Bending Space!

[VendingMenace]

The gravity inside the Earth must be like the blotting paper effect.

 

But this doesn't make sense. If gravity is due to the fact that there is diluted particles, then where there are concentrated particles gravity should be weaker accourding to you, right??

 

But then everywhere there are lots of particles, we should have weak gravity, like in the earth there should be very little gravity. I do not see how there could be a leakage of strong gravity into the earth, if gravity is due to dilution of particles. If gravity is due to dilution of particles, then where there are lopts of particles there should be little gravity. Period. Perhaps i do not understand.

 

 

Also, lets consider the following. As you get futher away from the earth, you find that gravity weakens. That is, gravitational fields are found to be stronger 100 ft about hte earth than 100 miles about hte earth. Of course, 100 ft above the earth there are more particles present (in the form of hte atmosphere) than there are 100 miles above the earth. How does your theory explain this trend? THe trend being that al we move away from the earth we find that the concentration of particles decreases while the effects of gravity increases. THis trend seems to be in direct opposition to your theory.

 

It seems to me that your theory could only make partial sense if you reverse what you are saying, like i mistakenly did in my original post. But then again, perhaps i do not understand what you are saying.

[iglak]

about the hypercube:

we can't have pictures of hypercubes, and we can't have videos of rotating hypercubes. this is because we can't see the a 4th spacial dimention. you could understand it, if you study it, but you still can't visualize it. our 3d graphs can't show hypercubes, they can only show 3 dimentions. you could give it 4 axies, but it would still only be 3d. a hypercube would look exactly like a normal cube for us if we saw one.

the book, "Flatland" gives a good understanding of it.

 

similarily, it is hard to understand the bending of space that recent theories suggest. they show a bent bedsheet so that people can more easily understand it. a 3d grid could possibly be made (i don't know since i don't understand it myself), but it would have to be on the computer so that viewers could rotate it. if it was on paper, or tv, it could easily be mistaken for something other than it's intentions.

 

 

also, i have some questions about the theory

1) if the bed sheet is an accurate representation, then what is causing the downward force that pulls in the balls?

2) if the 2 dimentional sheet represents space, then does that mean that space is bent along the 4th dimention, and not in 3?

3) if the 2 dimentional sheet represents space, and it is not bent in the 4th dimention, then that is not a very good theory. if 3d space is bent, and objects want to go in a straight line, then no matter what the speed, objects should follow the same curvature around masses. and it still doesn't make much sense, because how is it possible that something can be bent so that an object coming in at any 3d angle bends inward?

 

 

and... i have a question that goes with Pinch Paxton's hypothesis:

lets say you are in space with no gravity, and no magnetism. if you have a stationary container half full of water and half full of air (one half is on one side, the other is on the other), would the water and air eventually mix (would the water differentiate into the air and the air into the water)?

then, lets say that some force was causing the water and air to not differentiate, but other things could. if i stuck a sphere halfway between the two halves, woul it stay where it is, or move to one side?

[VendingMenace]

well, that is quite a number of questions, i will give them my best shot

 

As far as is the bed sheet an accurate representation? the answer is both yes and no. No, it is not accurate, becuase the universe is neither 2-d nor is it a bed sheet. THe answer is yet, because it provides a simple framework in which it think about GR.

 

The way that i understand it, mass bends space. That is the precnce of mass causes the space around it to curve. I know this is really hard to picture, but give it a try. Think about a completely 3-d grid. Got it? Now, put a ball in the center of this grid. Now, "pinch" in the grid around the ball, so that lines that are close the the ball are closer together than lines that are farther away from the ball. This is kinda how the whole curved space thing works, at least as far as i understand it.

 

I don't really know what else to say in this case. Perhaps a good book to read would be relativity by Einstein. It is actually a fairly accesable book. Albert wrote it for the layman, using a minimal amount of mathmatics. Another book to check out, for most things non-classical is. The New Mr. Thompkins in paperback by george gamow. That is quite a good book and takes a playfull approach to nonclassical physics. Also, in his book Six not so easy pieces Richard feynmann give a pretty decent look at realtivity, both special and general. If you feel like learning about this stuff, these are great places to start and you will get information from someone much more informed than me

 

lets say you are in space with no gravity, and no magnetism. if you have a stationary container half full of water and half full of air (one half is on one side, the other is on the other), would the water and air eventually mix (would the water differentiate into the air and the air into the water)?

 

I would have to say no. The reason? There are cohesive forces that keep water molecules together. that is, a group of water molecules will tend to stick together. THis is a result of electric intereactions within the water and hydrogen bonding networks too.

 

Of course if you get rid of magnitism, then electricity is right out too, since they are the same phenomenon. HOwever, if electricity is out, so is the atom and the electron :/ So that is probably not a good assumption

[Pinch Paxton]

But then everywhere there are lots of particles, we should have weak gravity, like in the earth there should be very little gravity. I do not see how there could be a leakage of strong gravity into the earth, if gravity is due to dilution of particles. If gravity is due to dilution of particles, then where there are lopts of particles there should be little gravity. Period. Perhaps i do not understand.

 

Yeah, that's right, but then I thought about space as a seperate material to solid mass like planets. Think of space as being a bunch of strings. They vibrate fast causing a wave, the wave slows things down, but not to a halt, like treacle. As a planet forms from a mass like beads on strings they are stopped from vibrating. The strings are still vibrating in space, and the vibration deminishes towards the planet. This would be my weakened force which I have been comparing to a dilution of liquid. So the planet has encapsulated the strings, and they travel all the way through the Earth, but the vibration frequency is being slowed all the time. Now if you imagine a black hole, you would have vibrations forcing light back into the hole from all directions.

 

Now according to this vibration theory, planets would have formed where the vibrations lessened. If you put a bead on a string, and vibrate it the bead heads off towards the low vibration. So at the beginning of time you get a bunch of strings vibrating, and a random set of low pitches. These cause a build up of mass, this mass slows down the vibration further, more mass..etc.

 

Some problems may occur in my theory because I am making it on the fly. It just started out as a way to avoid the 2D picture of space.

 

Pincho.

[Pinch Paxton]

Just going back to magnetism again. I was thinking that perhaps iron travels along these space strings better than other materials. Iron is found in meteorites 90% of the time, and iron works well with magnets. So I am now thinking that Magnets must vibrate the strings at a distance, and back to my picture. But once you have a large enough collection of iron gathered in one place, the iron slows the vibration enough for gravity to work on all materials.

 

Pincho.

[VendingMenace]

so you are saying that mass dampens out these waves and creates gravity? Are these waves equally distributed throughout space? Are they infinitely long? Are they only effected by mass? Are they at a resonance, or do they just kinda vibrate randomly? Do the virations have any energy associated with them? If light is effected by them, then does light, in turn, effect them? That is, is light able to dampen out the vibrations?

 

Just some more questions, so that you can answer them and think about your theory some more

[Pinch Paxton]

so you are saying that mass dampens out these waves and creates gravity? Are these waves equally distributed throughout space? Are they infinitely long? Are they only effected by mass? Are they at a resonance, or do they just kinda vibrate randomly? Do the virations have any energy associated with them? If light is effected by them, then does light, in turn, effect them? That is, is light able to dampen out the vibrations?

 

The strings are equally distributed throughout space. They are probably built up from joined particles that can stretch, and wriggle in 3D. That is so that they can pass on the wave message to the next joined particle, and in all directions. They are as long as the universe, infact they are the space/universe. I think that they are effected by...

 

Loss of energy = mass

Gain of energy = Magnetism or Electrodynamics.

 

Lastly something I am thinking about..

High Frequency = Light

 

Maybe light is a frequency of the strings. So normally they are invisible, but at the right frequency they glow. This explains how the light splits in half in Scrodinger's Kittens. The vibration could take two courses. It explains a lot of things about light actually. How it can be individual, and yet display a wave pattern.

 

To imagine these strings you need to think about a bunch of jellyfish all touching one another. You hit the first jellyfish and it sends a wave through the other jellyfish. Hit them hard enough and it sends a glow through all the jellyfish in the direction of the force applied. The jellyfish constantly wriggle unless they are trapped between rocks.

 

 

Pincho.

[VendingMenace]

The strings are equally distributed throughout space. They are probably built up from joined particles that can stretch, and wriggle in 3D.

 

So, what kind of particles are these? I guess they can't have mass. But they must exist, so are they energy? Or what? I think particles is a bad word, since particles have mass :/

 

Well, there is no need to have your complex equation for light -- it is already a wave, that is why it can take two paths at once, or at least seem to. Just as a ocean wave can go through to slits at the same time, so can a light wave.

 

Most of your thoughts, however, seem to be along some of the same lines as string theory, wich is interesting, but just like string thoery your ideas are untestable :/ I think this remains the major problem of your ideas. You can come up with any conceptual framework that you like, but it if is not testable, then it is not really usefull and we must stick with the thoeries that we have now and are testable.

[Pinch Paxton]

Oh well, can't test it. There may be ways to use these vibrances though. Has anyone ever made transport from magnetism? Because I'm sure that the wave can be used to push things along with little effort. You might be able to reach the speed of light that way.

 

Pincho.