## Posts Tagged ‘Gravity’

### Gravity is Not a Force: A term designed to explain state of nature

Posted on: December 5, 2014

Gravity is not a Force: A term designed to explain state of nature

Maybe I’m  not saying anything new: Taking a new perspective might be the proper way for education.

The  term of force, and all types of forces are terms invented to explain the state of nature, its equilibrium and unstable nature.

Two terms have material reality, and all natural laws are deduced from them:

1. Mass of bodies, including  particles and the tiniest of elements

2. Movement of bodies or trajectory

Speed is a mathematical derivation of movement, and Acceleration is a derivation of speed that is linked to the notion of force on a mass or by a mass.

It is the revolutions of big masses (planets, asteroids…) on themselves and around other planets that engendered natural laws due to their respective masses.

The mass of the immediate outer atmosphere is included in the total mass of a planet, so that their volume is commensurate  to their total masses.

If a planet is constituted of gases, its volume is as large as its total mass represented by the movements of the planet on itself and around the other planets, Sun and the nearest galaxy.

The shape of the movement of the planet and its mass is described by their speed and distances from the other adjacent planets, the sun and galaxy.

If the mass of a planet is changed (reduced or augmented), the shape of its movement is changed to maintain equilibrium.

As the mass of the Sun is reduced, the shape of movement of earth around the sun is altered to keep their distance in equilibrium.

Consequently, the shapes of movement of all planet are continuously changing: The ellipse shapes are altering accordingly.

For example, the speed of revolution of earth on itself is exactly the consequence of its mass in order for all “massive bodies” on it to remain grounded, otherwise, everything will be navigating off the ground at the speed of earth around the sun?

The bodies will be circulating (levitating) in levels (altitudes) according to their masses: The heavier circulating closer to the ground?

It is the centrifugal force of this rotation that keeps masses directed (falling) toward the ground

The tangential force direct earth forward on its trajectory around the sun in an elliptic shape.

For example, this zone of weightlessness (no effect of gravity)  between earth and the moon is determined by the respective masses of these two bodies.

Now, as a corollary, if we need to create a reduced weightlessness  atmosphere on earth, we might build an enclosure that rotate counter clockwise to earth: The closer the speed of the enclosure is to the speed of earth the more weightless is the body inside the enclosure.

For example, the “magnetic force” of the core of earth is the result of the movement and total mass of the liquid and gases in the core of earth. Reduce the mass of the core and the shape of the movement of this hot amalgam will be transformed to compensate for the reduced acceleration of the mass.

Question: What set in motion the revolution of earth on itself?

Possibly the Sun winds? These highly dense and charged particles that have great effect when earth was mostly a gaseous entity?

As earth began to acquire its own rotating cycle, matters (particles with masses) settled firmly on the surface and then created this magnetic field to repulse further “sunny winds” attacks, thus allowing organic or living creatures to be created and evolve.

Question: Has the moving magma in the core any effect on the velocity of earth on itself?

I tend to conjecture that it is the rotation of earth that set its liquid interior into movement, and thus creating the magnetic field that is preventing the outer dangerous radiations from reaching earth surface. All these radical transformation of ice ages and desert ages are the direct consequences of the altering of the magnetic field.

This alterations of earth magnetic fields were consequences to the alterations in earth speed rotation due to galactic changes, in the sun location to the center of the Milky Way galaxy.

With mankind tampering with earth environment, it is highly plausible that the movement of the core will have direct impact on the speed of earth rotation.

What make the comets and other celestial bodies (not classified as planet) so dangerous?

They don’t have magnetic fields and earth magnetic field has no repulsive effect on them to change their trajectories away from earth when they come close.

Since nature behaviour has nothing to do with time, time is used as a mathematical factor to facilitate the derivations of many natural phenomena laws.

Attaching time as a fourth dimension for the structure of the surface of planets’ movements is purely a mathematical manipulation in order to explain a few relativity laws.

What do I know?

Just an essay to draw professional responses and get you to reflect on our state of existence and check your hypothesis.

### “Wishes wilder than in night dreams”: How fitting

Posted on: August 17, 2011

“Wish wilder than in a dream”: How fitting

Dream. Dreaming. Far out. A parallel life: Extravagant, detailed, passionate, creative, limitless in potential and capability…

Gravity?  How many fold heavier than earth you like it to be?

The ultimate in oppression, in feeling down to earth, in inertia… I get up and feel unable to reintegrate bed.

Have got to do anything but going back to this heavy dream.  For example, I am of the type of guys I shake hand with someone and used not to recall how he was dressed or fathom his character.  But in dreams, I see and meet hundreds of total strangers, and I am able to dress every one of them according to their character, and create multitude of facial features…Where all that creativity came from? Not from my conscious world.

Gravity? How many times lighter than earth do you like to feel it?

Feeling the air exercising the proper pressure under you wings, sliding, hovering over mountain tops, valley, speeding like crazy, feeling light, happy, full of expectation; climbing high walls, with bare hands, effortlessly, much faster than cats and lizards… Noises, morning clapping trying to get me out of my lovely dream, and I refuse to acknowledge that it is time to face the “real life”.

How do you dare claim that my dreaming period is not as real, is not the wonderful possible life, my life, my expectations, my power…?

Older people, hard of hearing, dim in the eyes, decrepit… Just hanging on to life, to the living, just to experience another dozing dream, another night dream…  Laying down on this “balcony of a bed“, a relaxing long chair, eyes closed, excited for a new story adventure, capabilities rejuvenated, limitations vanishing in thin air… All is possible, youth, a reincarnated life of what it should have been…

Hanging on to life to see the grandchildren and children?  Get real.

Children make themselves scarce and you have been forgotten long time ago.  No, elder people grab to life for another dream story adventure:  The real life when the other stupid “real life” gave up on you, and turned you down, and trampled your dignity, smashed all your wishes and expectations…

Dream. Dreaming. Far out. A parallel life: Extravagant.  The real life. Got to agree, sooner or later, that dreaming is the true lullaby that your mother failed to sing to you, tacking you in bed…

Why everything, every adventure is possible in dreams, except falling in Love?

This split-second realization that “This is it!”.  Maybe I never fell in love in order to dream it? What a pity.

Falling in love must be the concentration of a life experiences, observations, feelings, knowledge…What a pity!

Except falling in love, everything else is in the realm of dreaming, a much livelier, colorful, exciting alternative powerful life.

What a pity!

### In the Heart of Earth: How the mechanism works?

Posted on: November 24, 2010

Consider a large inner core of iron of 2,200 km in diameter.  The heart of earth is swimming in a temperature around 5,000 degree celsius, and a pressure of 3 million atmosphere.   There are lighter elements in this magma of iron such as sulfur, silicium, and oxygen.

By convention, the west side of the core is situated under Latin America and the east side under Japan.  The overall core has a diameter of 2,900 km and is way down beneath a thin solid crust of less than 100 km, and the viscous mantel of 3,000 km.

On the west side of the core, iron crystals (of less than 700 meters in diameter) move eastward, a translational movement of 0.5 mm per year, they grow larger and reach the east side with diameters of less than 15 km.  On the east side, under Japan, the iron crystals are in a state of fusion and overflow on the surface of the core returning to the west side as the flow cools down, liberating on their way the lighter elements, which are directed inward to the core. Thus, the iron in fusion becoming heavier than the mixture of iron forming the inner core .

The entire cycle last 100 million years for the rejuvenation of the core.  Every rejuvenating cycle of the core adds a thickness of 0.5 mm to the outer layer of the core since less iron crystals go in fusion than what is formed.

Apparently, this flow of heavy iron returning to the west side generates the magnetic force or field on earth.  It is assumed that only gravity is powerful enough to getting iron crystals of such magnitude moving forward in the translation activity.

This theory explains three anomalies provided by seismograph data that need to be interpreted.  The first anomaly observed is the elastic anisotropic: the seismic waves travel faster from north to south than east to west.  The second anomaly is called asymmetric phenomenon: the irregularity experienced in seismic waves manifested in the western hemisphere where the speed is slower in the first 100 km of the outer layer of the core than in the east side.  The third anomaly is that the deeper layers (around 250 km) must be heavier than the upper iron layers because the seismic waves slow down in this layer:  In a mixture of two salted fluids with different densities, the denser fluid sinks in the bottom regardless of temperature or atmospheric pressure.

The questions that geophysicists need to resolve are: First, how rigid is the grain of the core? If the grain is deformable then, more headaches for validating this theory, if there is a way for such validation.  Second, are the iron crystal of cube shape or hexagonal.

What I understood is that:  the first layer of the core is 100 km, the second layer is 1,220 km thick, and the deepest and denser layer is 250 km. Second, it is that the 250 km layer is responsible of the movement from west to east and reaching the fusion stage and generating the magnetic field. Third, the iron crystals in fusion liberate the lighter elements as they cool down before arriving to the west side of the core.

My set of questions are many:

First, If the liberated lighter elements on the upper layer of the core do not reach the deeper layer then, after each rejuvenation cycle, it will become harder for the iron crystals to reach fusion and to cool down; thus, the return cycle will slow down and the magnetic field will diminish and the most inner 250 km layer of iron acquires heavier density with each cycle.  The middle iron mixture (with abundance of lighter elements) is squeezed between two denser layers.  To which layer would the lighter elements converge? It must be to the deeper layers, otherwise we are in trouble as the ratio of lighter elements to iron decreases with each rejuvenation cycle.

Second, how gravity functions in the lowest location on earth is not clear to me?  Since earth rotates, then what is described as translational movement must be understood as a tangential circulation; a normal centrifugal force exerted on the flowing iron in fusion attracts the lighter elements (does that make any difference in the theory with the snail pace of moving iron crystals?)

Third, the mixture of iron in the middle layer of the core does not rejuvenate quickly.

Fourth, does quantum mechanics play a role in such a hot environment with such a huge atmospheric pressure?

Note:  This article was inspired by the French monthly Science and Vie, number 1118.

### I have a problem with Newton’s causal factor: Shouldn’t you?

Posted on: November 13, 2009

I have a problem with Newton’s causal factor; (Nov. 13, 2009)

Let me refresh your memory of Newton’s explanation of the causal factor that moves planets in specific elliptical trajectories.  Newton’s related the force that attracts objects onto the ground by the field of acceleration (gravitation field) that it exerts on the mass of an object. Thus, objects are attracted to one another “at distance and simultaneously” by other objects; thus, this attractive force causes movements in foreseeable trajectories. Implicitly, Newton is saying that it the objects (masses or inertia) that are creating the acceleration or the field of gravity.

If this is the theory then, where is the cause in this relation?  Newton is no fool; he knew that he didn’t find the cause but was explaining an observation.  He had two alternatives: either to venture into philosophical concepts of the source for gravity or get at the nitty-gritty business of formulating what is observed.  Newton could easily have taken the first route since he spent most of his life studying theological matters. Luckily for us, he opted for the other route.

Newton then undertook to inventing mathematical tools such as differentiation and integration to explaining his conceptual model of how nature functions. Newton could then know, at a specific location of an object, where the object was at the previous infinitesimal time dT and predict where it will be dT later.  The new equation could explain the cause of the elliptical trajectories of planets as Kepler discovered empirically and as Galileo proved by experiments done on falling objects.

For two centuries, scientists applied the mechanical physics of Newton that explained most of the experimental observations such as heat kinetic, conservation of energy laws, the theory of gases, and the nature of the second principle in thermodynamic.   Even the scientists working on the electromagnetic fields started by inventing concepts based on Newton’s premises of continuum matters and of an absolute space and time.  Scientists even invented the notion of “ether” filling the void with physical characteristics that might explain phenomena not coinciding with Newton’s predictions.

Then, modern physics had to finally drop the abstract concept of simultaneous effects at a distance.  Modern physics adopted the concept that masses are not immutable entities, and that speed of light in the void exists but it has a speed limit. Newton’s laws are valid for movements of small speeds. Thus, partial differentials were employed to explaining the theory of fields. Thermal radiation, radioactivity, and spectrums observations have let to envision the theory of discrete packet of energy.

Newton was no fool.  He already suspected that his system was restrictive and had many deficiencies. First, Newton discovers experimentally that the observable geometric scales (distances of material points) and their course in time do not define completely the movements physically (the bucket experiment).  There must exist “something else” other than masses and distances to account for. He admits that space must possess physical characteristics of the same nature as masses for movements to have meaning in his equations. To be consistent with his approach of not introducing concepts that are not directly attached to observable objects ,Newton had to postulate the concept of absolute space and absolute time framework.

Second, Newton declares that his principle of the reciprocal action of gravity has no ambition for a definitive explanation but a rule deduced from experiment.

Third, Newton is aware that the perfect correspondence of weight and inertia does not offer any explanation.  None of these three logical objections can be used to discredit the theory. They were unsatisfied desires of a scientific mind to reach a unifying conception of nature’s phenomenon.  The causal and differential laws are still debatable and nobody dares reject them completely and for ever.

Let me suggest this experiment: we isolate an object in the void, in a chamber that denies access to outside electromagnetic and thermal effects, and we stabilize the object in a suspension sort of levitating. Now we approach other objects (natural or artificially created) in the same isolated condition as the previous one. What would happen?

Would the objects move at a certain distance? Would they be attracted? At what masses movement is generated? How many objects should be introduced before any kind of movement is generated? What network structure of the objects initiates movements? Would they start spinning on themselves before they oscillate as one mass (a couple) in clockwise and counterclockwise fashion around a fictitious axe? How long before any movement is witnessed? What would be the spinning speed if any; the speed of the One Mass; any acceleration before steady state movement?  I believe that the coefficient G will surface from the data gathered and might offer satisfactory answers to the cause of movements.

The one difficult problem in this experiment is the kind of mechanisms to keeping the objects in suspension against gravity. These various mechanisms would play the role of manipulated variable.

My hypothesis is that it is the movements of atoms, electrons, and all the moving particles within masses that are the cause that generates the various fields of energies that get objects in movement.  Gravity is just the integration of all these fields of energy (at the limit) into one comprehensive field called gravity. If measured accurately, G should be different at every point in space/time.  We have to determine the area that we are interested for the integral G at the limit of the area.  With man activities that are changing earth and climatic ecosystem then, I think G has changed dramatically in many locations and need to be measured accurately for potential catastrophic zones on earth.

### Blog Stats

• 1,518,726 hits