Observations : indirectly leading to a possible insight into the Nature of Gravity.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

In recent months I have made 5 observations which are indirectly leading toward a possible theoretical insight into the possible underlying nature of gravity.

 

Although physics is usually concerned with the HOW science works , rather than WHY a certain aspect of the natural world happens the way it does. Nonetheless 'sometimes ' probing the WHY can occasionally lead towards an insight into the HOW something scientifically works the way it does. This could possibly be the case with the observation I have made , with 5 gravity related phenomenon.

 

1. Many years ago when the children were small, I was able to raise Massive quantities of water , high up in their round swimming pool . Taking water up to nearly a meter , by oscillating it up and down in synchronised pushes and being pushed by the rising water. All with a foam body board, loosely held . Why?

 

 

2. Out in deep ocean some massive non breaking waves , can be seen being elevated by the ocean , such that seen compared to the surrounding sea and dips in the ocean water height, it would appear Humongous volumes of water are rising and lowering effortlessly over great heights. Why?

 

 

3. Down at the Dawlish ( jurrasic Coast ) two years ago the railway was washed away. When you visit Dawlish in normal times , the sea can be seen sweeping in and out quite silently over 50 meters with a meter deep of sea water in a matter of a quarter of a minute. In and out with a meter of seawater along a 100 meter stretch of seafront. That is a vast, huge , mass of water , moved in and out over 15 seconds. Why ?

 

 

4. Ships can be recorded by 'time lapse ' photography . It becomes incredibly noticeable that the ships moving in and out of locks , are moving , In an almost unbelievable level and flat fashion . Why? This short video is an example

 

 

5. Since experimenting a few months ago with EULER's disc , I have noticed more than before , that on emptying the dish washer each morning , placing the china plates and dishes in twos or threes randomly , quickly placed temporarily , on the hard granite work top, that :-

 

 

The pairs , or threes of china plates oscillate , back and forward in a small amplitude oscillation ( gentle clicking) in an almost ' perpetual ' though not quite , as the energy bleeds away through sound and air and contact resistance . But again , like the incredible levelness of the gravity field, we appear to be ' approaching , invisibly a near perfect ' surface ' ( surface of the gravity field ) . Why?

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

All these 5 observations point , I believe , to a beautiful, unseen level contour of " gravities' nature " , which remains unseen , but shows its nature through these 5 observations, as well of course through the whole experiential life of existence throughout the whole universe . Is it ? ..the precision nature of this ' levelness ' that I am highlighting here. Can this, in turn lead to a deeper insight into the nature of GRAVITY itself? This then is exploring the WHY it behaves this way, as in addition to all the HOWs surrounding gravity , which are of course well explained and established by Isaac Newton, Galileo, Einstein and others.

 

Although these are WHY questions The questions remain though why do these phenomenons of Gravity behave the way they do with such precision, delicacy, and yet very powerful effects ?

 

Why is/are the underlying fields responsible for GRAVITY , so amazingly LEVEL ? And if understood

 

Can this in any way help us with other not understood questions , HOW issues , as to , :-

How Gravity works in these five observations ?

 

Could this give us more insight into Gravity , say surrounding , Dark Matter , Black Holes , Centres of Galaxies, Gamma Rays emanating from the centres of Galaxies etc

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

That's 3 not 5. There is no question or start of debate. And new theories belong in speculations

 

[swansont]

Water waves are not nearly as mysterious to science as you are implying.

[studiot]

Your waves sound like a lot of energy, Mike.

 

But consider these figures.

 

Burning 1kg of petrol releases 4.6 x 10⁷ Joules of energy.(yes 46 megaJoules) source: National Physical Laboratory tables.

 

Raising 1kg of petrol up 100 metres takes about 10³ Joules. Yes one thousand Joules.

 

So the hydro potential energy available due to 1kg of water falling 100 metres is 10³ Joules.

 

So the enenergy density for combustion is several thousandfold greater than for gravitational potential.

 

Collection and concentration is the key issue in alternative energy.

Edited October 30, 2015 by studiot

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Water waves are not nearly as mysterious to science as you are implying.

Where is the surface or otherwise that all these phenomenon are working from ?

This ever so level place ?

And what is the nature of this surface ?

 

 

Your waves sound like a lot of energy, Mike.

 

But consider these figures.

 

Burning 1kg of petrol releases 4.6 x 10⁷ Joules of energy.(yes 46 megaJoules) source: National Physical Laboratory tables.

 

Raising 1kg of petrol up 100 metres takes about 10³ Joules. Yes one thousand Joules.

 

So the hydro potential energy available due to 1kg of water falling 100 metres is 10³ Joules.

 

So the enenergy density for combustion is several thousandfold greater than for gravitational potential.

 

Collection and concentration is the key issue in alternative energy.

.

Yes I see the magnitude difference between the two liquids ( water and petrol ) .

 

However I am viewing it from a floating point of view , not an energy content point of view .

 

Mike

 

Ps . I seem to have asked plenty of questions for Debate . ( Imatfaal ) As well as including information on all 5 observations .Hope that is o.k. ( I was only part way through entering information )

 

The question that now can be posed where to look for an Insight ? and what is a possible insight. This ' levelness ' seems to be one thing . Also ?? The location , where this is all going on ? And what is it like ' in ' ? There ? Where is there ? Is it a Fulcrum ? Or is it not position orientated?

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

Where is the surface or otherwise that all these phenomenon are working from ?

This ever so level place ?

And what is the nature of this surface ?

I don't understand the question. If there's a wave, there is no longer a reference surface. You've perturbed it. That's what a wave is.

I seem to have asked plenty of questions for Debate .

And yet you are simultaneously asserting there is some kind of insight into gravity. Which path do you wish to take? You cannot do both.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I don't understand the question. If there's a wave, there is no longer a reference surface. You've perturbed it. That's what a wave is.

 

And yet you are simultaneously asserting there is some kind of insight into gravity. Which path do you wish to take? You cannot do both.

.

 

Yes but it would strike me , that the surface of the wave is not the fulcrum of the balance ( if there is a balance) . Or perhaps it could be viewed as an axis ( somewhere under the surface) about which any oscillation could be deemed to be oscillating about.? And somehow this great high wave is counter balanced by a multitude of little below axis waves?

 

This of course is what I believe was happening in the kids swimming pool .i could actually see , when the single central wave was at its highest point under the foam surf board . The rest of the pool around the circumference was way down from its normal level all around the edge .which would return up to the rim as the single central wave fell toward the centre. Whereupon I would assist with downward pressure . It would then ( as it were ) ' bounce ' back up to an ever improved height! Hence the " wow ! Dad !

 

 

Yes I believe there must be some form of insight to find or be had about gravity , I do not know what it is yet , but I feel there must be one or many there as the activity about these five observations is all rather , counter intuitive , beautiful , outside the realm of normal behaviour . Eg when you are normally filling up buckets of water and moving them about the garden to water plants or something ( mix cement ) . It weighs a ton . Here I was orchestrating 15 bucketfuls of water into the air with one hand , with little effort. That has got to be ' beautiful ' to say the least .

Similarly the ocean is going about its business in a ........... Way .

 

And so we could go through the other 4 observations and look for interesting insights about Gravity . There is something there ! It's too ... To be not significant .

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave[/quote

 

Ok then . While reading the introductory paragraphs from Wikipedia about mechanical waves which can be both longitudinal and transverse ,

There is the restorative force required from the medium ( water ) to return any perturbation that might have caused the initiation of a potential wave . I would suggest this is not the elasticity of the water but rather the gravity induced in the surrounding water somehow . Either down for an up wave section or up for a down wave section . Though that might not be so for the down wave part. It's more like a buoyancy , attempt by the pushed down bit. ( like trying to push an inflated ball below the surface ) maybe ?

So in this case gravity is only half of the cycle , buoyancy being the other half . ( synonymous , or similar to electro magnetic waves where one half , magnetic collapse induces electrical field , then visa versa .

 

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

There is no gravity induced in the water owing to the wave. Gravity is always present.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

There is no gravity induced in the water owing to the wave. Gravity is always present.

No but say the very high wave , the bit sticking up above everything else , like the rest of the sea , will want to fall toward the surface of the sea, under the pull of gravity , surely , toward the surface . And only when it is down at normal sea level will gravity be neutralised ( I appreciate ,it is not quite like that , but in principle it is. )

 

But we are getting to the nub here . Because this is all supposed to be Einstein's curved space , and mass moving in these fields , is it not ?

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Klaynos]

Without the driving force (you pushing the foam board, and excluding other outside influences) the equilibrium state is flat water surface due to gravity and the retaining sides of the pool.

 

None of this is very interesting wave theory. Ocean waves are pretty well understood, the pool example is an example of a driven oscillator, the dawlish sea wall event was iirc a combination of storm surge (a pressure driven event that's really quite interesting) and very strong winds.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Without the driving force (you pushing the foam board, and excluding other outside influences) the equilibrium state is flat water surface due to gravity and the retaining sides of the pool.

None of this is very interesting wave theory. Ocean waves are pretty well understood, the pool example is an example of a driven oscillator, the dawlish sea wall event was iirc a combination of storm surge (a pressure driven event that's really quite interesting) and very strong winds.

.

 

Yes I take your points.

 

But what is tugging at all these H20 molecules that are up there on that tall wave . Is it some force coming from distant large mass like the entire Earth? Or is it some cumulative curvature / distortion of space caused by the presence of 'the Earth' , that can be experienced locally by the upraised wave ( with its local accumulation of millions of H2O molecules) all sitting in a distorted space , that makes them want to move downwards a few meters , and then give up as somehow the distortions on space change radically once they drop a few meters to the average sea level?

 

Also what influences that ' low dip' in the sea. Is it Archimedes buoyancy coming in to play , just on that dip . Which stops its action once a level patch of sea is achieved. Or is it yet more Einstein type distortions in space that work so as to cause a flow , so surrounding water, now flows into the void until level with surrounding sea ?

 

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

.

Yes I take your points.

But what is tugging at all these H20 molecules that are up there on that tall wave . Is it some force coming from distant large mass like the entire Earth? Or is it some cumulative curvature / distortion of space caused by the presence of 'the Earth' , that can be experienced locally by the upraised wave ( with its local accumulation of millions of H2O molecules) all sitting in a distorted space , that makes them want to move downwards a few meters , and then give up as somehow the distortions on space change radically once they drop a few meters to the average sea level?

Also what influences that ' low dip' in the sea. Is it Archimedes buoyancy coming in to play , just on that dip . Which stops its action once a level patch of sea is achieved. Or is it yet more Einstein type distortions in space that work so as to cause a flow , so surrounding water, now flows into the void until level with surrounding sea ?

Mike

There is no radical change in curvature of space over a few meters.

 

Buoyancy is not an issue. Water is neutrally buoyant in water. The water involved has the same density.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

There is no radical change in curvature of space over a few meters.

Buoyancy is not an issue. Water is neutrally buoyant in water. The water involved has the same density.

O.k. Then if it isn't any curvature change , and it isn't any buoyancy .

 

What makes the low dip in the sea come back up , from its all time low , to be level with the rest of the sea? Or, if life is going for it , it goes upwards and onwards to an all time high like the other tall wave , we/I have been talking about?

 

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Klaynos]

The equilibrium is flat.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

The equilibrium is flat.

.

 

Yes. But where exactly is the " flat " .?

 

Is that the local sea level you would float a row boat on ? Or some average sea level , taken from an average of ALL sea levels taken from around the world . Which just might exist imaginatively one foot under the surface of where we are currently looking . Or is it some local average ( say over a 100 meter circle about the two waves under discussion "high wave , low wave " ) ?

 

 

My suspicion is that this equilibrium is in fact a ' hidden axis existing all over the sea , probably under the surface , not too far down having some form of ' tie up ' with those lines of gravitational force in space proposed by Einstein . However I am not sure , by any means . If it is ! Then I am approaching the area I am looking for in this thread . ( stable and a quiet , well protected domain , unruffled by turbulence and resistance ) . If this were the case , I could then go looking for this domain in the other four examples.

 

Mike

 

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Ophiolite]

But what is tugging at all these H20 molecules that are up there on that tall wave . Is it some force coming from distant large mass like the entire Earth?

You seem to be ignoring what generates the waves in the first place: wind. Differential heating of the Earth by the sun creates pressure differences. Pressure differences in a fluid tend to be reduced by flow from high to low pressure. Interaction of one fluid with another generates waves. What is problematic with that for you?

 

In response to your last query, the reference level is the mean sea level at that point. That is contingent upon the geoid, tidal effects, air pressure, etc. Neither the peaks of the waves, nor the troughs are "sea level", it is between the two.

Edited October 31, 2015 by Ophiolite

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

You seem to be ignoring what generates the waves in the first place: wind. Differential heating of the Earth by the sun creates pressure differences. Pressure differences in a fluid tend to be reduced by flow from high to low pressure. Interaction of one fluid with another generates waves. What is problematic with that for you?

 

In response to your last query, the reference level is the mean sea level at that point. That is contingent upon the geoid, tidal effects, air pressure, etc. Neither the peaks of the waves, nor the troughs are "sea level", it is between the two.

.

 

O.k. But could that " the mean sea level " be a stable line existing say below the ' actual ' local sea surface ? And does it relate to the supposed field lines of the Einstein gravity model ?

 

As regards " What is problematic with that for you? " . I am looking for a stable , quiet place , to act as a datum for operation , for activity, oscillation, reaction , operation , minimal resistance . ( this is similar to the notion of the ' centre of gravity in a complex solid might be outside the solid or buried deep in its mass ) it could be that , All or some , have to do with the effects of gravity . Particularly those I have given in the opening 'POST '

 

This is often a pre-revisit for oscillation ( a stable datum , from which to oscillate about. ) quite a few of the examples of observation quoted if not all, 1-5 . Involve oscillation . The quality of the datum is then reflected in the quality of the oscillation .

 

The bonus , would be an insight into ' the nature of Gravity itself '

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[swansont]

O.k. But could that " the mean sea level " be a stable line existing say below the ' actual ' local sea surface ? And does it relate to the supposed field lines of the Einstein gravity model ?

Mike

It can be, because mean sea level and local average sea level can be different. The relation to the field lines is that they are perpendicular to each other.

O.k. Then if it isn't any curvature change , and it isn't any buoyancy .

What makes the low dip in the sea come back up , from its all time low , to be level with the rest of the sea? Or, if life is going for it , it goes upwards and onwards to an all time high like the other tall wave , we/I have been talking about?

 

Mike

The high part falls down, and water is incompressible (at this scale), so something has to move to make way for it. Not unlike why the water rises when you get into a pool or bath.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

It can be, because mean sea level and local average sea level can be different. The relation to the field lines is that they are perpendicular to each other.

 

The high part falls down, and water is incompressible (at this scale), so something has to move to make way for it. Not unlike why the water rises when you get into a pool or bath.

I am going down to Exmouth or Sidmouth right now ! I need to look to inspire me , just where approximately that mean sea level 'IS'. Then I can think how the peaks and troughs of the sea are oscillating about the 'mean point ' which is NOT THE SEA SURFACE . But perhaps lies above or below the sea surface I am looking at ? Can you make a guess how far up above or below the surface you imagine this to be ? An approximation would be fine , I need to know where to ' Look ' in order to think about it !

 

 

And gravitational field lines , you say are , ' perpendicular ' do you mean they are coming up out of the sea?

 

 

But gravitation is unidirectional . So if the wave peaks are pulled down , as the downward part of their oscillation . What acts as the restorative force to return the waves in the upward direction ?

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[studiot]

Don't stand there thinking too long or the tide will ave ee.

 

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

Don't stand there thinking too long or the tide will ave ee.

 

You mean like "King Canute " !

 

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

 

Well there it is " as plain as day ". As Ophiolite recommended " Get out and look at the lay of the land "

It is glaringly obvious :-

 

 

 

I don't know how I can be so stupid ! The mean point IS THE SEA SURFACE .

 

 

And waves are a superposition caused by wind .

 

I am sure it gets quite torturously complex in the deep ocean , however it's all happening at or near the surface .

 

So gravity creates a perfectly spherical surface , which over short and medium distances appears very ,very Flat . .

 

 

It will be interesting to see if these 'blindingly obvious facts' can in fact lead to any insights on the nature of gravity and it's associated cosmic influences . Or we may have to dig a lot deeper !

 

Mike

Edited October 31, 2015 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

I think one of the aspects of this incredible aspect of gravity ,in its connection with water is.

 

Gravity makes water incredibly level

 

Quite what mechanism is at work to bring about this incredible ' levelness' may reveal these ' aspects' that give me the hint that ' something is 'there ' in the nature of this phenomenon .

 

Mike