Hello I Will Try to Help Your Gravity Problems

[Grimer]

One good thing about the Bessler forum. There's a real smorgasbord of opinions to choose from. I don't want to get involved in the arguments about time but since the subject has come up I may as well give my own essay on the nature of time a plug.

http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Arti ... ry5-3a.pdf

[bluesgtr44]

Hijacked indeed, BAR....my apologies.....


Steve

[Michael]

Michael that is incorrect, the 4th dimension is not the measurement of time, it IS time. In 3 dimensions we need time to show mass in motion (as energy), but if an entity was given yet a 4th dimension of time can you imagine what that means? Evidently you are confused but most are in understanding the 4th dimension

Bar, instead of making assumptions , can you please give me the dimension of asking what I mean, like I am of you, and don't let your comprehension of words make your misunderstand what I might know or not know ( then we can become the best of friends ).

Fundamentally your point does not differ one bit from what I wrote.
Without measurement bar, we are lost. There is absolutely nothing that can be accomplished in this universe without some form of measurement. The minimum number of dimensions that matter can be comprehended on, witnessed on, measured on, is three, BUT the minimum number that can actions can occur on is four. Time, duration, movement, is four.
So, I totally agree with you about the 2nd dimension. 2 dimensions is fine when viewing drawings but 2 dimensional drawings need 3 dimensions to actually exist and four dimensions for the very act of the settling of three dimensions to occur.

I'll take a better look at your paragraph after some sleep, but I think you'll find that even though the wavelength changes the total amount of energy stays the same. So you see, nothing is destroyed. Do you disagree?

[BAR]

Ok I apologize if I have hurt you from my assumption.
Hehe, now you are getting it. The 4th dimension CAN NOT be measured. Extra dimensions can do that which is impossible by a lesser dimension. That is why gravitation exists.

In fact, fundamentally your point does not differ one bit from what I wrote.

I have explained as best I can. At this point I do not understand what I am missing in my explanation to you? Why do you say that?

I'll take a better look at your paragraph after some sleep, but I think you'll find that even though the wavelength changes the total amount of energy stays the same. So you see, nothing is destroyed. Do you disagree?

Simply impossible, wavelength changes directly with energy. Gamma rays "goes up" in a gravitational field, then it's energy is removed or (destroyed in our observation).

[Michael]

I have explained as best I can. At this point I do not understand what I am missing in my explanation to you? Why do you say that?

I'll leave it to you to reread it.

Extra dimensions can do that which is impossible by a lesser dimension. That is why gravitation exists.

And yet we can measure three and not four; ironic isn't it?
That was a joke.

What we can't do is measure the totality of the fourth dimension.

The change in "measured" wavelength occurs because time runs differently depending on how far in or out of the gravitational well you are. A theory that's been verified experiementally.

[BAR]

Ok Grimer asked me of my profession:
I like to keep some of my life private at this time. I am already some what fearful of saying things that could get me in trouble. Especially after what I have read of others experiences on the members only forum. I am not an engineer. I very much like science and math though. Simply, if all my statements are incorrect about physics please state your arguments. :)

Thus in terms of information, time, and length are equivalent. But if time and length are equivalent this means that just as we should be able to increase or decrease length, so should we also be able to increase or decrease time. In other words increasing length is equivalent to time moving forward whereas decreasing length is equivalent to time moving backwards.

In your treatise on time and information theory, you state that information is in relation to length and shortening that length is equilvalent to reversing time. That is simply impossible from my point of view. If I follow you, then information exchange must have a rate. So if that rate of exchange is increased with a fixed packet, or size of data, then its increase of rate would shorten it. How can this exchange of information become reversed? Just like reading these words. How fast can you read before they are reversed? Removing information does not change the time of other entitys. It is simply a loss of the information.

During the upward swing energy is flowing from the field into the pendulum. During the downward swing the reverse process occurs, the energy flows from the pendulum into the field.

No this is incorrect, energy is being consumed by gravitation in the upward swing, and gained in the downward. Then HOW can you reverse time in a backwards swing? Grimer you are close, information is in essence like energy. They both need to be exchanged in a mutual system. Trying to figure how to reverse this exchange is extremely difficult if not impossible. I have been trying to figure this for many years. Reverse time is far more difficult than perpetual motion. Time travel to the future is possible because the state of the universe does not change, only the entity not interacting with it. For example if you could take an entity and completely remove it's interaction with the universe, then it has the ability to exist any where relative to the universe. The universe is now totally imperceptive to the entity and vise versa. What if the entity could then sample exchange with the universe, or have a delay in it's interaction? This means great amounts of time could pass for the entity relative to the universe between samples, or it's interaction. In essense this entity could travel into the future. Collasping this non interaction will immediately bring the entity back to it's original time + time experienced in the non interaction.

Even if one could move faster than light, interaction is a step process. Even this would not reverse time for an entity. There is absolutely no possible frame where motion can be reversed relative to another frame, inless the entity experiencing this can change its form by removing it's rest mass energy. This only leaves the kinetic energy "history" of all the interactions of the entity and this kinetic history must be relative to when it acquired the interactions. Thus it would only percieve interactions in the past and thus be in a earlier frame of time.

[BAR]

Quote:
I have explained as best I can. At this point I do not understand what I am missing in my explanation to you? Why do you say that?



I'll leave it to you to reread it.

Ok please tell me where? How do you not accept what I am saying about the 4th dimension and how it can create and destroy energy?

What we can't do is measure the totality of the fourth dimension.

The change in "measured" wavelength occurs because time runs differently depending on how far in or out of the gravitational well you are. A theory that's been verified experiementally.

Ok you are refering to time dilation in a gravitational field, where an airplane flys with an atomic clock relative to one on earth, but this still does not explain how gamma rays gain or lose energy as I have explained. Wavelength is directionally proportional to energy content. It does not matter at what distance from earth the gamma source is, its photons change in energy measured going towards or away from earth. ARE photons energy? Are they made of cheese? Energy is proven to be created and destroyed in this, but mainstream does not accept it.

[Michael]

Ok please tell me where? How do you not accept what I am saying about the 4th dimension and how it can create and destroy energy?

I'm going to be blunt, okay?

1. I think that most of what has been discussed about the fourth dimension we agree on. Though you've said that time can't be measured, but I'm saying time can be and is measured, but the can be and the is of it are only measured in comparing one frame of reference to another frame of reference. The totallity of time cannot be measured. Just as infinity can be realized within a parcel or a frame of reference but the totality of infinity cannot be, and can never be measured.
As a sidepoint my personal viewpoint of the greater view is the potential of infinity acts upon the framework of the fourth dimension.

2. I find the view that gravity is the creator and destroyer of energy to be incomplete and somewhat childish. You've posted the comment a few times now that essentially says, what...do you believe in magic? But that's essentially the power you are giving to gravity when you say it has the power to create and destroy. That's the exact power your giving it. Voila, ...materializo, Voila, ...dissapero. I don't know why you can't admit that the energy from mass leaving a gravitational system is still there in the form of potential measured as a frame of reference which is of the object and where it is, to the gravitational source. Every thing is there, nothing has dissapeared and it all makes sense. But, having said all of this I am the one who said he thinks the potential of infinity becomes realized through the frame of the 4th dimension.

3. Your essentially asking if light has energy. Of course it does. What it does not have is rest mass, but it has energy. Everytime a piece of matter absorbs light which causes it to grow, change, decay, etc. it is absorbing energy. Drop a ball to the earth, it is going to speed up. Same as light. Make both events leave the earth in the same fashion they came in, they loose the energy that was supplied to them by the gravitational field ( it being transformed to potential ). In other words the total amount of energy stays the same when measured correctly.

Mainstream science answers this with the theory which has found evidence to support it which says time runs differently ( like layers of an onion analogy ) depending on where something is in a gravitational field. I found not a bad link which deals with the subject of the change of wavelenghts and gravity.

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

[BAR]

1. I think that most of what has been discussed about the fourth dimension we agree on. Though you've said that time can't be measured, but I'm saying time can be and is measured, but the can be and the is of it are only measured in comparing one frame of reference to another frame of reference. The totallity of time cannot be measured. Just as infinity can be realized within a parcel or a frame of reference but the totality of infinity cannot be, and can never be measured.
As a sidepoint my personal viewpoint of the greater view is the potential of infinity acts upon the framework of the fourth dimension.

Michael you keep thinking in 3 dimensions. Yes we can measure change of position and it's rate as time, because we and everything else observed is 3 dimensional. Even the maximum velocity of light requires time for photons to travel a distance. When one measures a 3 dimensional entity, we need to describe it's energy by the use of time as a 4th dimensional property. However, this is not the same as an entity existing in 4 dimensions through quantum effects. There is a difference there. Like I explained before a 4th dimensional entity like mass in the gravitational field has infinite time in addition to width, length and depth. The 4th dimension of infinite time allows mass entitys to exist simultaneously across a region of space. This simultaneous ability to exist is beyond any measurement from our 3 dimensions. The earths mass is "smeared" outwards by this quantum effect. Can we measure the earths mass passing through a ball thrown in the air? Can we measure the earth's mass passing through satellites in orbit thousands of kilometers away? How about the earth's mass passing through the moon, or to the sun and back? The mass of the earth is there and back so rapidly it is beyond measure in our 3 dimensions. The same with the sun. It's mass is enormous and yet we can not measure the sun's mass passing through the earth, or to Jupiter and back. All we can measure is the effect of the gravitational field, we can not measure the earths mass moving rapidly about in the 4th dimension and creating gravitation. The main proof (like I said before) is the force of gravitation is instantaneous. It's presence is much faster than light, though mainstream science says it is limited to the velocity of light because of Einstein. Funny thing is the delay in that velocity for gravitation is never considered in space flight, but it's seriously considered controlling robots on mars. Hmmm...

2. I find the view that gravity is the creator and destroyer of energy to be incomplete and somewhat childish. You've posted the comment a few times now that essentially says, what...do you believe in magic? But that's essentially the power you are giving to gravity when you say it has the power to create and destroy. That's the exact power your giving it. Voila, ...materializo, Voila, ...dissapero. I don't know why you can't admit that the energy from mass leaving a gravitational system is still there in the form of potential measured as a frame of reference which is of the object and where it is, to the gravitational source. Every thing is there, nothing has dissapeared and it all makes sense. But, having said all of this I am the one who said he thinks the potential of infinity becomes realized through the frame of the 4th dimension.

Michael I am not the one who started to state about magical things in physical processes. I simply remind of this "magic" when I see people trying to get extra energy out of things that have been shown not to be the case by experiment. You are the one suggesting that gravitation works by magic, not me. I know how it works. Gravitation is not there because space is bending (which Einstein started), and what mainstream still assumes today. It exists by 4th dimensional quantum effects. Lets take your analogy of leaving a gravitational system further. How about launching a missile with just enough energy to escape earth? It then slowly begins to fall towards the sun. If all that energy is conserved in the missile to get there, we should be able to use it to get back to earth. Is this no different than a spring that stores energy, since gravitation like the spring is considered as a conservative force? If we could make a ultra strong and low density spring attached to that missile at the same distance, would there be a difference? What if the missile was captured and fell to the moon? Some of the potential energy returns from the moon's gravitation, but there is no way it returns the same quantity of energy that was used to leave the earth. Where did all the extra energy go? What if we could weigh the missile since that energy must be conserved? Does it weigh more since mass and energy is interchangable? Hmmm... Newtons laws state for every action there must be an opposite reaction, so how is the gravitational field different here? The thrust of the rocket goes a direction and moves the missile in the opposite direction. The gravitational field acts no differently than if another rocket was thrusting in opposition against the missile, canceling energy. You assume that all the energy is conserved as potential in the gravitational field and beyond, but if there is a situation where the gravitational field can not restore the energy back from the potential, then where does it go? Is that really conservation? That potential just went "poof", or like you say "dissapero". :) Much more simple to state the obvious, gravitation creates and destroys energy.

3. Your essentially asking if light has energy. Of course it does. What it does not have is rest mass, but it has energy. Everytime a piece of matter absorbs light which causes it to grow, change, decay, etc. it is absorbing energy. Drop a ball to the earth, it is going to speed up. Same as light. Make both events leave the earth in the same fashion they came in, they loose the energy that was supplied to them by the gravitational field ( it being transformed to potential ). In other words the total amount of energy stays the same when measured correctly.

Mainstream science answers this with the theory which has found evidence to support it which says time runs differently ( like layers of an onion analogy ) depending on where something is in a gravitational field. I found not a bad link which deals with the subject of the change of wavelenghts and gravity.

Michael the velocity of light is always the same in a vacuum. Its passage through air or water is a little slower, but still the same for different wavelengths and energy. Photons can not have potential energy, they are already energy. Like I said earlier about gamma photons that change frequency and energy in the gravitational field. How can a photon gain or lose energy in this field, and yet keep a constant velocity of c? Anything material that has rest mass can not do that. Any change of energy for something with rest mass can only do so by a change in velocity. This again means gravitation is creating or destroying energy in the photon.

Time dilation in a gravitational field is simply more proof that gravitation is 4th dimensional and of infinite time. Einstein assumed that gravitational and inertial mass are the same from his equivalence principle, but all you have to do is jump off something high and compare that feeling to a car with a powerful engine that pushs you into the seat. A 60g acceleration in a strong gravitational field will not kill you, but straping a rocket to one's behind certainly will at 60g's. Infact Einstein suggests that gravitation is not energy, simply the curving of space. Making empty space like a form of the Aether. His theory is the best so far, but it is not at all complete in describing gravitation.

[erick]

"In fact Einstein suggests that gravitation is not energy, simply the curving of space."

This statement is not correct. Einstein suggested that gravity is the result of the bending of space/time not just space. This curvature comes about as a result of an object moving through space at specific rate of speed. The curvature itself is the differential between the amount of space covered in a given amount of time. The faster the object is moving the more space is covered in a shorter amount of time resulting in a gulf between space and time. Sort of a disjointing between the first three dimensions and the fourth dimension.

Imagine two parallel, horizontal lines. One represents space, on represents time. Now imagine a dot on the line that represents space. That dot is an object floating, perfectly still in outer space. At this point the two lines remain parallel because even though the object isn't moving through three dimensional space, time, the fourth dimension, continues to march on. Now if we move our dot/object along the line that represents space we see that as we move it faster, it covers more 3 dimensional space in less time but that excess time doesn't just go away, it must now be dilated in order to fit into the same space/time reference frame as the movement. So then the line of time is curved in order to fit with the same reference frame as the movement. Causing the gulf in space/time AKA gravitational field.



Now, because acceleration of mass is what produces gravity in the first place (theoretically) that means that gravity in it of itself is caused by massive amounts of energy propelling objects through space (theoretically as a result of the Big Bang). So then it is that energy that is a crucial component to the whole equation.

[primemignonite]

BAR,

What you write and the way you do it regarding this deep, ordinarily unfathomable subject, even I, at least, can begin to understand.

I vote for continuance.

James

[Michael]

I started to read your post and this caught my eye.

Michael you keep thinking in 3 dimensions. Yes we can measure change of position and it's rate as time, because we and everything else observed is 3 dimensional.

No, I am not. , I simply stated that time ( DURATION; occuring from difference ) is used in measurement in comparing a frame of reference to another. All you've really done is parrot what I said using different words. Bar, TIME is duration. Duration is always a comparision from one frame of reference to another. If you are talking about an inability to measure duration, then you are really talking about timelessness, or infinity. And I agree on the point that the fourth dimension is probably infinite in it's totality.
I've already said it, but I'll try again. 2 dimensions can't really exist. 3 dimensions are the minimum number we can measure matter on, but they can't really exist by themselves either because all measurement and all existence, anything we can concieve of as form requires difference, in order to exist, and this difference shows itself in the forms of motion, sequence, duration, greater and lesser etc. and these items only exist because of what we call the fourth dimension.

Like I said earlier about gamma photons that change frequency and energy in the gravitational field. How can a photon gain or lose energy in this field, and yet keep a constant velocity of c? Anything material that has rest mass can not do that.

Light energy is measured by frequency. It's that simple. Light doesn't have rest mass.

You are the one suggesting that gravitation works by magic, not me.

Before I go any further with what you wrote show me when and where I said or even implied to you that gravity worked by magic.

And again, your the one saying gravity creates and destroys, basically the very essence of magic. I've asked you a few times to give a concrete example of what gravity does with the energy you say it destroys and you fail to give this concrete and direct answer, all you say is it puts it into the fourth dimension. By putting it into the fourth dimension how can it at the same time be destroyed? And if destroyed was a bad choice of term on your part and you really just mean it was put into the fourth dimension then in what form does it exist, how can it be measured, what are the mechanics of the whole process? And if you again answer or imply that you don't know because the fourth dimension can't be measured, well it will be very telling.

I also want to know where your proof is that gravity exists at all points simultaneously. You might not be aware as of yet but proof has been found that gravity travels at the speed of light.

How do all the planets remain stable in their orbits if the suns gravity travels at the velocity of light?

? Really? Because the gravity from the sun has not been "turned off".

One more question for you bar in the meantime. Where do you sit on this whole free energy thing...really?

[DrWhat]

These are the discussions that really count. As long as they don't fade (like most) into personal offence they make things really interesting. Excellent guys.

[datico]

I second DrWhat's comment. In fact the mention of "personal offence" reminds me of an email etiquette rule which states to be wary when using or reading strong language, as it is often interpreted with a stronger tone of voice than was originally intended by the author. So I hope all concerned can continue to avoid this pitfall and continue a cordial and healthy debate.

BAR, if it doesn't derail the current conversation and is appropriate to this thread, I wonder if you might address the topic of centrifugal force, if it is related to the gravitational force and if so how or why?

I am particularly curious about a statement I read somewhere which was that if two flywheels balance on opposite ends of a lever, and one is then spun up, it exhibits the effect of becoming lighter than the other flywheel such that the lever tips in favor of the stationary wheel. I haven't been able to find time to experiment with this myself (nor have I found anyone else's results as of yet) but perhaps your theory of gravitation could predict/explain/refute this one way or another?

[BAR]

"In fact Einstein suggests that gravitation is not energy, simply the curving of space."

This statement is not correct. Einstein suggested that gravity is the result of the bending of space/time not just space. This curvature comes about as a result of an object moving through space at specific rate of speed. The curvature itself is the differential between the amount of space covered in a given amount of time. The faster the object is moving the more space is covered in a shorter amount of time resulting in a gulf between space and time. Sort of a disjointing between the first three dimensions and the fourth dimension.

Imagine two parallel, horizontal lines. One represents space, on represents time. Now imagine a dot on the line that represents space. That dot is an object floating, perfectly still in outer space. At this point the two lines remain parallel because even though the object isn't moving through three dimensional space, time, the fourth dimension, continues to march on. Now if we move our dot/object along the line that represents space we see that as we move it faster, it covers more 3 dimensional space in less time but that excess time doesn't just go away, it must now be dilated in order to fit into the same space/time reference frame as the movement. So then the line of time is curved in order to fit with the same reference frame as the movement. Causing the gulf in space/time AKA gravitational field.



Now, because acceleration of mass is what produces gravity in the first place (theoretically) that means that gravity in it of itself is caused by massive amounts of energy propelling objects through space (theoretically as a result of the Big Bang). So then it is that energy that is a crucial component to the whole equation.

Erick you are right, I stated space without including time. It was a simple "slip" of the typing. :) I must point out that there is no "space/time". Space is not divided by time as you write it. Einstein thought of space as the Aether in that it could be distorted, but this distortion is apparantly beyond our perception. "The blind beetle crawling on the surface of the globe." Einstein's description is 3 dimensions of space and 1 dimension of time as a 4 manifold and thus, spacetime is 1 word. This means those worldlines of a particle (or beetle) on the geodesic described by spacetime must behave in the classical sense of Newton's infinity, but also be constrained by the limit of the velocity of light. Einstein's theory of special relativity is incomplete in geometry when it comes to describe gravity. The reason being Newtons's theory is 3 dimensional, so they need transformations to include time. Newtonian gravitation assumes infinite velocity (which is almost correct). Your analogy is something I have never encountered in everything I have ever learned of in relativity. Space & time is never separated in the theory. If space curves, then time must curve as well in the theory. We ARE the blind beetle so to speak. Space can be curved and we are not aware. Mathematically to measure we need time to curve with the geometric of space. Your analogy should have the person stretch perpendicular to the direction of motion from the Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. For example the person should also be in a geodesic cone that deepens as velocity increases in the direction of motion. There is no "gulf" or disjoining that describes gravitation that I am aware of. Einstein's general theory of relativity includes the apparatis to assume how gravity behaves in the geometry that is observed. The special theory only describes the action and time experience of bodies moving at a high velocity. No velocity is necessary in the general theory of relativity to describe gravitation. Gravitation is simply described by it's "penetration" into the Z axis of the spacetime coordinates. The big problem is relativity is incomplete. It does not include quantum phenomena that has been observed. Einstein's theory is very accurate because the universe of 3 dimensions and time (including gravitation with the inverse square law) behaves in geometrical (spherical) fashion. However, this description of geometry does not explain everything. Einstein was an immense genius but, his theory never unified the forces of nature, and he never resolved Newton's gravitational constant. Einstein got close with 8piT, but he could never find the value of the tensor. The value of that tensor can only be completed by quantum effects. Only then does it yield Newton's gravitational constant. :)