Need Mathemetician

[Martian]

This is also posted in a Mathematical Forum:

 

I've been scoffed at before for making this request, but here goes:

 

As a hobby since I was young I've been trying to develope a working theory for Gravity. (With the enthusiasm for anti-gravity, of course) When I say theory, I mean an explanation that makes sense scientifically. I've explained it completely in terms of waves and electromagnetic radiation right down to how ratiation converts to particle form in the proper conditions. I've explained how the speed of light is crucial in setting the standard for how gravity works, and so on. From an illustrative point its convincing. Unfortunately I do need someone more skilled in mathematics to read my thesis and:

 

1: See if he/she agrees with it to begin with.

2: If agreed with, give it a skelleton with the proper mathematics.

 

I offer this for fun, although the possibility does rest that there may be something to it.

 

E-mail me at Leo_Blanchette0001@hotmail.com

 

[blike]

Out of curiosity, what is wrong with Einstein's description of gravity?

[ydoaPs]

just post it and we'll see what we can do.

 

blike, it doesn't seem as though he is one of the "GR is wrong because it doesn't make sense. my theory is right because it makes perfect sense, but i suck at maths and can't make formulae" guys; he sounds like he is just trying to learn and make his hobby more fun.

[Martian]

Thank you for acknowledging the fact that I"m not out to debate things that are really not in my territory! It is a hobby, and completely for fun.

 

I don't think anything is wrong with Einy's theory of gravity and relativity. While I don't know mathematics, I follow the verbal explanations in science without a problem.

 

Actually, my little theory here just explains what makes gravity pull on a very practical level.

 

To make it very simple (the theory encompasses twelve pages) it just states that Inertia sets the speed limit on light, as spacetime is subject to inertia by this little theory, and the speed of light actually causes gravity to become defined as the waves of electromagnetic radiation push the limit on spacetimes ability to conform at such speeds. When transverse waves become spherical waves (particles, another idea unique to this theory) gravitational properties are carried over from the original wave. This theory claims that photons are merely gravitational packets of different properties depending on the frequency of light, and in the end the correllation between magnetism and gravity manifest.

 

Its all very unique, but I need a mathemetician to weigh its sanity.

 

Again, to speak so confidently on the subject without a knowledge of mathematics has been offensive for some, but I'm just a hobbyist.

[Martian]

Out of curiosity, what is wrong with Einstein's description of gravity?

 

I've always seen his description(s) of gravity as brilliant. (These little faces you can put at the end of sentences are cool).

 

If I tell you the description of a Delorian, you will know its a nice car and that you can go back to 1955 when you reach 88.8 miles per hour but you won't know how it works. Einstein described gravity, as far as I can tell. Spacetime describes gravity, and its similarity to the law of inertia that Einy pointed out also describes it. The relationship of mass and gravity are very consistent, but those are external observations. As for the raw mechanics of what makes it work, it appears this is still open to people to explore.

 

...Unless I've missed something, which is very well a possibility.

 

Pretty soon I'm going to have a page open where you can just click an link from here, read the theory, and then bash it on this forum. I stress the need for a talented mathemetician to look it it. I've gotten some positive comments on the practicality of the theory.

 

[Martian]

http://www.geocities.com/antigravityquest/Main.html

 

(Good for its comedy value, anyways.)