Gravity theory

[Pinch Paxton]

I have posted my example of how I would portray gravity. Here's a link.

 

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3164

 

It's very probably right, but I can't prove it.

[alt_f13]

I'm sorry, your theory of molten liquid surfing and electric guitars is clearly the answer.

[Pinch Paxton]

It works with magnets too...Very nicely.

[mooeypoo]

I didn't get it.

[Pinch Paxton]

Do you understand how water pushes sand and surfers onto the beach?

[mooeypoo]

uhhh.. yes, I do, but what does that have to do with gravitational force? (other than perhaps the one from the moon)

 

I dont mean to disrespect your idea i just don't understand what you're saying..

 

please explain

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

I am saying that we are surrounded by waves that are pushing us down to the ground, like a surrounding sea. Waves, Vibrations, radiation, whatever you want to call them. They are also like strings, and the atoms are the beads, and light is a bead that creates its own wave behind itself. A magnet creates its own wave too, but the wave is displaced by some distance away from the magnet. Glass is a bead that has been pushed off the string so that light can travel between its atoms. I'm not sure what else I can say. This isn't on topic anyway.

 

Pincho.

[mooeypoo]

Yeh, I will transfer myself to the other topic to answer that theory

 

~moo

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

It's very probably right, but I can't prove it.

 

Then it's not science.

 

GET OFF MY INTERNET

[Pinch Paxton]

Maybe science can only proove things that are untrue? Maybe there are so many false factors in science that you will never get to the truth? Then you are stuck in your own black hole.

 

Pincho.

[mooeypoo]

Maybe we were created yesterday by a god that wanted us to have lifetime of memories so we won't suspect his almighty plan.

 

Maybe.

 

Maybe, but it gives you NOTHING other than the frustrating notion you're helpless. If that's the case, then you have nothing to TRY and understand because you have no way of knowing anything.

 

That's... sad.

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

You are making out that I am guessing. But there are is a lot of real science involved in my theory. Maybe you are not up to scratch with the details of light?

[mooeypoo]

Maybe you are not explaining yourself right.

 

I asked for explanations about the theory, and why we should believe yours over others that quite frankly, explain the theory of light PRETTY GOOD.

 

And I am aware of it, thankyou.

 

Please explain your theory, the burdain of proof is STILL on your shuolders, not mine. You're the one who threw the idea to the air, convince us t's the truth.

 

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

But it's an entire book. I told you about Scrodinger's Kittens, surely I can't quote an entire book in a thread.

[mooeypoo]

Your theory is an entire book?

 

Okay, well, see, I can't start believing a theory that makes no sense - and yours AT THIS POINT makes little sense. It has some basic logic but it melts when you reach the "whats it all have to do with our day to day life".

 

If you can't supply *any* kind of information then your theory is invalid.

 

At least for me.

 

~moo

[Pinch Paxton]

No scrodingers Kittens is an entire book. I think that my theory is one of those things that only a few people can understand. The ones that already know about strings, Scrodinger's Kittens, fractals, light, time, constant velocity, dark matter, and I can't go through every detail. I was hoping for other people to join in, and fill in some of the gaps, but maybe I am on the wrong site.

[Sayonara]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

I think that my theory is one of those things that only a few people can understand.

Sorry, but that phrase always makes me giggle like a schoolgirl who's just seen her first willy.

[mooeypoo]

Let's stop assuming what I know and don't know, and stop avoiding the responsability of trying to prove your wn theory, and just give some REASONS.

 

Trust me, my friend,if there's anything I don't understand I'll ask you. Or look for it myself.

 

Don't assume. Prove.

 

~moo

[greg1917]

Sorry, but that phrase always makes me giggle like a schoolgirl who's just seen her first willy.

 

 

I hope you mean as in the 'free' kind, as killer whales!

[Pinch Paxton]

@Mooeypoo

 

But I have several times, but you haven't seemed to follow what I am talking about. Light can be a wave, and a particle right? You know that? How can this be explained? It can be explained by light travelling on a wave right? Light would then be a particle travelling on a wave. If light is a particle travelling on a wave, what about atoms. They are particles. How do they float though space? If you put sand on a guitar string it vibrates the sand to an area that is not vibrating, that is atoms travelling on strings. In the sea, sand is pushed along onto the beach, that is atoms travelling on a wave. Light travels to an observer as you should know. How does the observer send a signal to the photon? You need a material between the photon, and the observer that cannot be seen. What is this material? It's a material that creates the wave pattern of photons. If it creates a wave pattern from a single photon then it is a wave itself. So an observer produces a wave that affects a photon. How can this wave reach the photon before the photon has reached its destination. It has to travel faster than the photon to get there in time. So now we have a wave that travels faster than light. So why can't the photon travel faster than light on the wave of the string. We it can! Scrodingers Kittens shows how a light particle can be in two places at once. This can only happen if the wave from the observer reaches the same photon from two different directions. Because the wave can travel faster than light, it travels backwards in time. It reaches the light from both directions of an observers directional path. Now the photon has two paths to take. It has to travel faster than time to reach both goals. So light speed is not accurate. I have explained this earlier. Now we have a wave focusing light. But the wave has to fill the entire universe to function properly with light. Its a wave with a high peak if it is capable of pushing photons at extreme high speeds, so maybe it can push matter. How do I find out if it interacts with matter. Well we start with magnetism. Magnets cause a wave visible from iron filings. This wave can push magnets together. They are matter. They must be using the same medium as light because that medium has to be everywhere to work with light. So now the wave can push matter. Therefore it can vibrate in a way to push atoms together. Therefore it produces gravity. That's all the typing I want to do. If you don't understand, the I have to refer you back to Scrodingers Kittens.

 

Pincho.

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

Maybe science can only proove things that are untrue? Maybe there are so many false factors in science that you will never get to the truth? Then you are stuck in your own black hole.

 

Pincho.

 

Look at it this way.

 

How does your theory, which doesn't actually postulate anything that can't be explained by simpler theories, actually help?

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

But it's an entire book. I told you about Scrodinger's Kittens, surely I can't quote an entire book in a thread.

 

How does a popscience explanation of Quantum Theory lead naturally to your postulate?

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

Light can be a wave, and a particle right?

 

Right.

 

It can be explained by light travelling on a wave right?

 

Wrong.

 

I could go through all the post in this manner, but it would distract me from my dinnery kievy goodness.

 

Furthermore

 

Shut up about your 'theory' that light travels faster than itself. It's not only wrong in context, it also doesn't make sense within itself.

[Pinch Paxton]

Scrodingers Kitten is a Popscience book based on real experiments. The experiments are taken from universities from all over the world. The experiments show how light can be both a particle, and a wave. If a surfer hit a wall, and left a mark, he would leave the mark at the height of the wave. If he repeatedly hit the wall, he would leave marks at different heights. That is what light does when it hits photosensitive paper.

 

 

Shut up about light travelling faster than itself.

 

Light speed as registered by man is not accurate. Therefore I can say that light travels faster than Lightspeed, because lightspeed is a number that is innacurate. For example, can sound be heard inside Concord? Is that sound travelling faster than the speed of sound relative to someone on the ground?

 

Same thing.

 

Pincho.

[JaKiri]

Pinch Paxton said in post # :

Scrodingers Kitten is a Popscience book based on real experiments. The experiments are taken from universities from all over the world. The experiments show how light can be both a particle, and a wave. If a surfer hit a wall, and left a mark, he would leave the mark at the height of the wave. If he repeatedly hit the wall, he would leave marks at different heights. That is what light does when it hits photosensitive paper.

 

This may shock and alarm you, but I know about quantum physics. Furthermore, stating your rather poor interpretation of it is NOT a good argument when asked to give proof of a connection between quantum theory and something nigh-on entirely irrelevent.

 

Light speed as registered by man is not accurate. Therefore I can say that light travels faster than Lightspeed, because lightspeed is a number that is innacurate. For example, can sound be heard inside Concord? Is that sound travelling faster than the speed of sound relative to someone on the ground?

 

Same thing.

 

Not really. Even if you ignore the fact that it's EXACTLY THE SAME FOR LIGHT, even given that lightspeed is invarient to all observers, you're still left with the problem that light and sound are totally different with respect to this area.