 # awaterpon

Senior Members

72

## Everything posted by awaterpon

1. r=cT , at each point from mass the mass spent T time to reach this point in the past.Time T spent at this point in the past multiplied by c equivalent to distance r. We have limited time T instead of infinite distance r.
2. A new equation : F= G mM/(c^2* T^2) T: is from zero to current time since the existence of mass
3. I will think about a new mathematical equation I think I get it now.
4. The math is difficult I will try again. What if I eliminate both time and speed and add r? (1-r/cT)
5. Giving the idea that magnetic field in a wire spread with speed c , my equation would be similar to electrodynamics one , but I couldn't find that equation for electrodynamics where magnetism on wire spread with c speed.
6. Well, when a current is started in wire the magnetic field starts to spread with speed c similar to light itself. Now let's test a point where the magnetic field didn't reach yet.How the equation of the squared proportional distance and force works then. There should be a point when magnetic field drops to zero suddenly .And there would be a place where magnetic field didn't reach " out of range" how the equation applies there? The equation I'm referring to is the magnetic force is inversely proportional to distance r
7. I don't know yet. But should be something similar to what I presented for gravity, the same idea of limited range extendable with speed of light c. I showed a mistake in current physics a magnetized wire if its magnetism spread with c then it should have a limited range of magnetic force and the equation in which force is inversely proportional to squared distance won't apply"out of range" . The same for gravity I described in fact they all have things in common.
8. But magnetism equation is the same as gravity equation in which a magnet can affect a magnet at infinity and force is inversely proportional to the squared distance . If not and magnetism of a wire spread with c then how the equation applies for distances out of range. T here will be measured from the time the magnetic field started in a wire.
9. "It should be for both coulomb's law and magnetism. For a wire when the circuit is closed the magnetic field starts to spread with the speed of light an experiment could be performed to determine whether magnetic field is already available at a point or it will reach that point after a time"it is not logical that the magnetic field already at infinity since we had a current started to flow at specific moment and shouldn't be available before that moment ,so how it would be available everywhere at an instant?" What do you think of this ?
10. Hi Ghideon Thanks for following my idea, Yes I'm using speed instead of velocity the direction is not important whether towards the center or outwards the center of mass, acceleration is just changing in speed v with respect to time t if it is towards or outwards the center it would take effect "gravity change" if it is not it won't take effect.for instance an object at motion in a perfect circle around the earth its gravity won't change unless it changes distance r with some speed v whether inward or outward this object is supposed to have the largest gravity value" being at stationary" although in fact it is accelerating inwards The effective direction is outwards or inwards center so elliptical motion of planets will change its gravity but that will not stop planets being in their orbitals I think increment in v decreases gravity since an object will try to ruin connection between space and matter when at motion
11. v is a variable quantity just like r it is the calculations for gravity for a moving object at speed v. if v is zero then the quantity vt/cT will equal zero in such case gravity for an object at stationary is the largest amount ever while v increases gravity decreases a little bit . t=0 only when v=0 , we start to measure t at object beginning of motion . Anyway gravity decreases with time t as well as it decreases with speed v.
12. No the quantity vt/cT is is always less than or equal to 1 t is measured after or exactly at mass existence so t will never be greater than T if so and v is always less than or equal to c then vt/cT is always less than or equal to 1. In such case " vt is greater than cT " masses will be out of range and gravity" mathematically " is supposed to equal negative but the eqaution won't apply for masses out of range and negative gravity doesn't exist. Notice I didn't consider the other mass range since Inside range means both masses are inside each other's range or at least one is inside the other's range The force between masses is mutual one mass attract another mass with a force the other mass attracts with the same force. each mass attracts with its own force using its own range and this force is mutual .Force is propotional with mass M and mass m. Mathematically and according to my equation exceeding the range edge or zero gravity means negative. That also validate my equation.
13. My equation is the same as Newton's gravitional equation multiplied by this quantity: (1-vt/cT) in which: vt : is the same as r represented by speed v of object and time t It is represented so because we have only two options for two masses whether masses are in each others' range then an object can't exceed range since it can't move with v faster than light or they are out of range then the equation won't work anyway. c : is the speed of light. T : is the time measured since the mass came from nowhere cT: is the changeable range. According to the equation both range cT goes to infinity and distance vt goes to infinity. According to the equation as range increases or as time time T increases gravity in general increases a little bit according to the equation because there would be more space curved behinde the mass.
14. Thanks Ghideon .I read it but I didn't get your point . I'll try to derive an equation from the above one.
15. Wikipedia " In physics and chemistry, the law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant" However energy in the whole universe is being created continuously " infinite mass/energy" and we can somehow add this energy to the system infinitely. Doesn't that mean the system has become a perpetual motion machine creating energy from nothing ? This system is part of the unviverse . "This law means that energy can neither be created nor destroyed" While according to infinite universe , energy is already being created from nothing " infnite mass/energy in the universe"
16. If the entire universe is infinite then total energy on universe is infinite " mass-energy is infinite " then the law of energy conservation is wrong and can't be applied. There should be a finite amount of energy for the system" universe" no more energy is created or added. if energy can't be created , according to infinite universe and mathematically it's already being created since infinity continuse to multiply and increase to " infinity".
17. Your answer is not detailed . could you you explain more? how to apply infinite space-time to finite observable universe?
18. Infinity is unreachable : in time in distance in spreading in mass by mathematics it is clear So how there should be gravity available at infinity if it is unreachable? You say if but there is not evidence that the universe is infinite.
19. You say it's necessary for me to be right that matter came from no where , so what? we know energy is conservative in this universe but we don't know what was before the big bang"the beginning of this unviverse" My idea is not based on the non-existence of matter at some moment but in the unlogical Newtonian view of infinite gravity. So I don't need to present evidence that mass came from nowhere .If the idea that mass came from nowhere is part of my concept then OK noone can prove it didn't came from nowhere and no one has evidence that it is there always. So do matter exist in the past back to infinite time ? this will be another "infinity" wrong idea. It is simple nothing goes with infinity speed nothing weighs infinity nothing spend infinity time nothing spread to infinity distance nothing reaches infinity no other universes will fill the infinity. There is nothing in the universe is infinite and will never be . space and time are not the universe . the are the place in which any possible universe might exist and function so they are infinite " although some scientists say space and time are finite but some say they are infinite and I agree with those who say they are infinite."
20. No one knows what was before the big bang.
21. Guys you mistunderstand me.Gravitional waves and gravity propagation are standard physics but I added that it has a LIMITED RANGE this range is extendable with speed c. Speed c is the common factor for all these concepts that doesn't mean I' m repeating science @swansont understood me well I need now some math for it so that it is complete and great theory.
22. I don't know the mathematics about space-time curvature , what mathematics might be if we add that space time curvature spread out with c ? any ideas?
23. Honestly I'm merely an engineering student so I will just leave it Have come to your mind any math or details about it? Thanks,
24. Does that mean what I proposed won't be accepted in any way?
25. My idea is space-time curvature spreads out with c . mass motion " accelerated one" causes changes in space-time curvature places making new curvatures in space-time these new curvatures spread out with c in form of waves that proves space curvature spreads out with c. Gravitational waves are standard physics but what I proposed is not.
×