Gravity!

[Relative]

 

You have no basis for your opinion other than, as you say, it "does not compute in your brain". This is a problem for you, not for the existing theories. You either need to work harder at understanding the current models (and why they work and should therefore be accepted) or give up completely. Those are the only two sensible alternatives. Just making stuff up is a waste of time. It will tell you nothing useful.

 

 

Put two magnets close together and they will be attracted to one another. They will NOT repel each other. You can confirm this for yourself after a quick visit to a toy shop. It is this sort of denial of reality that makes your "theories" so ridiculous.

 

 

Calculate the relative strengths of the forces and you will immediately see that it is NOT correct.

Firstly , I am not making things up, my ideas are calculated , not by maths but by logical reasoning, you say magnets do not repel yet I can push a magnet with another magnet and they will not touch.

 

I do experiments if you remember.

 

 

 

And you say calculate the relevant strengths, not considering equilibrium needs little F to become offset in a near vacuum.

Added - The Earth's magnetic field repels EMR.

[Strange]

you say magnets do not repel yet I can push a magnet with another magnet and they will not touch.

 

You are holding one of the magnets. Who is holding the Sun?

 

 

And you say calculate the relevant strengths, not considering equilibrium needs little F to become offset in a near vacuum.

 

Nonsense. Calculate the forces involved (it isn't hard). Then come back if you think you still have a case.

[Sensei]

The Earths magnetism is made in the core, it expands outwards until it meets an opposing force, i.e the sun F of magnetism.

 

Mars doesn't have magnetosphere. Does it also not have gravity?

 

What with rock meteors?

What with ice comets?

[Relative]

You are holding one of the magnets. Who is holding the Sun?

 

 

Nonsense. Calculate the forces involved (it isn't hard). hen come back if you think you still have a case.

Nothing needs to hold the Sun, you are just been silly now and awkward, the Physics in my diagram works, imagine putting two balls inside an elastic band, or magnets, that were repelling each other, both balls want to travel away from each other, but the elastic band contains them, I do not need to hold any of it. the force is still there, Calculate the forces involved, that is what they probably said to Faraday, did it make him any less incorrect because he could not do the maths?

 

 

I need a Maxwell.

 

 

 

Mars doesn't have magnetosphere. Does it also not have gravity?

 

What with rock meteors?

What with ice comets

Mars has a core, nothing says that Mars is not magnetic in the core, just because there is no external field been created.

[swansont]

The pond was to represent waves, The Physical process of opposite reaction, all movement creates opposite motion in time and space, A comet will have a comet tail, a ship at sea will have a trail behind it,

That's not what the principle of action/reaction states.

 

The suns pattern ,shape of fields and energy will be directional opposite to direction of the suns travel axis.

 

 

An Ellipse orbit can be only created by forward movement of the sun,

Not required in Newtonian gravity, so to say it can "only" be done this way is trivially falsified.

[Strange]

Nothing needs to hold the Sun, you are just been silly now and awkward

 

Nope. Let go of the magnets and they will be attracted to one another. The only reason they repel is that your forcing an unnatural configuration on them. There is nothing forcing the Sun and Earth into such a configuration.

 

You mention an elastic band. Well, imagine that works in a similar way to gravity (it doesn't but near enough). Tie your two magnets together with an elastic band, stretch it and then let got: does it establish an equilibrium, or odes the elastic pull them close togther until the magnetism takes over and ... SNAP.

 

 

that is what they probably said to Faraday, did it make him any less incorrect because he could not do the maths

 

He did the correct experiments to see what happened rather than bogus ones. What you are doing with the magnets is equivalent to holding a ball up in the air and yelling "antigravity!!!"

[Relative]

strength of A and B would only define distant between the two masses.

 

Nope. Let go of the magnets and they will be attracted to one another. The only reason they repel is that your forcing an unnatural configuration on them. There is nothing forcing the Sun and Earth into such a configuration.

 

You mention an elastic band. Well, imagine that works in a similar way to gravity (it doesn't but near enough). Tie your two magnets together with an elastic band, stretch it and then let got: does it establish an equilibrium, or odes the elastic pull them close togther until the magnetism takes over and ... SNAP.

 

 

He did the correct experiments to see what happened rather than bogus ones. What you are doing with the magnets is equivalent to holding a ball up in the air and yelling "antigravity!!!"

 

 

Holding a ball in the air and shouting anti-gravity, only if the ball was magnetically suspended ,

 

 

I am not tying magnets together, I am allowing the force of repel to reach its distance, then adding a slightly tighter elastic band to the structure, the band will always be taught.

[swansont]

The sun and the Earth push and pull each other by different forces not one force been gravity.

It still follows F = GMm/r^2

 

Call it what you will. The rest if us call it gravity.

[Relative]

 

That's not what the principle of action/reaction states.

 

 

Not required in Newtonian gravity, so to say it can "only" be done this way is trivially falsified.

The opposite reaction to throwing a ball in a pond, is movement of the pond, and the energy is conserved by the pond.

It still follows F = GMm/r^2

 

Call it what you will. The rest if us call it gravity.

I am not arguing gravity with you, I am saying that it is not just gravity that makes the orbits etc, there is several acting forces.

[swansont]

Nothing needs to hold the Sun, you are just been silly now and awkward

No, it's that you are completely missing the point. The magnet has an external force on it, which restricts its motion. The sun is free to move. Thus the examples are not equivalent to each other. If the magnet were free to move it would re-orient and the two magnets would snap together.

The opposite reaction to throwing a ball in a pond, is movement of the pond, and the energy is conserved by the pond.

Still not action/reaction. Newton's laws of motion refer to forces, not movement.

 

"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion

 

 

I am not arguing gravity with you, I am saying that it is not just gravity that makes the orbits etc, there is several acting forces.

No, you're not and that's a problem. You need to actually engage in the argument. Orbiting bodies follow the equation of just one force. i.e. there is absolutely no evidence of any other forces acting on planets and moons. Failure to acknowledge this, or give actual evidence of these other forces, is just rampant denialism (also soapboxing, which is a violation of the general rules, and a specific violation of speculations tules of providing evidence to support your claims)

[Strange]

I am not tying magnets together, I am allowing the force of repel to reach its distance, then adding a slightly tighter elastic band to the structure, the band will always be taught.

 

I know you are not tying them together. But you are describing a situation where there is an attractive force between the Sun and Moon (i.e. gravity). I am suggesting you use elastic to represent this in your simple experiment.

 

Alternatively, just let go of the magnets and see how much they repel.

 

You are faking the results of your "experiment" (it no longer deserves the name) to get the results you want, rather then seeing how magnets really behave.

[Relative]

No, it's that you are completely missing the point. The magnet has an external force on it, which restricts its motion. The sun is free to move. Thus the examples are not equivalent to each other. If the magnet were free to move it would re-orient and the two magnets would snap together.

 

Still not action/reaction. Newton's laws of motion refer to forces, not movement.

 

"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton's_laws_of_motion

 

 

 

No, you're not and that's a problem. You need to actually engage in the argument. Orbiting bodies follow the equation of just one force. i.e. there is absolutely no evidence of any other forces acting on planets and moons. Failure to acknowledge this, or give actual evidence of these other forces, is just rampant denialism (also soapboxing, which is a violation of the general rules, and a specific violation of speculations tules of providing evidence to support your claims)

If i put my elastic bands and balls in space, there will be no change, the band will stay taught,

 

No evidence, really, so you are now saying that there is no force involved in repelling emr?

 

 

The evidence is has clear has day.

The sun gives off energy waves, trying to travel into a wave is a force.

"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

 

The magnetic field v EMR?

Edited September 30, 2014 by Relative

[swansont]

If i put my elastic bands and balls in space, there will be no change, the band will stay taught,

 

No evidence, really, so you are now saying that there is no force involved in repelling emr?

 

 

The evidence is has clear has day.

 

The sun gives off energy waves, trying to travel into a wave is a force.

 

"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

 

 

The magnetic field v EMR?

Perhaps you can cite the relevant experiment(s) that shows the EM forces the sun and earth exert on each other.

[Relative]

Perhaps you can cite the relevant experiment(s) that shows the EM forces the sun and earth exert on each other.

cite?

use quotes?

[Strange]

<groan>

 

Look at how weak the Earth's magnetic field is: it can barely rotate a sliver of metal on a low-friction bearing (e.g. a compass). Can you feel the effects of the Earth's magnetic field when you hold your magnet? No, of course not. The Sun is much further away than the Earth and so its magnetic field here is many millions of times weaker - it won't even affect a compass needle.

 

Now, EMR (light) does have a measurable effect. For example, there are spacecraft planned that use solar sails. However, this force is still much, much smaller than gravity.

 

And then there is the solar wind. But, again, much, much smaller than gravity.

[Relative]

[Strange]

cite?

use quotes?

 

Reference, provide a link to.

cite.jpg

 

Pretty. But irrelevant.

[Relative]

<groan>

 

''Look at how weak the Earth's magnetic field is: it can barely rotate a sliver of metal on a low-friction bearing (e.g. a compass). Can you feel the effects of the Earth's magnetic field when you hold your magnet? No, of course not. The Sun is much further away than the Earth and so its magnetic field here is many millions of times weaker - it won't even affect a compass needle.

 

Now, EMR (light) does have a measurable effect. For example, there are spacecraft planned that use solar sails. However, this force is still much, much smaller than gravity.

 

And then there is the solar wind. But, again, much, much smaller than gravity.''

 

And all these small forces you mention are starting to built up.

 

and the magnetic force of magnet v magnet is strong,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[swansont]

cite?

 

use quotes?

Provide a link to some peer-reviwed publication, or do a calculation yourself and show us where you're getting the numbers. Something that has a whiff of scientific rigor rather than mere hand-waving and repetition of unsubstantiated claims.

[Relative]

 

Reference, provide a link to.

 

Pretty. But irrelevant.

Well it is pretty and the effect caused by the two opposing forces, and ok i will try find some references

Provide a link to some peer-reviwed publication, or do a calculation yourself and show us where you're getting the numbers. Something that has a whiff of scientific rigor rather than mere hand-waving and repetition of unsubstantiated claims.

I will try.

[Strange]

And all these small forces you mention are starting to built up.

 

What evidence do you have for that? And what do you mean by "starting to built up"; do you mean they are stronger today than yesterday?

 

and the magnetic force of magnet v magnet is strong,

 

Stop just denying reality. It is not healthy.

 

You cannot feel the magnetic field of the Earth when holding your magnet.

 

Also: let go of your magnets and tell me if they still repel.

[Relative]

 

 

 

 

 

''The main advantage of an electromagnet over a permanent magnet is that the magnetic field can be rapidly manipulated over a wide range by controlling the amount of electric current. However, a continuous supply of electrical energy is required to maintain the field.''

 

''Magnetic separation is a process in which magnetically susceptible material is extracted from a mixture using a magnetic force. This separation technique can be useful in mining iron as it is attracted to a magnet.''

 

 

''In thermodynamics, work performed by a system is the energy transferred by the system to another that is accounted for by changes in the external generalized mechanical constraints on the system. As such, thermodynamic work is a generalization of the concept of mechanical workin physics.''

 

 

''In physics, a force is said to do work when acting on a body there is a displacement of the point of application in the direction of the force. For example, when a ball is held above the ground and then dropped, the work done on the ball as it falls is equal to the weight of the ball (a force) multiplied by the distance to the ground (a displacement).''

 

 

I am unsure if this is what you want, but this is where my thought just went, Wiki articles, I tried explain a while back about the Doppler, been a switch in direction, either travelling with waves or opposed to the waves , creating more or less force.

 

 

Hence longer wavelengths when travelling in conjuction with the waves,and shorter when opposing the waves.

 

 

The wave having force , energy pressure on the surface.

 

What evidence do you have for that? And what do you mean by "starting to built up"; do you mean they are stronger today than yesterday?

 

 

Stop just denying reality. It is not healthy.

 

You cannot feel the magnetic field of the Earth when holding your magnet.

 

Also: let go of your magnets and tell me if they still repel.

They still repel if i let go until they reach their very own event horizon, an equilibrium of force. But they are still repelling.

mass becomes greater than the force of the magnets

[imatfaal]

!

Moderator Note

 

Sorry Relative, but I have just about had it with this thread. Either start reading other members posts and responding to their questions (almost random copynpasta from wikipedia is not a response) or I will lock it.

 

We like new theories here - but you are just waffling with NO basis in reason, maths or science. Get with the programme or the thread will be locked.

 

[Relative]

 

What evidence do you have for that? And what do you mean by "starting to built up"; do you mean they are stronger today than yesterday?

 

 

Stop just denying reality. It is not healthy.

 

You cannot feel the magnetic field of the Earth when holding your magnet.

 

Also: let go of your magnets and tell me if they still repel.

 

!

Moderator Note

 

Sorry Relative, but I have just about had it with this thread. Either start reading other members posts and responding to their questions (almost random copynpasta from wikipedia is not a response) or I will lock it.

 

We like new theories here - but you are just waffling with NO basis in reason, maths or science. Get with the programme or the thread will be locked.

 

I am sorry I am really trying, I thought wiki quotes were made up of citations, how can i find a citation for a new theory when it has not yet been written? how can I find maths that has not yet been created?

 

 

You say no basis in reason, you are then saying that what I have learnt from science, from wiki is garbage.

 

 

My reasoning is obvious, magnetic field, opposes EMR, your laws state this, Force in the opposite direction,

 

This -

"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

 

 

I do not understand, why my posts keep getting threatened with closure, you can see I am trying,

I used wiki quotes to try to convey my thoughts in your terminology.

 

It would be mean of you to close this thread, I am polite, and do try to answer the questions.

 

No one answers my questions, I asked if the diagram of a,b,c,d squares, if the physical process on that was correct, to what I defined with that example, and if that is correct, that does mean my whole gravity concept is possible also.

you can not deny that my abcd diagram is possible?

[Strange]

They still repel if i let go

 

No they don't. If you put two magnets close to each other they will be attracted to one another. Billions of people have experienced this over thousands of years.