Notices
Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: how to create gravitational waves?

  1. #1 how to create gravitational waves? 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2
    found such a wave instruction, is it correct? Can I use this instruction to create gravitational waves at home?
    it would seem that energy should help attract objects. but this is not the case. energy can only push and not attract. energy counteracts gravity. but, the less energy the body contains, the more they attract. this means that cold bodies create a much larger gravitational field than hot bodies. heating and cooling of bodies can cause any event, which means the gravitational field changes every second. each wave has the possibility of resonance. this means that by cooling and heating the body with a certain frequency, we can create a resonance. and so we can see it.impulse force must be such that the wave does not have time to extinguish other waves that are in space. for this you need to use strong impulses. ideal electromagnetic waves. they, having a greater frequency, are able to warm up any objects on their way in space. moreover, the greater the frequency, the more they warm up the objects. perhaps a laser would be suitable for this purpose, but it is not capable of operating at a regulated frequency. Only a high frequency transmitter is suitable for this purpose. even if the resonance frequency is 1kHz, the transmitter should operate in a pulsed mode at a frequency of 100 GHz, with interruptions of 1 kHz, otherwise it will not work to warm up objects. If powerful pulses are used, if the resonant frequency is small, a small source should suffice.
    to create a gravitational field we need a laboratory


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,699
    The quoted "information" is incorrect.


    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by scvitserdyak View Post
    found such a wave instruction, is it correct? Can I use this instruction to create gravitational waves at home?
    I don't know where you copied that from, but it is nonsense. (You shouldn't really copy and paste copyrighted text without providing the source.)

    If you want to generate gravitational waves, just spin two masses around one another.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    New Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    2
    I thought of it myself. I'm sure the method is working.
    The fact is that gravitational waves, passing through space, cause a change in the distances between objects in it. Similarly, a change in the distance between objects should cause waves. It is proved that one body, attracting another body, bends space. If you take a non-massive body, it will also generate waves.
    This is from the category "iron does not evaporate, but we smell it." Or "water can not be compressed but it is compressed."
    Remember the lessons of physics. Solar systems are formed from dust. The dust particles are not massive bodies at all. But they eventually attract one body. Although, they are at a decent distance from each other.
    This means that any bodies, even very small ones, exhibit an interaction.
    During the rotation of black holes in the wave waves enter. But there is one trick. There are no reference points for rotation - there is no such thing that a gravitational wave is emitted strictly after each revolution. The gravitational wave arises from the movement. Thus, if the black holes did not rotate at all, and one of them would have flown past the second, the same wave would have arisen.
    Thus, if the dust particles fly by, they generate the same wave, but very small. If they did not generate any waves, solar systems would not be created.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,699
    Moved to Personal Theories.
    Quote Originally Posted by scvitserdyak View Post
    I thought of it myself.
    It's still wrong.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by scvitserdyak View Post
    it would seem that energy should help attract objects. but this is not the case.
    No. It is the case. Energy causes the curvature of spacetime that we perceive as the force of gravity.

    energy can only push and not attract.
    No. Gravity can can only attract, not push.

    energy counteracts gravity
    No. Energy "causes" gravity.

    but, the less energy the body contains, the more they attract.
    No. If you increase the energy content of a body then you increase the effective mass and hence the gravitational force.

    this means that cold bodies create a much larger gravitational field than hot bodies.
    No. Exactly the other way round.

    heating and cooling of bodies can cause any event, which means the gravitational field changes every second.
    Amazingly, this is correct. Despite every other statement so far sing wrong.

    However, this will not create gravitational waves. You need very specific types of asymmetry to generate gravitational waves.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by scvitserdyak View Post
    I thought of it myself. I'm sure the method is working.
    As you have demonstrated an impressive near-zero knowledge of physics, I don't why you would think that something you made up would work.

    The fact is that gravitational waves, passing through space, cause a change in the distances between objects in it.
    The changes are very specific, because of the quadrupole nature of the waves.

    Similarly, a change in the distance between objects should cause waves.
    You might think that but, again, because of the quadrupole nature of the waves, only specific types of changes (such as two massive bodies orbiting one another) will generate gravitational waves.

    If you take a non-massive body, it will also generate waves.
    Citation needed. (Or, to put it another way: no.)

    This is from the category "iron does not evaporate, but we smell it." Or "water can not be compressed but it is compressed."
    Is this the same category as "I made some shit up so it must be right"?

    Remember the lessons of physics.
    Did you ever have any lessons?

    The dust particles are not massive bodies at all.
    Er, yes they are. Massive = having mass. Dust particles have mass.

    This means that any bodies, even very small ones, exhibit an interaction.
    Obviously. But it is hard to see how this is relevant.

    During the rotation of black holes in the wave waves enter.
    What??

    But there is one trick. There are no reference points for rotation
    Yes, there is. They are orbiting their common centre of mass.

    Thus, if the black holes did not rotate at all, and one of them would have flown past the second, the same wave would have arisen.
    Nope.

    Thus, if the dust particles fly by, they generate the same wave, but very small. If they did not generate any waves, solar systems would not be created.
    Nope.

    I think you should go and study some physics (and remember the lessons) instead of making stuff up.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    21
    As I recall, Gravity waves and The science of Physics don't get along that well. All that is really known about Gravitation is that it is mass dependent ,inverse proportional and is the result of curved spacetime. Studies indicate that the wave may be transverse. There are experiments done by John K. Huchison using high charge and superimposing rf varying in the microwave region that seem to have an effect on gravity. Down side is that it also effects the materials in the experiment. I personally consider the science of gravity to be wide open. I imagine that gravity might somehow be related to quantum mechanics which is also still not fully understood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    As I recall, Gravity waves and The science of Physics don't get along that well.
    Then, apparently, your memory is faulty given that physicists are the people who suggested their existence, set up experiments to find them and actually did so.
    Studies indicate that the wave may be transverse.
    Which studies?
    There are experiments done by John K. Huchison
    Get it right: claims of experiments...
    Hutchison (note spelling) is a nutcase and a fraud.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    As I recall, Gravity waves and The science of Physics don't get along that well.
    You mean gravitational waves, not gravity waves (which are something completely different).

    Gravitational waves were replaced by physics and detected by science and engineering. So your recall is faulty.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    21
    I'm thinking that a wave is a group interaction of smaller things with a force between them. For example water is the interaction of water molecules. Magnetism can be a wave, but static field cannot. As again I don't recall science seeing gravity gravitation as a wave or not. Just a dip in spacetime.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    I'm thinking that a wave is a group interaction of smaller things with a force between them.
    That is true for waves in matter. But not for, say, light waves or gravitational waves.

    As again I don't recall science seeing gravity gravitation as a wave or not.
    Gravitational waves have been discussed for well over a century. And directly detected a few years ago.

    "The possibility of gravitational waves was discussed in 1893 by Oliver Heaviside using the analogy between the inverse-square law in gravitation and electricity.[27] In 1905, Henri Poincaré proposed gravitational waves, emanating from a body and propagating at the speed of light ... [Einsten] based on various approximations came to the conclusion there must, in fact, be three types of gravitational waves (dubbed longitudinal-longitudinal, transverse-longitudinal, and transverse-transverse ... the first indirect evidence for the existence of gravitational waves was discovered. In 1974 ... LIGO made the first direct detection of gravitational waves on 14 September 2015"
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravit...l_wave#History
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    21
    None of that is enough. Theoretically gravitational waves should exist. What it says there is that the possibility was discussed and resulted in a proposal. Try a quick double chedk on that. If the waves do exist then you could have gravitation emitters. Wanting them to exist and even knowing that they must exist has no effect on physics. So just take out your old gravity detector and see what frequency they use.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Time Lord Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    5,184
    You missed that they DO exist.....
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    21
    I really wish that were true. Examining this from the very basis of matter, Feinman equations and diagrams of charge interactions and resulting waves, fine. On a larger scale mass mass interactions result from what. Weak forces? Spacetime dip? Unknown magic? Also note that that last one wasn't good science. Matter acts as waves, therefore, mass mass interaction must also be a wave? Ok given, if it involves mass, there are waves involved. So theoretically there must be gravitational waves. If they were actually found though, they might have specifications, such as wavelength and frequency and exact source sources of emission. Hey guess what canceling them out to a null would mean anti gravity. This is great. Now we can go out and start building some saucers.
    Last edited by Freelance Scientist; August 12th, 2019 at 09:12 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,699
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    I really wish that were true. - snip - So theoretically there must be gravitational waves. If they were actually found though
    How many times do you need to be told?
    They were directly observed 4 years ago.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    None of that is enough. Theoretically gravitational waves should exist.
    They do exist.

    If the waves do exist then you could have gravitation emitters.
    They do. You could make one yourself. (The gravitational waves would be undetectably small though.)

    So just take out your old gravity detector and see what frequency they use.
    They detect a range of frequencies. This tells them about the source.


    What is your point?
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,825
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    So theoretically there must be gravitational waves. If they were actually found though, they might have specifications, such as wavelength and frequency and exact source sources of emission.
    Where have you been for the last few years?

    Gravitational waves have been detected, the wavelength and frequency has been measured, the sources have been identified.

    https://www.ligo.caltech.edu

    Hey guess what canceling them out to a null would mean anti gravity.
    Gravity is not caused by waves, so cancelling them out would not stop gravity.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    21
    Thanks Mr. Strange. I skimmed over the info presented by Mr. Duck. It ,gravitational wave, was detected over three different times for sure. The first lasting .02s. The frequency varied between 35 and 250hz. The wavelength 40 times the size of earth. Sorry, I was somehow thinking gravity instead of gravitational waves releasing great amounts of energy from rotating black holes. Gravity is thought to be the result of gravitons not waves. Gravitons may somehow relate to bosons another nobel particle.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    exchemist
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Freelance Scientist View Post
    Thanks Mr. Strange. I skimmed over the info presented by Mr. Duck. It ,gravitational wave, was detected over three different times for sure. The first lasting .02s. The frequency varied between 35 and 250hz. The wavelength 40 times the size of earth. Sorry, I was somehow thinking gravity instead of gravitational waves releasing great amounts of energy from rotating black holes. Gravity is thought to be the result of gravitons not waves. Gravitons may somehow relate to bosons another nobel particle.
    What is a nobel particle?
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Unification Approach With Curvature, Gravitational Waves and Temperature?
    By Graviphenom in forum Personal Theories & Alternative Ideas
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: November 11th, 2018, 03:58 AM
  2. gravitational waves, really never detected yet?
    By Quantum immortal in forum Physics
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: February 15th, 2014, 01:23 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: February 12th, 2014, 08:10 AM
  4. Gravitational waves from black hole births?
    By xXplosionZz in forum Physics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 11th, 2013, 02:01 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: May 22nd, 2011, 11:37 AM
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
  •