Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 Something of substance was provided. So here’s my offer any direct question (must be a good one) I’ll answer at length. Including you Mordred, for the kitty cat lady sake, he’s not so bad Ms. Molecules, you can’t even shame that thing, but he’s starting to grow on me. J -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 You haven't answered a single question. Try starting with what do you mean by a nested central force ? How does that force differ from Newton's law of gravitational bodies [math]F=\frac{GM_1M_2}{r^2}[/math] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) Not nice enough, grow up, you just got a little box there that’s says math, is that in case you forget? Edited October 6, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Clairification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 Absolutely it's required in physics. Unless you can make testable predictions via math your theory means literally nothing in physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 Wow slow down, I’d like to hear from someone else, go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 How many times do I have to tell you this is an open discussion forum. All members can participate in any thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) Fine start with the F, what is that? You sound like a stalker. If you expect me to do advanced symbol manipulation we got to at least be in the same octave. What’s that F. Come on boy, man waiting. Get back to me when you figure it out. Google copy and paste coming. Minus a point Mordred. Edited October 6, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Clairification Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 F is force G is the gravitational constant M is mass the subscripts denote two seperate gravitational bodies example the Sun as M_1 and the Earth M_2. r is the radius Ie distance between the two centre's of mass. That equation is literally high school physics at least in my country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) All right F is force G. What’s that. Got to be quicker then that Mordred. What are trying to do with this relative to what I’ve posted. Edited October 6, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Bravado Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 I am trying to give you the basis for a central potential force. By the way I am also in PM with another Speculator getting help with his model. G is the Gravitational constant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 17 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: All right F is force G. What’s that. 22 minutes ago, Mordred said: G is the gravitational constant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant See link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) Nested Centers of Force and Time Space Fabric The time space fabric surrounding each planet orbiting the sun represents the local conditions of the fluid dynamics of the larger Superior center of force and the local pressure surrounding the Inferior center of force. Nested centers of force theory states each Inferior center of force will have spin equal to its constant emanation measurement. It’s C.E.M, or the total amount of light emanated from the Inferior, nested, center of force. “Because the constant emanation of the Superior center of force originates from the center of the overall gravitational field the pressure on the area that keeps the center of the Superior center of force in shadow, eclipses the Superior center of force from an observer position of a straight line trough both the Superior and Inferior Centers, will be lowest and constitute the orbital equator of the Inferior center of force unless acted upon by other forces.” O.k This is good but needs work There needs to be a measurement for the Inferior center of force’s emanation. I’m not Kidding here, someway to measure the light output of the earth. Edited October 6, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Thinking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 3 hours ago, uncool said: So is your "theory" a new theory which disagrees with current physics, or is it an explanation of some outcome of current physics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 What you need is the field equations and their thermodynamic equations of state. That would be tricky if you don't have the math skills of GR for spacetime fields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 I’m not one to flatter myself but math no worky well at advanced levels. Good for provy. The time space fabric surrounding each planet orbiting the sun represents the local conditions of the fluid dynamics of the larger Superior center of force and the local pressure surrounding the Inferior center of force. Man that sentence is genius. I’m seeing a large green bubble with a smaller blue ball inside it. The blue one is spinning and so is the green one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 Well start with Newtonian math you can get some estimates that way. A vast majority of astrophysics can be described without GR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 I’m try to think of the earth as being within a fluid bubble of energy emanating from the sun that is constantly spilling over the front and leaving a lower pressure area on the night side. It really does feel think less pressure is on us at night. How would that create spin if the earth was ejected from the sun. Just say for what ever reason the sun ejected the earth in a molten state why would it stop where it currently is. Magnetic relationship? Or the fluid dynamics of the sun spin or both. So is your "theory" a new theory which disagrees with current physics, or is it an explanation of some outcome of current physics? 23 minutes ago, uncool said: Well it’s sort of disagreeing with rocks grind together and form planet theory. It’s talking to sun spits out planet in molten state theory. Because oil from initial conditions of a molten state theory thinks oil from periods of time sinking to pressurized caverns from rain water theory is far fetched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uncool Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 13 minutes ago, Clay Gillespie said: Well it’s sort of disagreeing with rocks grind together and form planet theory. So your dispute isn't with subatomic physics, but with cosmology (and cosmogony) alone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay Gillespie Posted October 6, 2019 Author Share Posted October 6, 2019 (edited) No, it’s water from magic rocks theory liking what water from the initial conditions of molten state theory thinks and seeing if cosmology can come over for awhile and talk about it. It’s the, if you add up the oceans and lakes does that equal the moon mass, if it’s close call it Deflation theory, and swear too God no meteorite hit the moon those are pops from a molten state theory. That leads to Jesus, Google has every picture you’ll ever need and Goddam I think it true, that leads to Jesus, Google has every picture you’ll ever need and Goddam it only gets better on Mars, which leads a browsing of all Gods planets, then Goddam this is true, even the asteroids have pop marks. Don’t get me wrong I’m a Titan in A.I. and was trying to be more interdisciplinary. That worked out well, because this suite of theories can’t be disproven and evidence is mounting in the affirmative. Not to mention a juggernaut in Systems Theory and Phycology. Good looking well read and a great dresser. Edited October 6, 2019 by Clay Gillespie Cruk -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypervalent_iodine Posted October 6, 2019 Share Posted October 6, 2019 ! Moderator Note I am closing this thread, if for no other reason than because I am sick of closing reports on it (but also because it’s complete and utter nonsense and doesn’t belong here). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts