Notices
Results 1 to 32 of 32

Thread: Gravityguru's theory of gravity

  1. #1 how gravity works 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    1) Space is not empty. It is filled with matter that is much less dense than atomic matter (for naming purposes we will call it dark matter). Space does not want to be empty. This gives dark matter an elastic effect. Dark matter is thicker and thinner but it is not quantitative (meaning that it is not made up of individual pieces).

    2) Gravity is caused by the expansion of dark matter. Think of it this way; you have a container filled with gas. If you shrink that container everything in it repels each other. The more you shrink it, the more they repel each other. Visa versa. If you expand the container they will attract each other. The more the container is expanded the more they will attract each other. This means that gravity is simply caused by negative pressure in a realm where actual empty space doesnít want to be empty.

    3) All atomic matter is made of dark matter. Its configuration of densities determines what it is. This has to be so because atomic matter came into existence. Matter is neither gained nor lost. It had to come from somewhere. The only explanation is that the mass was already there and is still there.

    4) After the big bang dark matter was not expanded sufficiently enough for atomic matter to hold itself together. As dark matter expanded, the strength of gravity increased. At a curtain point gravity became strong enough for atomic mass to come into existence. As the strength increased stars and galaxies started forming. This process will continue until all atomic matter will coalesce into one point. When this happens the breaking point of the universe will break and all the matter will be dispersed in one gigantic explosion; the big bang. If everything in our container that is expanding repels each other it will cause dark matter to shrink. This process will repeat itself infinitely because energy is neither gained nor lost. This means that it is actually true perpetual motion. It will continue forever.

    5) You have two marbles. One marble bounces off of the other marble. The exchange in kinetic energy is calculated by the amount of mass marble A has in relation to marble B and the velocity marble A has when it hits marble B. If marble A had no mass marble B would not move because there would be no exchange in energy. Marble A would have no energy. In photovoltaicís photons bounce electrons out of their orbit to jump across the bang gap. If photons had no mass, than they would have no influence on electrons when they collided. The main reason photons were thought to have no mass is because you can make an infinite amount of photons without loosing any atomic mass from the atoms they came from. This canít be true because if they had no mass they would not have any influence on atoms. So the only other explanation is that when electrons go from an excited state to a less excited state they are actually crushing dark matter into photons.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    as an additional note, heat is how fast something is spinning. think of a ball in water. the faster the ball spins the bigger the whirlpool will be. two whirlpools cannot overlap because they would slow each other down. there is no other form of energy besides movement. there is no hidden phenomena. everything has to be explained in the form of movement. pressure causes movement. so, electricity carries energy because it is spinning. when you take that energy you are changing spinning to directional movement. think of it simply, there is matter and it is moving. how determines what.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    please poke holes in my theory. it allows me to refine it
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: how gravity works 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    1) Space is not empty. It is filled with matter that is much less dense than atomic matter (for naming purposes we will call it dark matter). Space does not want to be empty. This gives dark matter an elastic effect. Dark matter is thicker and thinner but it is not quantitative (meaning that it is not made up of individual pieces).

    2) Gravity is caused by the expansion of dark matter. Think of it this way; you have a container filled with gas. If you shrink that container everything in it repels each other. The more you shrink it, the more they repel each other. Visa versa. If you expand the container they will attract each other. The more the container is expanded the more they will attract each other. This means that gravity is simply caused by negative pressure in a realm where actual empty space doesnít want to be empty.

    3) All atomic matter is made of dark matter. Its configuration of densities determines what it is. This has to be so because atomic matter came into existence. Matter is neither gained nor lost. It had to come from somewhere. The only explanation is that the mass was already there and is still there.

    4) After the big bang dark matter was not expanded sufficiently enough for atomic matter to hold itself together. As dark matter expanded, the strength of gravity increased. At a curtain point gravity became strong enough for atomic mass to come into existence. As the strength increased stars and galaxies started forming. This process will continue until all atomic matter will coalesce into one point. When this happens the breaking point of the universe will break and all the matter will be dispersed in one gigantic explosion; the big bang. If everything in our container that is expanding repels each other it will cause dark matter to shrink. This process will repeat itself infinitely because energy is neither gained nor lost. This means that it is actually true perpetual motion. It will continue forever.

    5) You have two marbles. One marble bounces off of the other marble. The exchange in kinetic energy is calculated by the amount of mass marble A has in relation to marble B and the velocity marble A has when it hits marble B. If marble A had no mass marble B would not move because there would be no exchange in energy. Marble A would have no energy. In photovoltaicís photons bounce electrons out of their orbit to jump across the bang gap. If photons had no mass, than they would have no influence on electrons when they collided. The main reason photons were thought to have no mass is because you can make an infinite amount of photons without loosing any atomic mass from the atoms they came from. This canít be true because if they had no mass they would not have any influence on atoms. So the only other explanation is that when electrons go from an excited state to a less excited state they are actually crushing dark matter into photons.
    this is ridiculous.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    as an additional note, heat is how fast something is spinning. think of a ball in water. the faster the ball spins the bigger the whirlpool will be. two whirlpools cannot overlap because they would slow each other down. there is no other form of energy besides movement. there is no hidden phenomena. everything has to be explained in the form of movement. pressure causes movement. so, electricity carries energy because it is spinning. when you take that energy you are changing spinning to directional movement. think of it simply, there is matter and it is moving. how determines what.
    this is even more ridiculous
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    It's weird. But come on DrRocket can't you show how the model doesn't work? Make it do something, by it's rules, with result different than expected observation.
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    at least tell me why its ridiculous. not that it just is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    i wanted constructive criticism. not criticism.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    at least tell me why its ridiculous. not that it just is.

    Case in point:

    2) Gravity is caused by the expansion of dark matter. Think of it this way; you have a container filled with gas. If you shrink that container everything in it repels each other. The more you shrink it, the more they repel each other. Visa versa. If you expand the container they will attract each other. The more the container is expanded the more they will attract each other. This means that gravity is simply caused by negative pressure in a realm where actual empty space doesnít want to be empty.
    Everything you said in this paragraph is patently false.

    Compressing a gas does not cause the gas to repel itself. There will be an increase in pressure, but that is caused by the fact that the gas it made up of moving molecules. The pressure is caused by the collisions of these molecules. As you compress the gas the molecules are closer together and collide more often. So a 1 cm square area gets more molecules colliding with it per sec when the gas is compressed than it does uncompressed, which equates to more force acting on it, meaning higher pressure.

    Expanding the container just reduces the number of collisions and the pressure, there is no decrease in repulsion and definitely no increase in attraction.

    The idea that space doesn't want to empty, or that "Nature abhors a vacuum" as Aristotle put it, died a proper death ages ago.

    You said that you want "constructive criticism", but there is nothing here to constructively criticize, It is just faulty reasoning built on misconception.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    what about the part about space not being empty. logic is telling me that if you can make an infinite amount of photons without loosing any mass from the atoms they came from that they are appearing out of thin air. no matter how you look at it, if photons exist and exert kinetic force upon atomic matter than they have to be made of something. they cant very well just appear. so the only conclusion is there is something there for them to be made out of. and if that something is not quantitative than it doesnt have quantitative properties. it would have wavelike properties. so if this is true than maybe pressure is the answer? i cant think of any other way to explain it. maybe i should read a dictionary.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    139
    Also, from point 1:

    If you cannot quantize something, it is unmeasurable, and if it is unable to be measured, how can you prove it exists?

    From point 3:

    If everything is made of dark matter, then all matter is dark matter, and logically dark matter must have already been discovered because it is matter. Since you just stated that everything is matter, and we already knew that, and you previously stated that emptiness is also matter, please tell us how to measure the matter in a vacuum.

    From point 4:

    You contradict point two by saying the rapid expansion of matter after the big bang caused more intense gravity forming celestial bodies, but you said that the more space there is the "thinner" dark matter is making gravity less (in 2).

    From point 5:

    This entire point is based on several misconceptions. Firstly, there is a mass to a photon, it is considered negligible, and is measured in eV. Secondly, large scale physics do not always work on atomic scale. The way transistors/diodes/photovoltaic cells/etc work is very different than what you describe. In a photovoltaic cell the energy of the photon is "absorbed" and electrons attempt to pass through the band gap. An electron can only make the complete jump when the energy is equal to or greater than the band gap energy. Once that electron loses that amount of energy it moves back to its original place. This has nothing to do with the model you are visualizing. The explanation given to you was an analogy to help you understand it. Finally, since photons do have mass and energy, and the energy of the photon is transferred to the atom, the idea of crushing dark matter in the transition is absurd.

    There, I hope that was constructive enough. Good luck rewriting.
    --
    -M

    "Those that would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    -Benjamin Franklin, An Historical Review of Pennsilvanya, 1759
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    139
    To your most immediate post, read my first post.

    Space is not empty, there is ambient radiation (lots of it), and other particles, but the space is so large that they are not densely packed as they are here on Earth. That is why we consider space empty, because the stuff in it is pretty much negligible.

    Finally, photons are created from energy. Specifically, they are forms of "light" energy. The Energy-Mass relation tells us that they must have mass, even though it is insignificantly tiny.

    Don't forget the particle/wave duality.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2...rticle_duality
    --
    -M

    "Those that would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    -Benjamin Franklin, An Historical Review of Pennsilvanya, 1759
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13 Re: how gravity works 
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,255
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    1) Space is not empty. It is filled with matter that is much less dense than atomic matter (for naming purposes we will call it dark matter).
    Space is actually full of "atomic" matter. The complete absense of matter has not been pbserved.

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    Space does not want to be empty.
    Then why do gases diffuse?

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    This gives dark matter an elastic effect. Dark matter is thicker and thinner but it is not quantitative (meaning that it is not made up of individual pieces).
    Experiments have shown that there is no overall substance that the universe (the ether), as the speed of light remains constant, regardless of the direction the observer is moving in. If there were areas of mroe or les dense dark matter everywhere, the speed of light would change depending on location (it does not).

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    2) Gravity is caused by the expansion of dark matter. Think of it this way; you have a container filled with gas. If you shrink that container everything in it repels each other. The more you shrink it, the more they repel each other. Visa versa. If you expand the container they will attract each other. The more the container is expanded the more they will attract each other. This means that gravity is simply caused by negative pressure in a realm where actual empty space doesnít want to be empty.
    The gravitational attraction between two objects is directly proportional to their mases, it does not stay the same at all times in one area. Also by this explanation, there should no longer be a gravitational pull once an area i occupied by matter (e.g. Earth).

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    3) All atomic matter is made of dark matter. Its configuration of densities determines what it is. This has to be so because atomic matter came into existence. Matter is neither gained nor lost. It had to come from somewhere. The only explanation is that the mass was already there and is still there.
    But that is not an explanation at all. As well to say, everything has always been as it is now.

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    4) After the big bang dark matter was not expanded sufficiently enough for atomic matter to hold itself together. As dark matter expanded, the strength of gravity increased. At a curtain point gravity became strong enough for atomic mass to come into existence.
    By your explanation of gravity, the attraction should be away from the centre, so that the dark matter becomes thinner and thinner, making "atomic" matter less and less viable. Otherwise, you are saying the dark matter that is everywhere is turning into dense spheres, despite that you say it repells itself.

    The gravitational force on, say, an electron in a vacuum, would be to anywhere that is not inside it so the electron would

    a) never come into existance
    b) spontaneously decay back into dark matter

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    As the strength increased stars and galaxies started forming.
    If gravity is the repulsion between dark matter, and everything is made of dark matter, everything would spread out, not be attracted together.

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    5) You have two marbles. One marble bounces off of the other marble. The exchange in kinetic energy is calculated by the amount of mass marble A has in relation to marble B and the velocity marble A has when it hits marble B. If marble A had no mass marble B would not move because there would be no exchange in energy. Marble A would have no energy. In photovoltaicís photons bounce electrons out of their orbit to jump across the bang gap. If photons had no mass, than they would have no influence on electrons when they collided.
    Photons have energy, therefore they have mass;



    mass is equivelent to energy, and vice versa.

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    The main reason photons were thought to have no mass is because you can make an infinite amount of photons without loosing any atomic mass from the atoms they came from.
    Not true at all. Mass is lost in nuclear fission and fusion, and in gamma decay.
    "The major difference between a thing that might go wrong and a thing that cannot possibly go wrong is that when a thing that cannot possibly go wrong goes wrong it usually turns out to be impossible to get at or repair." ~ Douglas Adams
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    thanx for the posts. you have all given me loads to think upon.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    my brain hurts! i still cant figure out photons. how do they appear out of nowhere if they have mass. this is plaguing me to no end. only thing i can think of is that what they are made of is already there and being crushed into photons. but than theres the problem that if what they were made of is already there than why dont they unravel themselves like drowsy turtle said? one option i thought of is that they are spinning. that thought came to me while i was holding my external hard drive in my hand. while stationary it doesnt move. but when i go to turn it around i feel a resistance like its trying to hold on to space itself. maybe because its in motion it wants to stay in that motion allowing for the difference in pressures to not equalize. so the main question is what are they made of and how do they stay together?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    and as an observation, photons dont travel at the same speed everywhere. they travel slower when moving through thicker material. for example: when light travels through water it can only travel at 2/3 the speed of light. light speed is the speed if light in the vacuum of space. also, what if light does travel at different speeds through different regions of space and we dont know it because we have only measured the speed of light here. we have not measured the speed of light anywhere else. this could be useful for faster than light travel. stretch space thin so theres less resistance while traveling. of course the thinner it is the less there is to push off of. maybe the inverse of these properties keeps the constant the same. my brain is hurting again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    139
    Actually, if light traveled at a different speed somewhere else, then that area would be studied for some unknown substance. If nothing were found, our area would be studied in depth. If still nothing were found, someone would compare both regions to a third neutral region, or other regions where the speed was known.

    If more regions where the speed was known match our original value, it would be concluded that our original value is correct and some unknown substance is affecting it in the other region. The other region would continue to be studied until the solution was found.

    That's how science works. Slow and steady, but eventually the answer would be found.

    I can't help you with your mass issue.
    --
    -M

    "Those that would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    -Benjamin Franklin, An Historical Review of Pennsilvanya, 1759
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    and as an observation, photons dont travel at the same speed everywhere. they travel slower when moving through thicker material.
    Pretty sure that's not what drowsy was on about. He meant that outside of obvious cases such passing through conventional matter or interacting with gravitational fields, we don't observe variations in the speed at which light travels.

    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    for example: when light travels through water it can only travel at 2/3 the speed of light.
    3/4 :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19 photons????? 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    ok, so ive decided to take my theory on gravity one step at a time and start where i first started coming up with the idea. i figure we can logically debate it one step at a

    time unstead of trying to post everything in a unorganized clump.
    I first started thinking about photons. we know that when electrons in an atom go from an excited state to a less excited state that the atoms emit photons. we also know that when photons bounce off of electrons in a solar panel they give kinetic energy knocking them from the atoms to jump across the bang gap. because of this we know that A: they have mass, and B: they are made of something. the two main questions id like to debate are what are they made of and how do they appear out of thin air.

    my current assumption is that whatever they are made of (whether it be dark matter or something else) is everywhere and that they are condensed into photons out of this material. one flaw i can point out in this theory is that everything wants to equalize in pressure. so why dont they just unravel themselves? whats holding them from unpressurizing. one theory i have is that they are spinning. matter in motion tends to stay in motion. when they stop spinning is when they are absorbed by atoms and they atom take the release in energy in the form of heat (which causes the electrons to move to a more excited state. the opposite of making photons)

    can anyone see a more logical way this can happen?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20 Re: photons????? 
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,197
    Quote Originally Posted by gravityguru
    ok, so ive decided to take my theory on gravity one step at a time and start where i first started coming up with the idea. i figure we can logically debate it one step at a

    time unstead of trying to post everything in a unorganized clump.
    I first started thinking about photons. we know that when electrons in an atom go from an excited state to a less excited state that the atoms emit photons. we also know that when photons bounce off of electrons in a solar panel they give kinetic energy knocking them from the atoms to jump across the bang gap. because of this we know that

    A: they have mass,
    Nope. At least not mass in the way that electrons do. They have energy, and therefore momentum.
    Photons are self-propagating changes in electric and magnetic fields(an electromagnetic wave). An accelerating charge(such as an electron) produces a changing electric field, which in turn produces a changing magnetic field, etc. Conversely, a changing electric field can disturb or move an charge. The term photon refers to the smallest discrete energy an electromagnetic wave of a given frequency can be divided into.


    and B: they are made of something.
    Again, they are "made of" electric and magnetic fields, they are not made of any material substance.


    I'm sorry, but you just do not have a strong enough grasp of the current state of knowledge to be proposing theories on the nature of gravity or photons. You need to listen and learn more and opine less.
    "Men are apt to mistake the strength of their feelings for the strength of their argument.
    The heated mind resents the chill touch & relentless scrutiny of logic"-W.E. Gladstone


    Edit/Delete Message
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    ok fine ill wait until im done with physics this semester. chemistry obviously wasnt enough.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    ty for the insight though. i am listening.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23 revised gravity theory with experiment 
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    i have spent some time thinking and have come up with a way to prove how gravity works. i think most everything is included in the video i made of the experiment i did. if you have any comments on it please let me here them. they help me to gain more understanding.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsL7uOZOwiI
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    1)ok so, photons are waves in the fabric of space/time. just like waves in a pool of water. a wave is kinetic energy flowing through something else. this explains why they dont have mass.

    2)because sound and photons are waves we can compare them. the speed of sound is related to the speed of light. it is the measure of how fast a wave can move through a set body. the only difference is that the fabric of space/time is non-quantitative and air is quantitative. so the properties are going to be slightly different.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    1 2 3
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,328
    Pleasant video, and it illustrates something... I'm unsure that's exactly how you mean gravity to work though.

    The masses must impinge on the fabric, there. I mean they have to pop into existence, forcing the fabric aside. Either that, or the fabric must be falling around the masses. Also, in your experiment the pencils' movement is restricted. They can't touch. But that could be corrected if instead of rubber band you use old oatmeal, which is fluid yet elastic. Why not cook some oatmeal with raisons in it, so from the beginning we have masses embedded in the fabric of space?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    i figured that a rubber band has elastic energy and that space/time does too. and yes i do think that space/time sits around mass. i dont know how i would use an elastic liquid because earths gravity would overpower my independent variables and give me false data. and i cant get to outer space to do the experiment. ive seen some videos on gravity experiments that used a balance beam floating on water to cancel out earths gravity, but i cant think of a way to apply that to the entire experiment. it might work if i have the masses on the bottom of the container. but then i would need a super perfect flat bottom to the container and it would have to be perfectly horizontal. and also i wouldnt know if it was the elastic effect of the oatmeal causing the attraction or just gravity (if this isnt the actual way it works gravity would still bring them together). any ideas on how to test it better?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    i need a rubber band in a tube shape(maybe i can use an innertube). and i also need two balls with pressure sensors all over them. i will then put the two balls in the innertube and record the pressure data(data will have to be digital. physical pressure sensors would get bruised while trying to insert and remove them from tubing). after the pressure sensors are inserted i will then stretch the tube so it will contract. this will put more elastic force upon the sensors making it easier to distinguish scientific error from the real measurements. or even better ill us greased up ball bearings. when i stretch the tube they should slide to each other. ill try it out tomorrow. and post another video on the experiment.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    139
    Actually, space is quantitative in the sense you are thinking of. Space attenuates magnetic/electric fields at a rate of 20 dB/decade. (This is in the RF spectrum, it varies per frequency, but in all frequencies there should be an attenuation.)

    So: if you have a source radiating at x=0, at x=10 it is 100 times less than it was at 0. At x = 100 it is 100 times less than at 10, and 10000 less than at 0. etc.


    The speed of sound and the speed of light are completely unrelated. The speed of sound has been broken many times, but the speed of light cannot be.
    --
    -M

    "Those that would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
    safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

    -Benjamin Franklin, An Historical Review of Pennsilvanya, 1759
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    We generally don't delete threads unless there's offensive content or spam. The thread will sink off the page if you simply don't post in it. To be honest, I'd much prefer it if you'd have only on thread per topic. You currently seem to have three threads on the same topic so I may merge these. But I certainly can't delete them without a good reason, especially since other users have replied and I would have to delete their posts too.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31 Gravityguru's theory of gravity 
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,564
    Merging three threads on this topic. Please add any new ideas on your theory to this thread rather than starting new ones.

    Thanks,
    B
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    140
    all i meant is that the speed of sound itself cant break the speed of sound. not comparing matter to it. its how fast the wave can travel through the air. light is how fast the photon can travel through space. but they are both a wave traveling through a body.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •