Gravity or Magnetism??

[rigney]

I know, the topic is taboo. And it's probably perceptual to anyone above a third grade education, that the only person wanting to talk about the subject would be someone assimilating that third grade mentalityl. Daaaa!!

Anyway, E.M.F. and Magnetism in practically any form above a lodestone can be changed to a new dynamic almost instantly. There are formula enough to fill a library, from the simplest application of D.C. theory, to the intricacies of a Cern Collider. Yet, other than the laws laid down by Sir Issac Newton, and a little mumbo-jumbo, gravity is an unquestionble entity. WHY?? Ubiquitous, yet inexplicable? What does gravity do other than supposedly keeping us from flying off into space?? If in fact, that's what it does? Someone help!!

Edited June 6, 2010 by rigney

[Sayonara]

If you continue to post the same thread over and over, you will be suspended for two weeks without any further notice.

[rigney]

Sorry Sayonara, there was no intention of posting this question other than the original. I've only been with you guys for a couple weeks now and still finding it hard to do things right. Please take a couple of them off if you will or can, since it was only intended to be the initial posting.

[swansont]

Science speculation goes in the speculations section. Anything appealing to conspiracy (the topic is taboo) probably belongs here.

[Spyman]

Yet, other than the laws laid down by Sir Issac Newton, and a little mumbo-jumbo, gravity is an unquestionble entity.

I would think Einsteins Theory of General Relativity deservs a little better notion than "a little mumbo-jumbo".

 

Modern physics describes gravitation using the general theory of relativity, in which gravitation is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime which governs the motion of inertial objects. The simpler Newton's law of universal gravitation provides an accurate approximation for most calculations.

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

 

General relativity or the general theory of relativity is the geometric theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein in 1915. It is the current description of gravitation in modern physics. It unifies special relativity and Newton's law of universal gravitation, and describes gravity as a geometric property of space and time, or spacetime. In particular, the curvature of spacetime is directly related to the four-momentum (mass-energy and linear momentum) of whatever matter and radiation are present. The relation is specified by the Einstein field equations, a system of partial differential equations.

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

 

General relativity's predictions have been confirmed in all observations and experiments to date.

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

 

General relativity has emerged as a highly successful model of gravitation and cosmology, which has so far passed every unambiguous observational and experimental test.

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

 

The tests of general relativity included:

* General relativity accounts for the anomalous perihelion precession of Mercury.

* The prediction that time runs slower at lower potentials has been confirmed by the Pound–Rebka experiment, the Hafele–Keating experiment, and the GPS.

* The prediction of the deflection of light was first confirmed by Arthur Stanley Eddington in 1919. The Newtonian corpuscular theory also predicted a lesser deflection of light, but Eddington found that the results of the expedition confirmed the predictions of general relativity over those of the Newtonian theory. However this interpretation of the results was later disputed. More recent tests using radio interferometric measurements of quasars passing behind the Sun have more accurately and consistently confirmed the deflection of light to the degree predicted by general relativity. See also gravitational lens.

* The time delay of light passing close to a massive object was first identified by Irwin I. Shapiro in 1964 in interplanetary spacecraft signals.

* Gravitational radiation has been indirectly confirmed through studies of binary pulsars.

* Alexander Friedmann in 1922 found that Einstein equations have non-stationary solutions (even in the presence of the cosmological constant). In 1927 Georges Lemaître showed that static solutions of the Einstein equations, which are possible in the presence of the cosmological constant, are unstable, and therefore the static universe envisioned by Einstein could not exist. Later, in 1931, Einstein himself agreed with the results of Friedmann and Lemaître. Thus general relativity predicted that the Universe had to be non-static—it had to either expand or contract. The expansion of the universe discovered by Edwin Hubble in 1929 confirmed this prediction.

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

[Mr Skeptic]

Gravity acts on neutral objects, and can't be shielded.

[Kaka]

I would think Einsteins Theory of General Relativity deservs a little better notion than "a little mumbo-jumbo".

 

Modern physics describes gravitation using the general theory of relativity, in which gravitation is a consequence of the curvature of spacetime which governs the motion of inertial objects. The simpler Newton's law of universal gravitation provides an accurate approximation for most calculations.

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

 

General relativity or the general theory of relativity is the geometric theory of gravitation published by Albert Einstein in 1915. It is the current description of gravitation in modern physics. It unifies special relativity and Newton's law of universal gravitation, and describes gravity as a geometric property of space and time, or spacetime. In particular, the curvature of spacetime is directly related to the four-momentum (mass-energy and linear momentum) of whatever matter and radiation are present. The relation is specified by the Einstein field equations, a system of partial differential equations.

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

 

General relativity's predictions have been confirmed in all observations and experiments to date.

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

 

General relativity has emerged as a highly successful model of gravitation and cosmology, which has so far passed every unambiguous observational and experimental test.

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

 

The tests of general relativity included:

* General relativity accounts for the anomalous perihelion precession of Mercury.

* The prediction that time runs slower at lower potentials has been confirmed by the Pound–Rebka experiment, the Hafele–Keating experiment, and the GPS.

* The prediction of the deflection of light was first confirmed by Arthur Stanley Eddington in 1919. The Newtonian corpuscular theory also predicted a lesser deflection of light, but Eddington found that the results of the expedition confirmed the predictions of general relativity over those of the Newtonian theory. However this interpretation of the results was later disputed. More recent tests using radio interferometric measurements of quasars passing behind the Sun have more accurately and consistently confirmed the deflection of light to the degree predicted by general relativity. See also gravitational lens, on this blog.

* The time delay of light passing close to a massive object was first identified by Irwin I. Shapiro in 1964 in interplanetary spacecraft signals.

* Gravitational radiation has been indirectly confirmed through studies of binary pulsars.

* Alexander Friedmann in 1922 found that Einstein equations have non-stationary solutions (even in the presence of the cosmological constant). In 1927 Georges Lemaître showed that static solutions of the Einstein equations, which are possible in the presence of the cosmological constant, are unstable, and therefore the static universe envisioned by Einstein could not exist. Later, in 1931, Einstein himself agreed with the results of Friedmann and Lemaître. Thus general relativity predicted that the Universe had to be non-static—it had to either expand or contract. The expansion of the universe discovered by Edwin Hubble in 1929 confirmed this prediction.

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

 

Really great post, thanks for all the links.

[rigney]

Hey!, I wasn't trying to throw any of these esteemed gentlemen under the bus. The mumbo-jumbo thing was just to get someones attention. And me? I have a problem making change for a dollar. All I'm asking is; if gravity is holding my body together, keeping me elastic and bolted to the ground, while also maintaining a decent solar system and galaxy, why are we having so much trouble explaining this runaway train wreck our universe is experiencing?

Edited June 7, 2010 by rigney

[swansont]

Because when you get down to brass tacks, science is hard.

[rigney]

I get your point Swansont. If science wasn't such a hard game, one trip to Vegas would make any of us rich? In all seriousness though, when we cut laws into stone with no recourse to question?, they had best be beyond reproach! Otherwise, it's a cote for the docile.

[swansont]

In all seriousness though, when we cut laws into stone with no recourse to question?, they had best be beyond reproach! Otherwise, it's a cote for the docile.

 

Good thing we don't do that, then.

 

It's not questioning laws and theories that is the problem. It's questioning them with an obvious lack of understanding of the theory and/or knowledge of the supporting evidence of the theory, and often with no evidence that's in contradiction. One generally ends up attacking a strawman.

[Clipper]

Are you trying to relate Gravity to Magnetism. What I take from you OP is instead of Gravity, you're thinking a + and - type magnet? One keeping us from drifting into space and one pulling us towards it; and we're closer to the earth so it's pulling force is greater?

 

If that's what you mean, to me, that's spot on. (Y)

[swansont]

If magnetism were responsible, we would all feel a torque when we tried to lay own/stand up.

Edited June 7, 2010 by swansont
typo

[rigney]

Been there and having done that probably a hundred times, the "Straw Man" always wins. As you say, being controversial just for the sake of being different is not the norm. I'm seventy eight years young and have worked an entire life time making a comfortable living for myself and family. So, unfortunately I haven't the time nor the resource to go out and spend $20,000.00 + on books to disprove or refute a theory. My greatest fear is to eventually see 6 or 8 Phds digging a ditch, and the Dude supervising the job, is actually a bona fide "Ditch Digger".

[insane_alien]

So, unfortunately I haven't the time nor the resource to go out and spend $20,000.00 + on books to disprove or refute a theory.

 

Thanks to the internet you don't have to. There is plenty of material online that will bring you up to speed.

[rigney]

You may have missed my thoughts completely Lad. I'm not a kid looking for consternation, just an old Dude hoping to find some quick answered to my life long questions??

Edited June 7, 2010 by rigney