ghideon]

13 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

Would it make sense to put a different wheel in that does not support my theory like a perfect sphere?

That post at least shows more of some sort of scientific approach, I think. Are we still talking about the hypothetical case where you have access to a vacuum chamber? 

[Theredbarron]

4 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

That post at least shows more of some sort of scientific approach, I think. Are we still talking about the hypothetical case where you have access to a vacuum chamber? 

No just as it sits and changing out the wheel in the video and running again to see if the effects change. This is to see if static electricity is what's causing it. I do want to know if this would work if I spun this would it create static electricity?

I wanted to test the static electricity one because it would be easier to perform that test before making a whole new wheel and everything.

[Janus]

43 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

I am going to get a wheel made that doesn't vibrate one of these days to eliminate the vibrations?

Are you claiming that there's no gaseous matter past 62 miles above our head? This is what I refer to as air so what I mean is gaseous matter it doesn't matter what it's made of.

99.999997% of the Earth's atmosphere is below that 62 mile altitude.   If it the air above us that holds us to the planet then that force should drop to about 0.000003% of the surface value at that height, and it doesn't. Even at the distance of the Moon, nearly a quarter of a million miles away, gravity has only dropped to 0.0028% of the value it is at the surface of the Earth.

At the distance the ISS orbits (254 miles) it is still 88.5% of what it is at the surface, even though it is well beyond the vast majority of the atmosphere.

[Ghideon]

44 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

No just as it sits and changing out the wheel in the video and running again to see if the effects change.

If it's easy to do then by all means go ahead and try. But as long as you perform the experiment in air i think you will have no evidence that gravity generation is involved. The machine just acts as some sort of fan or similar, I would prefer to discuss the setup in vacuum.

But lets try this idea as a way to find out what your setup is doing: Use a vacuum cleaner, start it and let it run. Air flows out from it somewhere. Now stick a paper to the inlet. The paper will get stuck and stay there even if no air is allowed to pass into the vacuum cleaner. No air will flow out from the vacuum cleaner. Does the vacuum cleaner generate gravity? Does the behaviour of the vacuum cleaner now look very similar to the phenomenon in your video? 

 

Edited August 22, 2018 by Ghideon

[Theredbarron]

1 hour ago, Janus said:

99.999997% of the Earth's atmosphere is below that 62 mile altitude.   If it the air above us that holds us to the planet then that force should drop to about 0.000003% of the surface value at that height, and it doesn't. Even at the distance of the Moon, nearly a quarter of a million miles away, gravity has only dropped to 0.0028% of the value it is at the surface of the Earth.

At the distance the ISS orbits (254 miles) it is still 88.5% of what it is at the surface, even though it is well beyond the vast majority of the atmosphere.

So let me get this straight. Just so I can understand. Your saying that gravity doesn't change from here to the moon but just that little bit correct? If that were true then we would weight about the same. One document that was posted earlier states that the gravity decreases from the north pole to the equator within even grater % then your saying. for both of those statements to be true you would have to weight about the same. That's what I got out of that. This link states that the slight change in gravity for that much smaller distance then from the moon makes a noticeable change in weight.

https://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/ask/a11511.html

we are orbiting the sun. I proposed that it is a gravity assist sling shot. That same logic applies to whats orbiting our planet. That mass of atmosphere is moving at over 1000 mph around. Blow air by you at 1000 mph and tell me it wont move you when you are not  in the direct path but just close. This device isn't even close to creating that. The surface of my wheel is only moving at approximately  3/4 of a mile per minute at 25% which is where I ran it. The moon is sling shot gravity assist orbiting as well. Your weight is so low on the moon because its rotating at approximately 10mph. It doesn't have oxygen because none is trapped in its field. Notice the comparisons of speed to weight. My question that I have for the moon is how much do you weight on the back surface or forward  surface or trailing surface all at the same time at any one instance. Its not the same everywhere on earth even if its just barely different. 

Black is the wheel cutaway looking from top down.

Blue is the direction of travel of the wheel. 

green is the resistance from the atmosphere another words the air or whatever that's surrounding it. Right now its earths pressure. 

Red is what the green will do as it passes the wheel.

Orange is what is happening inside at the edge of the void once you have reach certain speeds dependent upon the environmental factors. Like vacuum or pressure.

Grey is where the venturi effect is created. This is where something would orbit.

brown is the gravitational pull

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2018 by Theredbarron
photo didnt upload

[beecee]

44 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

we are orbiting the sun. I proposed that it is a gravity assist sling shot. That same logic applies to whats orbiting our planet

You can claim whatever you like, but it doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and seem to be making ever more silly claims, the latest being of course that the air above us is keeping us on the surface. 

Again as was pointed out to you earlier, you don't get to make things up. A gravity assist sling shot is as follows....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity_assist

"In orbital mechanics and aerospace engineering, a gravitational slingshot, gravity assist maneuver, or swing-by is the use of the relative movement (e.g. orbit around the Sun) and gravity of a planet or other astronomical object to alter the path and speed of a spacecraft, typically to save propellant and reduce expense. Gravity assistance can be used to accelerate a spacecraft, that is, to increase or decrease its speed or redirect its path. The "assist" is provided by the motion of the gravitating body as it pulls on the spacecraft.^[1] The gravity assist maneuver was first used in 1959 when the Soviet probe Luna 3 photographed the far side of Earth's Moon and it was used by interplanetary probes from Mariner 10 onwards, including the two Voyager probes' notable flybys of Jupiter and Saturn."

44 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

So let me get this straight. Just so I can understand. Your saying that gravity doesn't change from here to the moon but just that little bit correct? If that were true then we would weight about the same. One document that was posted earlier states that the gravity decreases from the north pole to the equator within even grater % then your saying. for both of those statements to be true you would have to weight about the same. That's what I got out of that. This link states that the slight change in gravity for that much smaller distance then from the moon makes a noticeable change in weight.

I'm not qualified enough to argue with Janus's figures, but I'm pretty sure your suggestive claims are explained by the simple fact that [1] the ISS in in free fall around the Earth [as defined in an orbit] and the Moon is in free fall around the earth [as defined in an orbit] This explains your gravity query as when in free fall, and acceleration due to gravity and weight or lack thereof due to freefalling.

Edited August 22, 2018 by beecee

[Theredbarron]

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

If it's easy to do then by all means go ahead and try. But as long as you perform the experiment in air i think you will have no evidence that gravity generation is involved. The machine just acts as some sort of fan or similar, I would prefer to discuss the setup in vacuum.

But lets try this idea as a way to find out what your setup is doing: Use a vacuum cleaner, start it and let it run. Air flows out from it somewhere. Now stick a paper to the inlet. The paper will get stuck and stay there even if no air is allowed to pass into the vacuum cleaner. No air will flow out from the vacuum cleaner. Does the vacuum cleaner generate gravity? Does the behaviour of the vacuum cleaner now look very similar to the phenomenon in your video? 

 

Yes and no. The vacuum builds a lot of pressure from the outlet. I attempted to plug it because mine is plugged. I could not. But I do get what you are saying in that it will still hold the paper. That's given that the pump doesn't recirculate once the other end is actually capped. Almost similar and they will be due to what I'm trying to explain. I will come up with the vacuum chamber setup one as soon as I can.  

[beecee]

1 minute ago, Theredbarron said:

 I will come up with the vacuum chamber setup one as soon as I can.  

Great!!  And then come back here and inform the forum how you were totally wrong in your hypothetical.

[Theredbarron]

This is speculations forum. Not fact

Edited August 22, 2018 by Theredbarron

[beecee]

1 minute ago, Theredbarron said:

This is speculations forum. Not fact

Yep, totally correct, and as per the rules of the speculation section of the forum, all speculation put will undergo scientific scrutiny.

[koti]

11 minutes ago, Theredbarron said:

Yes and no. The vacuum builds a lot of pressure from the outlet. I attempted to plug it because mine is plugged. I could not. But I do get what you are saying in that it will still hold the paper. That's given that the pump doesn't recirculate once the other end is actually capped. Almost similar and they will be due to what I'm trying to explain. I will come up with the vacuum chamber setup one as soon as I can.  

Dude you’re on your way to blow yourself up or at least loose a couple fingers with all this fast spinning stuff and now wanting to build a vacuum chamber without having the slightest idea what you’re doing and refusing any knowledge and tips you’re getting here. Do yourself a favour and wear some protective glasses at least.

[Theredbarron]

23 minutes ago, koti said:

Dude you’re on your way to blow yourself up or at least loose a couple fingers with all this fast spinning stuff and now wanting to build a vacuum chamber without having the slightest idea what you’re doing and refusing any knowledge and tips you’re getting here. Do yourself a favour and wear some protective glasses at least.

I have already been blown up so keep watching.

[t686]

I think it would be good to make two tubes separated by 90 degrees, with a cylinder spinnning in one and another spinning in the other one.  I think it would create an interesting scenario right at the 90 degree join of the two tubes, maybe some type of dynamic standing wave.  You might have to have one spinning clockwise and the other spinning counterclockwise (not sure yet), but it also might be a feedback system where the pressure at the 90 degree join is fed to a feedback controller that controls the speed of either motor ie the pressure in one tube is a combination of its own pressure, the pressure in the neighbor tube, and the pressure at the join.

 

Edit: the picture should say 90 degrees.

Edited August 22, 2018 by t686

[Theredbarron]

33 minutes ago, beecee said:

Yep, totally correct, and as per the rules of the speculation section of the forum, all speculation put will undergo scientific scrutiny.

Saying its false without testing it is not scrutiny. Its opinion. You yourself even said.

56 minutes ago, beecee said:

 

I'm not qualified enough to argue with Janus's figures, but I'm pretty sure your suggestive claims are explained by the simple fact that [1] the ISS in in free fall around the Earth [as defined in an orbit] and the Moon is in free fall around the earth [as defined in an orbit] This explains your gravity query as when in free fall, and acceleration due to gravity and weight or lack thereof due to freefalling.

That make you not qualified enough to say what it is. 

[Achilles]

You are very good at farting.

Edited August 22, 2018 by Achilles