Gravity

[kkris1]

I agree that fundamental theories (like Newton's and Einstein's) are absolute ,undisputable and allways right and one shouldn't even think about different solutions

 

Experimental differences are not the same thing as a time-varying value (i.e. not a constant). I think G is the worst-determined physical constant, in part because it's hard to do.

[CPL.Luke]

hmm if I didn't know better I'd say you ere trying to mach me, I'd hate to think this were true considering that you haven't shown anything new to support your theory, and you would have only resorted to this tactic after I asked you a question.

 

and for a historical background you should be aware that when Einstein presented General Relativity he was able to make a number of new predictions, that was later confirmed through experimentation (but he did provide a precise mathmatical prediction for these new experiments, i.e. he didn't say "I think this will happen, because I think my theory implies it")

 

the same goes for newton and everyone else.

[swansont]

I agree that fundamental theories (like Newton's and Einstein's) are absolute ,undisputable and allways right and one shouldn't even think about different solutions

 

If this is supposed to be sarcasm then you've completely missed the point.

[trvlrpsmyrph]

Every particle attracts every other particle. Could gravity be a reaction to the force causing the expansion of the universe?

[5614]

Every particle attracts every other particle. Could gravity be a reaction to the force causing the expansion of the universe?

No. If that were true then gravity would be bigger in a bigger object, however we know that gravity is bigger when something has a bigger mass, this is different.

 

Also gravity has never been observed on a subatomic level.

 

Whilst it is true that every particle has a gravitational attraction to every other particle this is so insignificant and impossible to imagine for the majority of subatomic situations you could just ignore gravity.

[kkris1]

There will be maximum "gravity" when massive object would block out all the energy. In other words it would not be possible to have black holes and "gravity" force would not linearly depend on mass.

 

 

could you please enlighten me then?

[Klaynos]

There will be maximum "gravity" when massive object would block out all the energy

 

If I'm reading this correctly doesn't this imply that I could build a gravity blocking device out of conventional massive particles?

[kkris1]

No, the "attraction force" is the net force caused by energy imbalance between "north"and "south"directions . If you imagine air pressure acting (pushing) from all directions and you create a vacuum in one particular directions, you would fill attracting force towards the vacuum, which really will be a pushing force

 

 

If I'm reading this correctly doesn't this imply that I could build a gravity blocking device out of conventional massive particles?

[solo]

Might it be possible that gravity is the zero point field pressure density acting upon matter rather than matter giving rise to gravity itself?

 

[(hbar*c/e^2)^3] X [(hbar*c/G^3)^3] X [(hbar*re/G^3)^1.1111111] = (pi^3)

[Spyman]

Might it be possible that gravity is the zero point field pressure density acting upon matter rather than matter giving rise to gravity itself?

 

[(hbar*c/e^2)^3] X [(hbar*c/G^3)^3] X [(hbar*re/G^3)^1.1111111] = (pi^3)

Your own thought or Stochastic ElectroDynamics (SED) ?

 

SED has been developed by a number of physicists; their contributions can generally be characterized as speculative proposals within mainstream physics.

 

More controversially, Haisch and Rueda have tried to use SED to provide explanations for the phenomena of inertia and gravitation.

 

According to Haisch and Rueda, inertia arises as an electromagnetic drag force on accelerating particles, produced by interaction with the zero-point field. In their 1998 Ann. Phys. paper (see citations), they speak of a "Rindler flux", presumably meaning the Unruh effect, and claim to have computed a nonzero "z.p.f. momentum". This computation rests upon their claim to compute a nonzero "z.p.f. Poynting vector", but according to Bill Unruh this computation is incorrect.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stochastic_electrodynamics

[solo]

Might it be possible that gravity is the zero point field pressure density acting upon matter rather than matter giving rise to gravity itself?

 

[(hbar*c/e^2)^3] X [(hbar*c/G^3)^3] X [(hbar*re/G^3)^1.1111111] = (pi^3)

[MATH]\left(\frac{\sout{h}c}{e^2}\right)^3[/MATH]

[solo]

Your own thought or Stochastic ElectroDynamics (SED) ?

 

My own thoughts:

 

[math]\left[\left(\frac{\hbar c}{e^2}\right)^3 \left(\frac{\hbar c}{G^3}\right)^3 \left(\frac{\hbar re}{G^3}\right)^{1.11111....}\right] =\left(\pi\right)^3[/math]

[solo]

My own thoughts:

 

[math]\left[\left(\frac{\hbar c}{e^2}\right)^3 \left(\frac{\hbar c}{G^3}\right)^3 \left(\frac{\hbar re}{G^3}\right)^{1.11111....}\right] =\left(\pi\right)^3[/math]

Solving for G: G = 6.67288271516 E-8 cgs.