after several successfull attempts at falling of of wooden power poles and other various structures like ladders and steel hi- line towers I can attest that there is NO SUCH THING AS GRAVITY!
The EARTH SUCKS!
------- Hill
Einstein Theory of Relativity
by VM44 73 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
DanTheMan
OK
I wanna ask Ona, Amazing, Farks, Hillbilly
Where the heck do you learn about this stuff? Did you learn it in college and you still remember it? Do you read like 10,000,000 pages of printed matter a year on physics, politics, history, sociology, etc.? Do you not work or recreate at all, just sit around and intellect 24/7?
Dan, feeling-dumb class
-
hillbilly
Can't speak for the others Dan, but I have a feeling they are really smart folks.
Ona suprises me. He works as a carpenter and everyone in the trades knows that a carpenter is a (your choice here) Plumber, Ironworker or Mason who's brain has been removed. It is common knowlege that electricians are near the "top-of-the food chain" and electrical lineman are the top of the food chain. Plumbers need only the knowlege tha SH*T goes downhill and payday is Friday.
Enginers. who knows? You can always spot and outgoing, gregarious, socially well adjusted enginer. They make eye contact with YOUR shoes during conversation. I like it when they fire up that big calculator and the lights dim down and you feel the air pressure change in the building.
24/7 intellect. Hardley, but science surrounds us if we pay attention.
Me, lots of PBS, about 2 years of college and a bunch of training/experience in applied electrical trades and technology. Learned to drive airplanes once upon a time too- lots of basic physics to learn and respect in that hobby. I am a recreational shooter and reload ammunition to improve ballistics, again a physics based hobbby.
Over the years in order to maintain home and hearth I learned to weld and spent some time learning various applied sciences while taking classes in Agriculture. Ion trasference is the key to fertilizer and boy cows like girl cows because...........I picked up a little knowlege of physiology and orthapedics from trimming and shoeing horses.
Plus, most importantly, I have a weird ablility to remember all sorts of useless trivial stuff. Some days I need directions home clipped on the truck's visor yet am always aware the Battle of Hastings was in 1099. Francs, Normans , Celts, penguins dive deeper than any other flightless birds...on and on!
Did you know that if you wrapped Earth (at the equator) with wire 10 complete times with a wire connected to a lamp on one end and a switch on the other the lamp would light before the switch operator could count "1001, 1002"?
Go Figure? Oh yea, 20 years of avid "Awake" reading had to help.... hahahahahahaha!
----------Hill (i can frame a house roof with a framing square= trig class)
-
Gerard
Gerard, perhaps you're thinking of neutrinos as possibly composing the "missing mass" of a closed universe? Gravitons are the postulated quanta that would be associated with the gravitational plane wave; not yet detected.
No. The neutrinos existence has been confirmed by detecting them, see this report from the University of Hawaii: http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/nuosc_story.html But I see that you are aware of other reports hypothesizing neutrinos as eventual source of mass: http://www.jps.net/physics/cosmic.htmThe text proposes that neutrino oscillations inside planetary matter are responsible for the fabrication of new protons, neutrons and electrons. From this, hydrogen nuclei are likely to form at the core of dense rocky planets.
Slow neutrons produced from the oscillation of neutrinos inside dense matter, may be fused into atoms near a planet's core. This will result in new elements production within a planet.I believe that the term "graviton" is a provisional term that will be used until the actual particle or force is/are actually uncovered.
Gravity is primarily believed to be a ?pull? type force, with ?gravity waves? transferring the force throughout space, but there are a substantial number of physicists who prefer a ?push? type force which is more local and does not involve gravity waves. Push Gravity was initially forwarded by G. Le Sage in 1784. He proposed that ?ultramundane? particles were differentially absorbed by bodies. The particles are supposed to move throughout the universe.
I copy below relevant concepts from contemporary scientists relating neutrinos to gravity:Pauli predicted the existence of a tiny particle which he attributed with having run off with, among other things, the missing linear momentum. The particle was later named the neutrino, Italian for little neutral one. Although well accepted by physicists by the 1950s, it was not until 1956 that the neutrino was first detected by American physicists Frederick Reines and Clyde Lorrain Cowan, Jr. Detecting these things is not easy because matter is virtually transparent to neutrinos but it is believed that many of them actually strike or "push" matter. Neutrinos transfer momentum evenly throughout the full thickness of matter, so that the gravity on any particular portion of matter is relatively small.
The only direction of neutrino bombardment that is not completely counterbalanced (in this illustration) is downward, toward the planet. The reason is that neutrinos which exert pressure in the opposite direction are not equal in their force.
It thus appears possible that the gravitational force holding the moon in its orbit could be due to differential absorption of neutrinos from the "spaceward" side as compared to those from the "earthward" side.
REFERENCES
1 M. R. Edwards, Ed. ?Pushing Gravity?, C. Roy Keys, Montreal, (2002)
2. G. L. Le Sage, Berlin Mem 404 (1784).
3. M. A. Gelman, There is no Gravitational Pull, http://www.cheta.net/gelman/gravity/
4. H. C. Dudley, The Neutrino Sea-Hypothesis or Reality?, Industrial Research, Dec 1977, p51-54
5. J. M. Paschakoff, "Astronomy: From the Earth to the Universe", Saunders College Publishing, Philadelphia, 1979, p-A3ff.
6. D, C. Miller, Rev. Mod. Phys, 5, 203, (1953)
7. C. L. Dulaney, Michelson-Morley and the Aether, Delivered at AAAS meeting, College Station, TX, May 1997.
8. F. Gucker and R. Seifert, "Physical Chemistry", W. Norton Co., NY, 1966, p-238
9. C. L. Dulaney, ?What is an Atom??, http://mywebpage.netscape.net/clarencedulaney/index.html
10. C. L. Dulaney, ?Why Spin?, http://mywebpage.netscape.com/clarencedulaney/index.html
On the other hand, Nobel Prize laureate Hannes Alfven believes that gravity results when electromagnetic forces neutralize each other.
As I mentioned before, understanding gravity is the current Holy Grail of modern Physics and controversies are expected.