New theory of gravity
in [Physics]
|
Prev: fundamental representations
Next: heavy water in comets is already proof Re: Additive Creation; Dirac's new radioactivities Chapt 5 #169; ATOM TOTALITY
From: GogoJF on 15 Jun 2010 15:27 I propose a new theory of gravity. According to conventional theory, two objects of different weight, dropped off a tower, will land at precisely the same time. According to my new theory, the two objects only appear to land at the same time because, in reference to the size of the Earth, the two different weighted objects are virtually the same weight when compared to the size of the Earth. According to my new theory, larger objects fall more slowly than smaller objects. As objects become larger and larger, and finally can be compared to the size of the Earth, these objects will begin to fall more slowly. Case in point. The moon is an object approximately one quarter the size of the Earth. Since it is such a large object and still is dictated by the Earth, (revolves around it), there finally comes a critical point where the object, not only falls slower, but stops falling altogether and is suspended in animation. This is my definition of the strength of gravity. I believe that the conventional theory of gravity is superficial, and only describes motion in terms of our limited point of view.
From: Sam on 15 Jun 2010 15:48 On Jun 15, 2:27 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > I propose a new theory of gravity. According to conventional theory, > two objects of different weight, dropped off a tower, will land at > precisely the same time. > > According to my new theory, the two objects only appear to land at the > same time because, in reference to the size of the Earth, the two > different weighted objects are virtually the same weight when compared > to the size of the Earth. > > According to my new theory, larger objects fall more slowly than > smaller objects. As objects become larger and larger, and finally can > be compared to the size of the Earth, these objects will begin to fall > more slowly. Your new theory is contradicted by observation.
From: GogoJF on 15 Jun 2010 16:13 On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, Sam <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 2:27 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > I propose a new theory of gravity. According to conventional theory, > > two objects of different weight, dropped off a tower, will land at > > precisely the same time. > > > According to my new theory, the two objects only appear to land at the > > same time because, in reference to the size of the Earth, the two > > different weighted objects are virtually the same weight when compared > > to the size of the Earth. > > > According to my new theory, larger objects fall more slowly than > > smaller objects. As objects become larger and larger, and finally can > > be compared to the size of the Earth, these objects will begin to fall > > more slowly. > > Your new theory is contradicted by observation. In this case, the results of the observation obscure the truth of the situation.
From: Greg Neill on 15 Jun 2010 16:36 GogoJF wrote: > I propose a new theory of gravity. According to conventional theory, > two objects of different weight, dropped off a tower, will land at > precisely the same time. > > According to my new theory, the two objects only appear to land at the > same time because, in reference to the size of the Earth, the two > different weighted objects are virtually the same weight when compared > to the size of the Earth. More or less true. In the vast majority of practical cases of interest (general physics near the Earth's surface with modest masses compared to that of the Earth), ignoring bouancy and air friction, all such objects take the same amount of time to drop a given height. Essentially, we take into account the acceleration of the falling body as caused by the mass of the Earth, but ignore the acceleration of the Earth towards the body as caused by the mass of the body. This doesn't have to be the case. Standard physics is perfectly capable of taking both into account, it's just a little more awkward to manipulate the mathematical expressions. > > According to my new theory, larger objects fall more slowly than > smaller objects. As objects become larger and larger, and finally can > be compared to the size of the Earth, these objects will begin to fall > more slowly. Well, that's got it precisely backwards; Larger objects should come together more quickly due to both objects being accelerated towards each other in each other's gravitational fields. > > Case in point. The moon is an object approximately one quarter the > size of the Earth. Since it is such a large object and still is > dictated by the Earth, (revolves around it), there finally comes a > critical point where the object, not only falls slower, but stops > falling altogether and is suspended in animation. This is my > definition of the strength of gravity. I can't follow your argument. There doesn't seem to be a logical path from the Moon being a quarter of the size of the Earth to concluding that there is some critical mass that would experience zero net gravitational force. > > I believe that the conventional theory of gravity is superficial, and > only describes motion in terms of our limited point of view. Convenient shortcuts are used where applicable, but the full rigor of Newtonian Mechanics can always be brought to bear where required.
From: jimp on 15 Jun 2010 17:22
GogoJF <jfgogo22(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jun 15, 2:48 pm, Sam <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Jun 15, 2:27 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> > I propose a new theory of gravity. According to conventional theory, >> > two objects of different weight, dropped off a tower, will land at >> > precisely the same time. >> >> > According to my new theory, the two objects only appear to land at the >> > same time because, in reference to the size of the Earth, the two >> > different weighted objects are virtually the same weight when compared >> > to the size of the Earth. >> >> > According to my new theory, larger objects fall more slowly than >> > smaller objects. As objects become larger and larger, and finally can >> > be compared to the size of the Earth, these objects will begin to fall >> > more slowly. >> >> Your new theory is contradicted by observation. > > In this case, the results of the observation obscure the truth of the > situation. In this case your insanity prevents you from acknowledging empirical observation says your "theory" is just babble. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |