So your argument is that because scientific knowledge is improving and thus was wrong at various times in the past that everyone should consider your new theory of gravity to be equivalent to Newton's laws of motions? Kepler is turning over in his his grave.

No, Newton did not not "drop an apple" and "know it all". What Newton really did is point out that an apple falls and the Moon rotates around the earth for the same reason.

He formulated the laws of motion and coinvented calculus. He wrote the Principia Mathematica which explained the classical laws of motion in great detail. He took the three laws of motion as axioms and then derived other known results from those laws.

Over the past four centuries, experiments have verified his laws basically to the error of relativity. Then in 1915 came Einstein's reformulations of gravity which showed that Newton's view was only an approximation.

"Magical power in the center of earth"? No, Einstein's General theory explains gravity as the warping of space-time itself by the energy/mass which resides in it.

You are a funny sort of troll. ;-)

hahaha...i like how you make up theories which go against the way things actually work

Wow, if you think that gravity is a 'pushing' force of a vacuum, explain to me how the density of an object alters this 'pushing force'?

For example a planet the size of earth but with 15 times the mass of earth, will have 15 times more gravitational PULL.

If gravity is a force PUSHING on the planet, then how would the planet's mass have any affect on the strength of this 'push' ??

You've simply embarrassed yourself here.

He doesn't have far to go to get to retarded.

Why are u in the adult industry you should be working for NASSA! :1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

The same way a 25mph wind pushes on a wide wing and keeps it from moving forward while a very small wing just glides through it.

Stop making yourself look stupid.

The surface(mass) of the wing controls the pressure applied. A big fucking plane needs big fucking wings to apply enough pressure to lift it's weight.


I have to go to bed now; it's 5:30 Am and I stayed up all night.

I wil continue this in a few hours.

If the earth exploded it would simply be gone. And the space the earth was would fill in instantly with "space". Whatever particles that happened to find a way back to the same spot earth was wouldnt be considered "earth".

That would be like taking a malted milk ball and smashing it with a hammer into dust and placing it back into the same spot before you smashed it and trying to call it a malted milk ball again. No matter how long you let it sit there it wont become a malted milk ball ever again.

you would just be left with the ingredients that at one point in time that were a malted milk ball.

:thumbsup

also the theory you speak of which has gravity acting as a pushing mechanism is ridiculous.
The Earth is a powerful spatial sink as it is one body...if you blew it up into parts or enough to split the axis as you say...it would still hold almost the same gravity due to it's mass, and i doubt highly it would stop spinning as it would have momentum...therefore there would be a strong pull inward..If the pieces didnt move very far apart from each other i think they would indeed find themselves back together, as they would both have a huge gravitational attraction to each other....im picturing a yo-yo with each half representing what would be left of our earth.

You need to smoke another joint and start another thread though as this was fun to read.

What? A qualified "scientist" with a college degree........and can't even spell "Sphere?"

What a fucking clown!

intresting thread....but your explaination here doesn't clarify...wake up and explain this further

:)

Surface and MASS are two entirely different things, you silly monkey!

ok yoda do u have any other interesting facts

The guy claims to be a scientist but he has no idea what the mass of an object is.

Does he think 'Density' is the name of a club in Brussels?

This is not the scientist you are looking for...

college degree...
not enough for me to read through your whole post

So you're saying that space exerts pressure on objects to hold them together? Under your theory, what would happen to a normal latex balloon in space? Would it expand or contract?

If there's enough pressure to hold something with the mass and density of the earth together, surely there'd be more than enough pressure to compress a balloon down to the size of the head of a pin.

If objects don't have a pull, but rather space has a push, then please explain high tides and their relation to the moon.

Also, if gravity is a push instead of a pull, please explain how orbits work.

That's all folks!

Matt

I think the bigger picture here is this..

As the theorys on gravity have yet to be conclusively proven, we could all make up our own theorys on what gravity actually is and how it acts ;)

Therefore, my theory is that gravity is made up of invisible strawberry milkshakes, please prove me wrong :)

Regards,

Lee

How do YOU know that? When was your last trip to outer space?

From your original theory, the body should "re-assemble" itself under water since the "gravity" of water pushes shit back together to fill this so called "void" you were talking about.

The idea of force from space producing gravity is only part of it. Without the rotation of the earth (on any access) or our solar system, gravity would break down. The larger the object?s mass the more pressure that can be added to the object, much like hear on earth.

If you put a non-spinning object in a vacuum it will not create force or pressure. The space will simply displace and make room for the object, creating no more pressure on the item holding the vacuum. If you spin the object, it creates force, if you move the object it will just simply move like we do through space, if you break it apart so it no longer has center force and the object will displace and never return. If you add in something, larger, spinning in the vacuum (like the sun) the displaced object will be pulled toward the larger object.


Very simple.. With your own theory, if you broke the earth apart. Then EACH object would now have an equal amount of EVEN pressure and would have no chance of being pushed back into that void, which wouldn?t be a void anymore because space would have filled it as soon as the object was displaced.

Your theory might work if earth was the center of the universe and 1000?s of times larger than any other object spinning in space.

blackmonsters thank you for sharing your views, very interesting points.
You should think about drawing up a formal paper and summiting it for review to the proper academy.

It's sphere not spheer , your college sucks.

LMAO :1orglaugh

Ok.. i found a huge flaw in your theory

If gravity is a push.. then when you go underground... you will be weightless because the ground above you is blocking the gravity.

only... that doesnt happen.

Yes they are so to fully answer a previous question about a planet with the same surface but more mass then earth you need only realize that the weight of the planet(mass) is pushing against space also much like a big boat pushing against the surface of the sea. The bigger boat creates more pressure on the surface and will displace water; but the weight of space is far more than any ocean and no planet is big enough to displace space thus space pushes back on the object with the same pressure created by the mass of the object.

Analogy: Take a drum and tighten the head of the drum to a set point(this is the weight of space); now select two balls(planets) of different weight. Each ball will make a different size impression on the drum head when rested on top. The deeper impression will create the most tension on the drum head; so even though the drum head(weight of space) is stable and set it still pushes harder against the more massive object.

It's clear hear that when both balls are rested on the drum head the heavier ball will affect the pressure on the smaller ball if the smaller ball is close enough. If the big ball is big enough it will indent the drum head to the point where the smaller ball will be sucked in and possibly collide. If you move the bigger ball on the surface the smaller ball will also move(if close enough).
If the bigger ball is moved in a circle the smaller ball will be forced to circle around the large one as in orbit.
So add 8 more differrent sized balls to the drum head and move the bigger ball in a circle and you will create the solar system.

And if it's a pull then U R weightless when above ground since the ground is now blocking the gravity pulling from the center of the earth.
NOTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't type "NOT" nerly fucking big enough for that line of bullshit.

Too much emphasis on rocks in the countering opinions.
When the mass of the exploded earth returns it need not return any solid rock; I already stated that the earth will lose and even gain mass in these events. The amount of solid rock on earth is a drop in the bucket to its full mass. Earth(planets) were formed from gases that melded to form liquid and rock. If the earth exploded; it's core, it's water and the atmosphere would become gases again and will not travel very far away. This gas is the matter that will be pushed back into the void and compressed once again into a sphere. But as I also stated earlier; over enough time actual rock will begin to return.

But also as you said; if earth were the biggest body in space by a huge enough magnitude it would absolutely reassemble since it's void would be the most powerful "black hole" in space.

I really think that you are saying many of the same things I am but just using a bit differrent explanation.

That actually made me laugh out loud!! Thank you! I needed a good laugh today!

In 5 billion years when the sun's lifecycle is almost over it will grow into a red giant and it will expand out to the orbit or Mars so the Earth is toast. Then when the sun finally dies what's left of the Earth( if anything ) will orbit a cold dead star.

hahahahahahahaha

First; there is no void in the earth's ocean as I propose is in space.
But if I could create a void in the ocean that could only be filled by matter other than the ocean then the dudes ass and all it's pieces would be pressed into this void. I already said that the World Trade Center will not reassemble. I state that the matter that formed it will return to the general area of earth. The void is not in the ocean in this analogy but rather it is on the shore.

The ocean is not a model of space, it is just being used to relate some similar properties.

The void and pressure thing when relating to water is like the big bubble in the water taking up smaller bubbles around it to form a even bigger bubble.

Surley you can imagine what would happen if you were swimming in the sea when a 10,000 foot radius air bubble appeared beneath you.
You would fucking fall into that void and also shit in your swim trunks.

Actually you're wrong since nothing touches anything else. No "matter" is really solid it's just TIGHTLY CLUMPED particles bound by energy...So that big ass ocean full of water is full of a bunch of water molecules that are not actually touching each other...

And if you want to use another analogy, (like you love to use), What about a big mountain in the middle of the ocean? Isn't that like a planet in the middle of space?

We could go on and on and back and forth with all kinds of analogies and if this was Harvard and not GFY, we could.....but what it boils down to is that neither one of us, nor anybody on this board REALLY knows what it's all about. It's only theories...

So, you went to college & got a degree in nuclear science or some shit, but you sell porn on the internet?

Maybe you should go buy some baking soda and pour some vinegar in it; you might then start crying after realizing who stupid you are to not have done this 3rd grade level experiment already.

I claimed I was smart; I never claimed I wasn't horny. :1orglaugh

lol,thats like saying if you go on the roof of your house you will fly away because your house is blocking gravity.

interesting read

BlackMonsters please contact me.. wanna discuss another theory with you

ICQ : 30898463

I don't do ICQ.

spill it here on the board so the rest of gfy can kill us. :1orglaugh

BM, whats your thoughts on string theory, gravitons, 11 dimensions, branes, etc?

hehe, most people likes to live inside the box.. going to work .. picking up the children .. watching TV .. go to sleep

Your theory is "funny" .. what energy is pushing all the matter so all the matter pushes the earth?

About the other theory I started this thread : http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=454374

It's just the classic matrix one .. which I like alot

hehe, yeah.. it kinda makes it hard to explain black holes

that might be plausible in a vacum (and i don't mean vacum of space, i mean a system where no other forces are acting on the object in question), but in practicality that is silly. there are too many variables including the gravity from our close neighbors like the sun and the moon.

some interesting points but i think its sheer imagination

based on......?
every theory is a good theory, simply cuz nobody knows.

Bottom line here folks is that I came up with the theory and that's more than my critics can do.

But lets get to my basic claims and forget about earth exploding and all that.

My basic claim (theory) is that :

1. Space is a massive body with a mass of it's own.
2. Space does not exert a force it's force is merely it's weight.
3. Space does not roll like the sea but it's weight and pressure is similar in that going deep into it increases the pressure on a object.
4. This pressure deep in space in what creates gravity
5. Were are certainly deep in space because no motherfucker will ever see the top. :1orglaugh



Any reasonably intelligent person should be able to see that these 5 points are a much better explanation of gravity than the notion that every celestial body magically starts sucking shit into it like a magnet.

you ignored someone's earlier question, about how do you explain high-tides & the moon correlation ?