sas Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 I have written my understanding of gravity into an essay , here is the abstract, "Velocity of an object can affect the gravitational acceleration. Black hole is an example where the light can form a circular orbit in the strong gravitational field. This light is moving around that causes the observer where is not in the path of the light orbit see the black hole as total darkness. In addition, when there is a high velocity of an object has been interacting with the gravitational acceleration, the object is in the micro or zero gravity relative to massive object therefor the gravitational acceleration does no longer exist." You can download the complete essay here : http://vixra.org/abs/1505.0129 I hope to get any comments related to my essay or comments that can give enlightenment to me, thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 ! Moderator Note Specifics should be posted here for discussion. (see rule 2.7) How can you test this? How big is this effect? Say, for an object traveling at 4 km/s, what is the change in g from its nominal value? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 18, 2015 Author Share Posted May 18, 2015 On the surface of earth, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters per second, earth gravitational acceleration is no longer exist to the spinning object. This means that you can put the spinning object in the air without fear of this object will fall down, some people say anti-gravity object. I will edit my post above and this takes time because English is not my primary language, thanks for your note. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) On the surface of earth, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters per second, earth gravitational acceleration is no longer exist to the spinning object. Do you have any evidence to support this claim? And how do you relate spin speed to metres/s? Are you talking about the speed at the circumference? Edited May 18, 2015 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 18, 2015 Author Share Posted May 18, 2015 (edited) I don't have any evidence to support this claim but I use the same principle to calculate the angle of bending light when a light across the surface of the sun, the angle is 1.750511243 arcsecond as I stated on my essay. I also calculate the time dilation for GPS satellite orbitting the earth at the height of 20,200,000 meters, the orbitting clock will run faster compared to the clock stationary on earth per day by 38.568 microsecond using the same principle. I use "the equivalence principle" means that gravitational acceleration on the surface of planet earth at 9.799 m/sec^2 equals to 8,371 m/sec. Edited May 18, 2015 by sas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 On the surface of earth, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters per second, earth gravitational acceleration is no longer exist to the spinning object. This means that you can put the spinning object in the air without fear of this object will fall down, some people say anti-gravity object. That's not a change in g, though. That's just being in free-fall. I don't have any evidence to support this claim but I use the same principle to calculate the angle of bending light when a light across the surface of the sun, the angle is 1.750511243 arcsecond as I stated on my essay. I also calculate the time dilation for GPS satellite orbitting the earth at the height of 20,200,000 meters, the orbitting clock will run faster compared to the clock stationary on earth per day by 38.568 microsecond using the same principle. It's not the same principle - that's from relativity, which does not say anything about a change in acceleration from what we already calculate. You seem to be prediction a deviation from this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 I don't have any evidence to support this claim but I use the same principle to calculate the angle of bending light when a light across the surface of the sun, the angle is 1.750511243 arcsecond as I stated on my essay. How do you calculate that? I use "the equivalence principle" means that gravitational acceleration on the surface of planet earth at 9.799 m/sec^2 equals to 8,371 m/sec. You can't equate acceleration (m/s2) to velocity (m/s). That is like trying to express your height in kilograms. It is meaningless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 18, 2015 Author Share Posted May 18, 2015 That's not a change in g, though. That's just being in free-fall. if you stand on the surface of earth and not being in free-fall, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters/sec, you can put the object anywhere in the air without the object fall down. the g to the object is no longer exist. Being in free fall or being in zero gravity is completely a different situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 if you stand on the surface of earth and not being in free-fall, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters/sec, you can put the object anywhere in the air without the object fall down. the g to the object is no longer exist. You said "I don't have any evidence to support this claim". So please stop repeating this if it is not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 18, 2015 Author Share Posted May 18, 2015 It's not the same principle - that's from relativity, which does not say anything about a change in acceleration from what we already calculate. You seem to be prediction a deviation from this. I just "borrow" the words "equivalence principle" and i don't refer to the "equivalence principle" in relativity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 I just "borrow" the words "equivalence principle" and i don't refer to the "equivalence principle" in relativity. In that case, I will borrow the words "work of genius" but use them to mean something slightly different... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 18, 2015 Share Posted May 18, 2015 if you stand on the surface of earth and not being in free-fall, if you spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 meters/sec, you can put the object anywhere in the air without the object fall down. the g to the object is no longer exist. Being in free fall or being in zero gravity is completely a different situation. The gravity is no actually zero, though. Are you talking about spinning, or an orbit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 18, 2015 Author Share Posted May 18, 2015 You said "I don't have any evidence to support this claim". So please stop repeating this if it is not true. I post under the sub forum speculations and if i know this is true, i will not post in speculations. we can not say it is not true if nobody haven't tried it yet. The gravity is no actually zero, though. Are you talking about spinning, or an orbit? Both, velocity in the spinning object and satellite's velocity while orbiting the earth are the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajb Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 The essay seems very strange. There is talk of time dilation etc while gravity seems to be handled in the Newtonian limit only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travis Hallet Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Both, velocity in the spinning object and satellite's velocity while orbiting the earth are the same. If the earth were to spin this fast there would be no earth caused from centrifugal force ripping the planet apart. Which means yes the gravity would be null. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 19, 2015 Author Share Posted May 19, 2015 The essay seems very strange. There is talk of time dilation etc while gravity seems to be handled in the Newtonian limit only. I tried to explain all the phenomena related to gravity by using the concept of velocity , including but not limited to the inertia , the shape of the orbit , bending light , black hole , time dilation , the speed of milky way galaxy , gravitational constant in a zero gravity environment , etc. I believe that you can not find the concept of velocity in Newtonian and relativity , and this little summary of the concept : "When an object moves from one point to another point in any direction inside the gravity field there is another acceleration acting on this object namely the velocity acceleration. Each moving object will see the velocity acceleration as an effort for any object to overcome these three drag factors, they are gravitational acceleration, fluid and surface. Gravitational acceleration obey square law, in terms of overcoming the gravitational acceleration as a drag. We need another acceleration and can be obtained by applying square law to the velocity so that we get velocity² or v². Then we divide this velocity square with 1 radius as the total exposure in the gravity field so that we will get the velocity acceleration" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 I don't have any evidence to support this claim Seeing as you are contradicting relativity, you fall well short of the mark when you have no evidence, considering the amount of evidence that supports relativity. (There are additional unsupported and bogus assertions in the paper. Gems like "Sun’s gravitational acceleration does no longer exist on the earth and on the moon because of their velocities." Um, tides exist.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 Seeing as you are contradicting relativity, you fall well short of the mark when you have no evidence, considering the amount of evidence that supports relativity. Albert Einstein proposed the deflection of light by the sun as a test of general relativity. I calculated the angle of deflection and time dilation for GPS satellite orbiting the earth using my own equation and and both the results are the same while people calculate them under relativity but I do not consider them as "evidences" to justify my essay because I strongly believe that when one claim he knows the gravity perfectly he has to know how to defy the gravity. I will say I have an evidence if one spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 m/sec and this spinning object does not obey the law of gravity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mordred Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 Feel free to post your mathematics and evidence then. Though one question remains explain how non rotating bodies exert gravity when they have no spin. Or how two bodies of equal mass exert the same force of gravity with two different rotation rates. Keep in mind there has been numerous claims in the past on gyroscopic anti gravity. None has ever been proven, Take a gyroscope stand on a scale spin the gyroscope your weight on the scale will not change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavelcherepan Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 (edited) Please explain what you mean by spinning an object? Say, if I take a gyroscope and spin it really fast, so that outside edge is doing the velocity you mentioned, will it levitate? Edited May 20, 2015 by pavelcherepan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I will say I have an evidence if one spin the object at the velocity of 8,371 m/sec and this spinning object does not obey the law of gravity. Let's have it. It can't be that hard to build such a device. Is the effect proportional to the speed, or does it only "turn on" at 8371 m/s? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 (There are additional unsupported and bogus assertions in the paper. Gems like "Sun’s gravitational acceleration does no longer exist on the earth and on the moon because of their velocities." Um, tides exist.) I agree with your statement, I should not said "sun's gravitational acceleration does not longer exist", but should I said "sun's gravitational acceleration close to zero or at the minimum level on the earth and on the moon because of their velocities", thanks for your input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I agree with your statement, I should not said "sun's gravitational acceleration does not longer exist", but should I said "sun's gravitational acceleration close to zero or at the minimum level on the earth and on the moon because of their velocities", thanks for your input. That is just as untrue as the original version. It is also completely unquantified ("close to zero", "minimum level") and therefore meaningless in a scientific sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted May 20, 2015 Share Posted May 20, 2015 I agree with your statement, I should not said "sun's gravitational acceleration does not longer exist", but should I said "sun's gravitational acceleration close to zero or at the minimum level on the earth and on the moon because of their velocities", thanks for your input. You're welcome, but you're still wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sas Posted May 20, 2015 Author Share Posted May 20, 2015 You're welcome, but you're still wrong. We all agree that the tides due to the gravitational acceleration of the celestial body and on earth the moon is a major influence on the Earth 's tides. Because the moon orbits and the earth, the magnitude of the moon 's gravity acceleration on Earth depends only on moon 's gravitational acceleration GM/r² and not the moon’s velocity acceleration v²/r. On the other hand the earth orbits the sun and the sun 's gravitational acceleration on earth besides depend on the magnitude of the sun 's gravitational acceleration GM/r² also depend on the earth’s velocity acceleration v²/r. Data : Moon Mass (Kg) : 7.3477E+22 Average Distance (meters) : 384,000,000 Sun Mass (Kg) : 1.9891E+30 Gravitational Constant : 6.67428E-11 Average Distance (meters) : 149,600,000,000 Average Velocity (Meters/sec) : 29,780 Sun’s gravity on the earth : GM/r² = 0.0059319550656 V²/r = 0.0059281310160 Moon’s gravity on the earth : GM/r² = 0.0000332577902 The magnitude of the sun's gravitational acceleration on Earth is 178 times bigger than the magnitude of the moon's gravitational acceleration on Earth therefor if we do not take into account the earth 's velocity acceleration, the sun will be the major influence on the Earth 's tides and not the moon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts