Gravity - How it Works

[Teotihuacan]

hmm... "gaviton orbit" may be his eupheurism for earth bound, but that aside..

 

It is possible to be looking through a Spyglass, backward.

 

If Gravity, although being the weakest of the forces, propogates itself across all dimensions... then, of course, it's agent of propogation would have to be unidimensional.

 

Gravity would be the force responsible for the clumping together of matter and the massive expansion of space. No mystery.

 

Just as electrons seem to be made of the same "non-substance" as a theoretical graviton may be, then gravitrons could be tachyons too. At different levels, maybe "smaller" as you suggest. Since elctromagnetism is a 2D propogation. 1D may be even less. **note free elctrons gather on surfaces, discharge at points.

 

Cosmic Rays are the closest to unidimensional objects we have in this Universe. Gravity could be a venturi type phenomena, drawing floated objects together, while space expands with the passage of time.

 

Teotihuacan

[ryguy81538]

Teo, thank you so much for giving some actual feedback. Let me clarify a few of my ideas.

 

hmm... "graviton orbit" may be his eupheurism for earth bound' date=' but that aside..

Teotihuacan[/quote']

 

I'm referring to a graviton orbital in a similar way that an electron orbits the nucleus of an atom, with the exception that in the 4th-diminsion a 3rd-D body would have area but no mass to make the orbit unstable. This creates the phenomenon that I was referring to from the Wired article, where the "programmable-matter" has all of the electron formation and will interact with other atoms as though they were real but no nucleus to make them unstable. I believe the "mass" of the nucleus is the cause. Therefore the gravitons if they exist in the 4th-D they would be able to support the huge orbitals of stellar bodies but without the instability of mass.

 

If Gravity' date=' although being the weakest of the forces, propogates itself across all dimensions... then, of course, it's agent of propogation would have to be unidimensional.

Teotihuacan[/quote']

 

Gravitons must be unidimensional as are electrons. The 4th-D has been proven to exist in that the only way to rectify electron spin is that they pass in and out of the 3rd and 4th-D.

 

 

Just as electrons seem to be made of the same "non-substance" as a theoretical graviton may be' date=' then gravitrons could be tachyons too. At different levels, maybe "smaller" as you suggest. Since elctromagnetism is a 2D propogation. 1D may be even less. **note free elctrons gather on surfaces, discharge at points.

Teotihuacan[/quote']

 

If the electro-magnetic flux is the fastest known force known to man, we must assume gravitons are smaller than photons to satisfy the theory of relativity.

 

Thanks again for the intelligent feedback, I really appreciate the positive response.

[Nevermore]

Jesus man! Your unintelligent scifi buzz words will not work here. I'm afraid I have to give you a good whack with the psudoscience stick.

[bascule]

Well, I don't think that anyone who's bashing me has actually read the article link I posted for Wired Magazine.

 

I did, fairly interesting, but it didn't help to elucidate your nonsensical drivel...

 

Perhaps you could try to rephrase your original post? Maybe include, I dunno, some math along with your "theory"?

[Daecon]

It would seem to be that a big part of your hypothesis hinges on the fact that the graviton is real. It may not be.

 

If the electro-magnetic flux is the fastest known force known to man, we must assume gravitons are smaller than photons to satisfy the theory of relativity.

Photons are massless energy quanta, they don't have size so saying the graviton is smaller is not an issue.

 

Admitedly I'm not expert on quantumn physics, but photons can have different amplitudes and frequency, etc. - I don't know if this means that one photon can have more energy than another?

 

Either way - you probably can't get 'less' energy than can be carried by a photon, due to restrictions on the amount of energy that can be transferred at any one moment by a force carrier - I think Planck discovered that.

 

Again, it's another reason why you can't have anything smaller than a photon to account for the graviton's need to satisfy relativity...

[CanadaAotS]

Ok, I starting to sort of make sense of what your saying....

 

Are you trying to propose that gravitons are faster then photons?

And that when you say "smaller" you mean unidimensional?

 

One thing that you seem to have ignored again and again is that the 4th dimesion is time. I don't understand why the earth would be massless in 4 dimensions? its already in 4 dimensions! time is going by... :'p

[Klaynos]

Ok' date=' I starting to sort of make sense of what your saying....

 

Are you trying to propose that gravitons are faster then photons?

And that when you say "smaller" you mean unidimensional?

 

One thing that you seem to have ignored again and again is that the 4th dimesion is time. I don't understand why the earth would be massless in 4 dimensions? its already in 4 dimensions! time is going by... :'p[/quote']

 

People always miss the 4thD=time trick.... I'm a 4D moving object I'm travelling forward in time at a rate of 1ss^-1

 

 

If the electro-magnetic flux is the fastest known force known to man, we must assume gravitons are smaller than photons to satisfy the theory of relativity.

 

I'm sure I've seen this stated by a resident expert somewhere on the forums recently but here goes again:

 

elctri-magnetic flux is NOT a force, magnetic flux is by definition a flux.

Forces do not have a velocity or speed.

The electromagnetic force carrier is the photon which travells at c, which is what it is belived that if the graviton does exist then it will also propegate at c, as it is the force carrier for the gravitational force... Photons have no real worldy dimentions, we can talk about their wavelength and other quantities but not a set size.

 

Someone mentioned energy of a photon, a photons energy is proportional to it's frequency:

 

E=hf

 

Where E is it's energy, h is planks constant and f is it's frequency.

 

 

||edit found the thread post I refered to:

http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showpost.php?p=230095&postcount=6

[Dave]

Moved to Speculations. It's clearly not Classical Physics, that's for sure.

[Martian]

No, not really. While the understanding of gravity is undoubtedly incomplete, a full knowledge would not in any way imply that antigravity is possible. Seeing as it would violate the first law of thermodynamics, one would tend to conclude the opposite.

 

If you run on a treadmill faster than it spins you will move forward. Climb gravity faster than it pulls (speed of light) then you will in effect repel it. Not necessarily anti-gravity, but I use the term for fun. Its just figuring out how to trick the speed of light into thinking its been exceeded is the problem. This, of course, is gibberish to a learned person I'm sure.