Notices
Results 1 to 54 of 54

Thread: Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic?

  1. #1 Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic? 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic and that it affects speed of light?

    I know you would find the above statement hard to accept that gravitational fields of earth and all such suspended bodies in outer space are electro-magnetic, have inherent electro-magnetism. Earth is a big, suspended magnet, with positive and negative property, with north and south poles. So does all such bodies, galaxies, stars, planets suspended in the universe. All of outer space is completely filled or unbreakably occupied by gravitational fields of galaxies, stars, and planets. Dr. Einstein call it spacetime which science has been trying to detect gravitational waves in outer space. But it exists.

    Consider, for instance a black hole, no matter how infinitely compacted, black hole is still matter. Before such matter collapses into a black hole, it was, say, a dying giant star, which has inherent positive and negative property which extends to outer space, call it gravitational field, thus, such extension gravitational field is made of stuff of such dying star, thereby inherit the quality of the giant star. When such giant star explodes and collapses into black hole, it never lose its inherent quality, that inherent positive and negative property, neither does it loses such inherence in its extension gravitational field. Just that everything, matter, is constricted/collapsed into almost infinitely small sized black hole with all its equally gravitational field concentrated but intact. That is why another body that comes near the gravitational field of a black hole is sucked inside. I guess this is something new: gravitational fields has inherent positive and negative property because the source has positive and negative property on which electro-magnetic light WAVE interacts on which to travel. By the way, light is both particles and wave. .

    Here is a clearer, simple logic: A bar magnet has an extension magnetic field that even a nail 2 inches away will be magnetized and pulled by such magnetic field because it has the stuff of the bar magnet. Earth is a magnet, with positive and negative, with north and south poles. Earth has, like bar magnet, has extension, called gravitational field that stretches to outer space. Such gravitational field has all the stuff of the mother earth. Earth is rotating, such rotation creates electricity and magnetism, call it, electro-magnetism in the gravitational field. Though more infinitesimal weaker than gravity (itself is trillion times weaker than a bar magnet) on surface of mother earth, that no scientific instrument can detects, nevertheless, no one can deny gravitational field of earth exists, such gravitational field which has created electro-magnetism because earth, a magnet, is rotating like rotating generator that creates electricity.

    I have proposed a simple experiment to NASA if the speed of electro-magnetic light is affected by electro-magnetic gravitational field. This is the reiterated proposal: Send a beam on earth to Cassini-Huygens probe now in Saturn, such beam to be automatically transmitted back to earth (it takes some 2.5 to 3 hours travel back and forth for such beam). Once the beam is received back on earth, the actual astronomical location of Saturn, plotting of actual location and distance of Saturn can be established (or has been already plotted) by our advanced astronomical telescope, in relationship with standard candles. Computation of the speed of light based on the transmitted beam and based on actual astronomical telescope measurement can be done. The experiment conducted by Roemer and Huygens, three hundred years ago on eclipsing moon of Jupiter showed the speed of light differs substantially (it appears not just caused by varying distances due orbit of earth) with Michelson-Morley interferometer measurement conducted on earth gravity. How about the stronger gravitational field of farther Saturn?. This proposed experiment, sending a beam to Saturn and back, is not to contradict GR but simply trying to expand GR of Most Eminent Scientist Dr. Albert Einstein.

    Jsaldea12
    11.27.10


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic? 
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic
    No. Gravitation has nothing to do with electromagnetism, they are completely seperate and independant, which is why they are both fundamental forces.

    The above reply makes the rest of your post redundant.


    "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  
     

  4. #3 Re: Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic? 
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic
    No. Gravitation has nothing to do with electromagnetism, they are completely seperate and independant, which is why they are both fundamental forces.

    The above reply makes the rest of your post redundant.
    redundant ?

    How about irrelevant ?

    bizarre ?

    erroneous ?

    deluded ?

    nuts ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    I guess, to clarify, we have to talk deeper about the unified field theory: inside the atom, inside the proton and neutron, inside the quarks ( remember the colors) is inherent positive and negative. Inside that proton and neutron are strong force and weak force, have inherent positive and negative. Rotation of electron causes such electro-magnetism. On the macrocosm scale, Earth is composed of atoms , is made of positive and negative. Whatever comes out from such inherent positive and negative is of same stuff. THIS IS UNIFICATION OF FORCES: all forces are unified into such indestructible, inseparable, indivisible inherent positive and negative property from macrocosm to microcosm (quantum theory), this unifying positive and negative property that attracts and repulses, re-unlike attracts, like repulse. Whatever such earth exudes, call it gravity, and extends in outer space, call it gravitational field, have fundamentally the same property: inherent positive and negative. Because earth is rotating, such positive and negative creates electro-magnetism, thus, it makes gravitational field electro-magnetic. Make sense? Hope this new revelation can be grasped.

    But that simple beam experiment will enlighten. Will NASA oblige?

    Jsaldea12
    11.27.10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5 Re: Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic? 
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Are all gravitational fields electro-magnetic
    No. Gravitation has nothing to do with electromagnetism, they are completely seperate and independant, which is why they are both fundamental forces.

    The above reply makes the rest of your post redundant.
    redundant ?

    How about irrelevant ?

    bizarre ?

    erroneous ?

    deluded ?

    nuts ?
    I was being unusually polite :P
    "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  
     

  7. #6  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Jsaldea, you are using undefined terms of your own and misusing common terms - I would suggest you re-think how you try and explain your ideas, and repost them in a format that is more comprehensible.
    "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  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Rephrasing: I guess, to clarify, we have to talk deeper about the unified field theory: inside the atom are electrons and nucleus, inside the nucleus are protons and neutrons, inside the protons and neutrons are the quarks ( remember the colors) which have inherent positive and negative and which makes strong force and weak force, the making of positive and negative. Rotation of electrons around the nucleus create electro-magnetism, the making of positive and negative in motion. Such is the nature in quantum microcosm scale, On the macrocosm scale, earth is composed of matters, composed of atoms , earth, therefore, is made of positive and negative. Whatever comes out from such inherent positive and negative property of earth, for instance, is of same stuff. THIS IS UNIFICATION OF FORCES: all four fundamental forces are unified into such indestructible, inseparable, indivisible, intersectible, equal inherent positive and negative property from macrocosm to microcosm, this unifying positive and negative property or force that attracts and repulses, re-unlike attracts, like repulse. Earth is a magnet, thus, whatever such earth exudes, call it gravity on its surface THAT extends to outer space, call it gravitational field, (this field is also known as spacetime, remember modern science has been trying to detect spacetime gravitational waves in supernova) have fundamentally the same property super, super-thin undetectable positive and negative property, completely intersecting one another as to become completely neutral fabric of outer space, but such property positive and negative of gravitational field are there (Can we deny such is fabric of spacetime?) Because earth is rotating, such positive and negative property is activated, creates electro-magnetism, thus, it makes gravitational field electro-magnetic. Make sense? Hope this new revelation can be grasped.

    But that simple beam experiment will be enlightening. Will NASA oblige?

    Jsaldea12
    11.27.10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Rephrasing: I guess, to clarify, we have to talk deeper about the unified field theory: inside the atom are electrons and nucleus, inside the nucleus are protons and neutrons, inside the protons and neutrons are the quarks ( remember the colors) which have inherent positive and negative and which makes strong force and weak force, the making of positive and negative.
    The strong and weak forces are nothing to do with electric attraction/repulsion either. Clear evidence of this would be that the nucleus composed of individual positively charged protons is held together by the strong force, despite there being an electric repulsion.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Rotation of electrons around the nucleus create electro-magnetism
    What do you mean by electromagnetism? How do you know that the rotation causes this (citation needed)?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Such is the nature in quantum microcosm scale
    Citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    On the macrocosm scale, earth is composed of matters, composed of atoms , earth, therefore, is made of positive and negative.
    This doesn't actually mean anything?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Whatever comes out from such inherent positive and negative property of earth, for instance, is of same stuff.
    The Earth is made of the same stuff as the Earth? Well, no shit.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    THIS IS UNIFICATION OF FORCES
    No it isn't. This is you repeatedly asserting that the forces are unified, but never actually making any progress towards demonstrating that this is so.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    all four fundamental forces are unified into such indestructible, inseparable, indivisible, intersectible, equal inherent positive and negative property from macrocosm to microcosm, this unifying positive and negative property or force that attracts and repulses, re-unlike attracts, like repulse.
    Citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Earth is a magnet
    Irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    thus, whatever such earth exudes, call it gravity on its surface THAT extends to outer space, call it gravitational field, (this field is also known as spacetime, remember modern science has been trying to detect spacetime gravitational waves in supernova) have fundamentally the same property super, super-thin undetectable positive and negative property
    Ad hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy. "The Earth has a magnetic field therefore everything about the Earth is caused by magnetism" simply doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    completely intersecting one another as to become completely neutral fabric of outer space, but such property positive and negative of gravitational field are there
    Citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Because earth is rotating, such positive and negative property is activated
    Citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    creates electro-magnetism
    What do you mean by electro-magnetism? Also, citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    it makes gravitational field electro-magnetic.
    Non-sequitur.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Make sense?
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Hope this new revelation can be grasped.
    But you haven't actually explained anything? You've just repeated, over and over again, that all four of the fundamental forces are the same single force, without actually demonstrating this in any way.

    Imagine I started out by saying "Imagine if everything was made of miniature elephants.... If this were the case, then....." - that's what your posts read like.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    But that simple beam experiment will be enlightening. Will NASA oblige?
    No, because it's pointless and it wouldn't work. How do you guarantee that the reply will come instantaneously once the light is detected? How could you even be sure the delay was systematic? And what would it actually prove (the answer is nothing)?
    "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  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    No comment.

    jsaldea12

    11.29.10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    No comment.

    jsaldea12

    11.29.10
    I find failing to comment to be far less paradoxical than commenting that one has no comment.

    Anyhoo, this is getting a bit pseudosciencey. You're making a lot of claims without backing them up and you're responding to logical criticisms with this silliness. If you want your posts to be given serious consideration, I think you're going to need to move beyond your current arguing style.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista

    Anyhoo, this is getting a bit pseudosciencey.
    Just out of curiosity, what do you see as the dividing line between the "New Hypotheses" and "Pseudoscience" forums?

    If the answer is that "New Hypotheses" is intended to be serious cutting edge proposals for new scientific principles, then I submit that such deep science will not make its first appearance in an open and primarily amateur forum such as this. Rather, pre-prints will appear in ArXiv and eventually in reputable refereed journals. That is certainly what is happening now in the scientific research community.

    What you will get here is off-the-wall unsupported ideas that are patently at odds with known experimental data, and that would qualify as pseudoscience under most definitions. That is what one finds in reviewing the threads.

    So, whether or not by intent, the de facto condition is that "new hypotheses" and "pseudoscience" are the same thing.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Quote Originally Posted by TheBiologista

    Anyhoo, this is getting a bit pseudosciencey.
    Just out of curiosity, what do you see as the dividing line between the "New Hypotheses" and "Pseudoscience" forums?

    If the answer is that "New Hypotheses" is intended to be serious cutting edge proposals for new scientific principles, then I submit that such deep science will not make its first appearance in an open and primarily amateur forum such as this.
    No, it's not meant to be anything of the sort. It's meant to be somewhere where people can spitball scientific ideas. Some may be outlandish, or be based on a genuine misunderstanding or simply be based on very tenuous evidence. But they should all have some grounding in established science, the proponents should be willing to talk in terms of evidence inasmuch as that is practical and, most crucially, the proponents should not be hostile towards scepticism.

    Are such threads rare? Yes, very. There are many reasons for that unfortunate state of affairs. For one thing, the internet has granted billions of people a soapbox and a megaphone and, secondly, websites with the word "science" in the title tend to be magnets for the noisiest and most colourful of these people.

    So to answer your initial question, the line most lies in how the users back up their claims and how they react when someone calls BS. If the reaction is dismissal or abuse, I change my font colour and get all fascist.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    Rather, pre-prints will appear in ArXiv and eventually in reputable refereed journals. That is certainly what is happening now in the scientific research community.
    I am familiar with this process, having put a couple of papers out there myself (in the peer-reviewed journals, not on ArXiv). I'm not under any illusions about what quality of hypothesis we can expect to be posted here.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    What you will get here is off-the-wall unsupported ideas that are patently at odds with known experimental data, and that would qualify as pseudoscience under most definitions. That is what one finds in reviewing the threads.
    For the most part, yes. And where it becomes clear to me that a topic fails on the above-mentioned criteria, for example experimental evidence, it gets moved on again.

    Quote Originally Posted by DrRocket
    So, whether or not by intent, the de facto condition is that "new hypotheses" and "pseudoscience" are the same thing.
    The de facto condition is that if there were quantitative measures of craziness and plausibility, the averages would differ markedly between one forum and the other. This may not be true across the board for all topics, because ultimately when it comes to the likes of physics I often won't have the knowledge to judge fringe ideas from nonsense. In such situations, I value feedback from users like yourself very much. Maybe that's not satisfying, but that's how it currently works.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm not convinced of the value of the system as it stands. I don't know whether there's much benefit to the community or to individual users to have new hypotheses plus pseudo plus trash (plus deleted threads). To me it seems like the process of drawing lines around these nebulous concepts should ideally come from within a community, but right now this is the system I have to work with. I've toyed with proposing changes, but I can't put much time or energy into it at the moment.

    Probably the place to have this discussion is in Site Feedback. I'd genuinely be really interested in reading your take on it all, and even more interested in any possible alternative systems.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Moderator wrote: “The strong and weak forces are nothing to do with electric attraction/repulsion either. Clear evidence of this would be that the nucleus composed of individual positively charged protons is held together by the strong force, despite there being an electric repulsion”

    Response: About strong force, read portion of the other posted article: “What is the unified field theory”, with due respect to the Nobel Laureate Physics 2004 for the discovery but no explanation.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


    Moderator wrote: “What do you mean by electromagnetism? How do you know that the rotation causes this (citation needed)?”

    Response: that is already known . Rotation of electrons around the nucleus creates electro-magnetism, just as rotation of generator creates electricity , just as earth, a magnet, rotation creates undetectable electro-gravitational field. The electro-magnetic Van Allen belt is one evidence. Lightning is another, etc.


    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




    Moderator: This doesn't actually mean anything?

    Response: It is hard to understand. But at his time, only three persons could understand Einstein, either..”Let us up and doing, with a heart for any fate, still achieving, still pursuing.” If Einstein were alive today, I don’t think he would advise us to stop thinking because of what he said is final, it is not.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Moderator: The Earth is made of the same stuff as the Earth? Well, no shit.

    Response: What I mean by stuff is the inherent positive and negative property extends to the field. A magnet has a magnetic field that a nail an inch away is pulled. Is not the field made magnetic that electricity can be generated on rotation.


    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Moderator: Irrelevant

    Response: That Earth is a magnet is irrelevant? No comment.. BUT HAS SCIENCE BEEN ABLE TO DISCOVER MAGNETIC MONOPLE? This leads to the deeper answer to your question “Irrelevant”. Please answer.

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Moderator: But you haven't actually explained anything? You've just repeated, over and over again, that all four of the fundamental forces are the same single force, without actually demonstrating this in any way.
    Imagine I started out by saying "Imagine if everything was made of miniature elephants.... If this were the case, then....." - that's what your posts read like.

    Response: Have not explained anything!!No comment

    Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx



    Moderator: No, because it's pointless and it wouldn't work. How do you guarantee that the reply will come instantaneously once the light is detected? How could you even be sure the delay was systematic? And what would it actually prove (the answer is nothing)? referring to suggested NASA test.


    Response:

    Quoted: “Cassini uses the DSN's 34 meter (112 feet) and the 70 meter (230 feet) diameter antennas at each site, with emphasis on the Madrid and Goldstone sites after the orbiter at Saturn. For increased performance, more than one antenna can be used simultaneously in an "array" to increase the strength of the received signal. Data rates for transmitting data to Earth vary from about 40 bits per second -- roughly equivalent to the rate of information conveyed in a normal spoken conversation -- to about 170,000 bits per second -- equivalent to one-eighth the rate of information played from a music CD. The low rates are used primarily during cruise, where there's not much science being conducted and we can't point the HGA directly to Earth for temperature reasons. Once the spacecraft reaches Saturn the lowest downlink data rate is roughly 14,000 bits per second.One factor that complicates matters somewhat is "light time." Since electromagnetic radiation travels at a finite speed -- about 300,000 kilometers (186,000 miles) per second -- and Saturn is so far away, it takes a while for the spacecraft data to get to the ground and vice versa. After arrival at Saturn, the "light time" from Earth to Saturn is about 70 to 90 minutes. This means the spacecraft doesn't receive commands until 70-90 minutes after they're sent, with the same delay on the ground”.

    Response: Permit me to say, that suggested experiment: sending a radio beam from earth to Cassini in Saturn to be automatically returned to earth in order to measure the speed of light, in comparison with ocular astronomical measurement., has not yet been performed by NASA because this is not one of the mission of Cassini. Never mind the “light time”. It is immaterial. The purpose of this simple experiment could FURTHER PROVE THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS CONSTANT 186,000 miles/sec. or it could be that stronger gravitational field of Saturn can affect the constant speed of light, because of unquestionable strong ELECTRO-MAGNETIC GRAVITATIONAL FORCE of black hole prevents light from escaping..

    Jsaldea12
    11.29.10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    There is a simple (basic) logic to come to four interactions (forces) from two principles (like north - south, plus - minus aso). If these principles are + and - the possibilities are + +, + -, - + and - -.
    A and B....AA, BB, BA and AB or Light, shadow aso.

    The trick here to see the logic is that for instance light and shadow (or plus minus) are relative. Like something negative to A (or me) can be positive to something else due to it,s dualism ; everything real has positive and negative (light and shadow etc), positive and negative on themselve + and - or south - north are abstractions and always come in relationships.

    AB and BA are same but with a direction as source, active side (A source) to B receptive side) The photon direction. B-A would be a graviton coming free from reception of photon (but only the non-particle part) then the graviton is the particle character of the photon except coming from within the receptive side hence : B to A.
    Just hypothetical thinking but anything is better then two sacks of sand with masses m1 and m2 exchanging gravitons. If there is complete symmetry I see no sense in such exchanges and that would conclude nature is senseless....nah .... so must be a physics problem then....pure logic deduction :-).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator wrote: “The strong and weak forces are nothing to do with electric attraction/repulsion either. Clear evidence of this would be that the nucleus composed of individual positively charged protons is held together by the strong force, despite there being an electric repulsion”

    Response: About strong force, read portion of the other posted article: “What is the unified field theory”, with due respect to the Nobel Laureate Physics 2004 for the discovery but no explanation.
    I didn't write any of the stuff you're responding to and drowsy turtle is not a moderator.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator wrote: “What do you mean by electromagnetism? How do you know that the rotation causes this (citation needed)?”

    Response: that is already known . Rotation of electrons around the nucleus creates electro-magnetism, just as rotation of generator creates electricity , just as earth, a magnet, rotation creates undetectable electro-gravitational field. The electro-magnetic Van Allen belt is one evidence. Lightning is another, etc.
    (By the way I'm not a moderator)

    You haven't answered my question. I asked what you mean by electro-magnetism, and you gave me unsupported examples of how it is created. I have literally no idea what you mean when you say "creates electro-magnetism", because you have not defined the term.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator: This doesn't actually mean anything?

    Response: It is hard to understand. But at his time, only three persons could understand Einstein, either..”Let us up and doing, with a heart for any fate, still achieving, still pursuing.” If Einstein were alive today, I don’t think he would advise us to stop thinking because of what he said is final, it is not.
    Which is why I'm asking you to clarify your terminology. I'm not telling you that you're wrong, necessarily, because I have very little idea what you're trying to say (other than that the four forces are unified, which is a claim which should very much be supported).

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator: The Earth is made of the same stuff as the Earth? Well, no shit.

    Response: What I mean by stuff is the inherent positive and negative property extends to the field.
    Yes, the Earth is made of charged particles (quarks, leptons etc. if you take it to the extreme). However, I fail to see the relevance?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    A magnet has a magnetic field that a nail an inch away is pulled. Is not the field made magnetic that electricity can be generated on rotation.
    Yes, because electrons are charged and so follow Faraday's Law when they interact with magnetic fields.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator: Irrelevant

    Response: That Earth is a magnet is irrelevant?
    Yes. To claim that gravity is electromagnetic simply because there are cases where objects display both properties is an ad hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. It would be like claiming that blue is the same as yellow, because there are green things.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    BUT HAS SCIENCE BEEN ABLE TO DISCOVER MAGNETIC MONOPLE?
    No. Is this relevant? If so, why?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moderator: No, because it's pointless and it wouldn't work. How do you guarantee that the reply will come instantaneously once the light is detected? How could you even be sure the delay was systematic? And what would it actually prove (the answer is nothing)? referring to suggested NASA test.


    Response:

    Quoted: “Cassini uses the DSN's 34 meter (112 feet) and the 70 meter (230 feet) diameter antennas at each site, with emphasis on the Madrid and Goldstone sites after the orbiter at Saturn. For increased performance, more than one antenna can be used simultaneously in an "array" to increase the strength of the received signal. Data rates for transmitting data to Earth vary from about 40 bits per second -- roughly equivalent to the rate of information conveyed in a normal spoken conversation -- to about 170,000 bits per second -- equivalent to one-eighth the rate of information played from a music CD. The low rates are used primarily during cruise, where there's not much science being conducted and we can't point the HGA directly to Earth for temperature reasons. Once the spacecraft reaches Saturn the lowest downlink data rate is roughly 14,000 bits per second.One factor that complicates matters somewhat is "light time." Since electromagnetic radiation travels at a finite speed -- about 300,000 kilometers (186,000 miles) per second -- and Saturn is so far away, it takes a while for the spacecraft data to get to the ground and vice versa. After arrival at Saturn, the "light time" from Earth to Saturn is about 70 to 90 minutes. This means the spacecraft doesn't receive commands until 70-90 minutes after they're sent, with the same delay on the ground”.
    Irrelevant trivia.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Response: Permit me to say, that suggested experiment: sending a radio beam from earth to Cassini in Saturn to be automatically returned to earth in order to measure the speed of light
    How would you make it automatically return? How would you prevent there being a time delay while Cassini's computer process the request? How could you be certain that any delay would be systematic (the same every time)?

    i.e. It wouldn't work.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    The purpose of this simple experiment could FURTHER PROVE THAT THE SPEED OF LIGHT IS CONSTANT 186,000 miles/sec.
    Not necessary. The speed of light has already been demonstrated to something like 10 significant figures.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    it could be that stronger gravitational field of Saturn can affect the constant speed of light
    Nope. The light will still travel at c; the variation would be in the observed distance traveled by the light (due to space-time curvature).

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    because of unquestionable strong ELECTRO-MAGNETIC GRAVITATIONAL FORCE
    Except that this wouldn't in any way link gravitation to electromagnetism. It is already predicted, observed and proven that photons are affected by gravity, exactly as they are predicted to as particles with mass.
    "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  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Cassini is a hi-tech pre-programmed computerized probe that can be directed from earth to perform many versatile operations, including performing such suggested beam experiment. Reiterating, this suggested beam experiment to NASA is another experiment, a new experiment (from deeper outer space, space curvature is immaterial) that would confirm the constant speed of light, or it might also show just how gravitational fields of DIFFERENT BODIES in outer space, like Saturn, can affect the speed of light. You said it, electro-magnetic photons of light ARE AFFECTED BY GRAVITY. Both constant of light and “A region in outer space with strong gravitational force that even ligh cannot escape…both came from Dr. Einstein.

    Magnetic monopole does not exist. All attempt to discover it will fail because magnetism is unbreakably, indivisibly, inseparably, come in equal positive and negative, reiterating equal positive and negative property.. A magnet has magnetic field that extends outward, that a nail put 2 inches away but in contact with such magnetic field, is sucked. That magnetic field has inherit that unbreakable, etc. property of positive and negative. Earth is a magnet, with positive and negative, north and south pole. Rotation, again, creates active electro-magnetism. It is simple as that.

    Jsaldea12
    11/29/10
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Administrator KALSTER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,232
    You said it, electro-magnetic photons of light ARE AFFECTED BY GRAVITY. Both constant of light and “A region in outer space with strong gravitational force that even ligh cannot escape…both came from Dr. Einstein.
    Yes, but photons don't have any mass, so they can't be slowed down by gravity. The way gravity affects light, is that it bends the space it has to move through, diverting its path or by causing red- or blue shifting.

    Magnetic monopole does not exist. All attempt to discover it will fail because magnetism is unbreakably, indivisibly, inseparably, come in equal positive and negative, reiterating equal positive and negative property.
    This just hand waving. Why should we simply take your word for it?

    Earth is a magnet, with positive and negative, north and south pole. Rotation, again, creates active electro-magnetism. It is simple as that.
    Gravitational strength is independent from magnetic fields. It is solely determined by mass.

    Jsaldea12
    11/29/10
    You don't need to do that. The date is automatically printed at the top each post.
    Disclaimer: I do not declare myself to be an expert on ANY subject. If I state something as fact that is obviously wrong, please don't hesitate to correct me. I welcome such corrections in an attempt to be as truthful and accurate as possible.

    "Gullibility kills" - Carl Sagan
    "All people know the same truth. Our lives consist of how we chose to distort it." - Harry Block
    "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    I don’t want to come into argument, all I know is that it took me quite some five years to realize what this positive and negative property that is present in all matters and in anything in this universe, it is in us, human beings that can only explain the nature of gravitational field. Where does it come from? Positive and negative property is, too, indestructible, indivisible, inseparable, comes in equal pair, that no matter what science can do it can never separate positive from negative, no such thing as monopole.. All the fundamental four forces, -re strong force, weak force, electro-magnetism, gravity, are made of this.

    The suggested beam experiment to NASA in deeper space, Saturn, (with different gravitational force field), could clarify light in relation to gravitation because it was Dr. Einstein, himself, who said the dictum “ Light is simply constant” (after 10 years wherein the whole scientific community, at that time, was in quandary why light is the same in all directions), and it was also Dr. Einstein who indirectly, originated black hole, when he said something like this: ”a portion in outer space whose gravitational force is so strong that not even light can escape”. Contradictory? I don’t think so. Just progressing concepts.

    Jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Reiterating, this suggested beam experiment to NASA is another experiment, a new experiment (from deeper outer space, space curvature is immaterial) that would confirm the constant speed of light
    You couldn't use this method to measure the speed of light, for the reasons I have mentioned twice already.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    or it might also show just how gravitational fields of DIFFERENT BODIES in outer space, like Saturn, can affect the speed of light.
    They can't. What they can affect, is the percieved distance bewteen two points, but from the distance traveled and the time taken, you will always calculate the light as moving at c (unless, of course, it passes through gas or other material en-route).

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    You said it, electro-magnetic photons of light ARE AFFECTED BY GRAVITY.
    Yes indeed. It can alter their wavelengthor diection, but not their speed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Magnetic monopole does not exist.
    Irrelevant. The 'failure' of the accepted theory does not support your theory.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    All attempt to discover it will fail because magnetism is unbreakably, indivisibly, inseparably, come in equal positive and negative, reiterating equal positive and negative property..
    Citation needed.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    A magnet has magnetic field that extends outward, that a nail put 2 inches away but in contact with such magnetic field, is sucked.
    Irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    That magnetic field has inherit that unbreakable, etc. property of positive and negative. Earth is a magnet, with positive and negative, north and south pole.
    I was not aware that the Earth had an electric dipole. Sources?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Rotation, again, creates active electro-magnetism. It is simple as that.
    What do you mean by electro-magnetism? You have yet to explain. Also, evidence required with regards to "rotation creating electro-magnetism".
    "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  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Moving light? Light moves in all direction and in case of Cassini, the beam from earth is specifically designed, directed toward Cassini, besides, motion of Cassini can be taken into consideration in the measurement. It is still intriguing why, with due respect, to NASA, such experiment has not been attempted or if attempted, it would be to our benefit. Reiterating, with this new experiment in gravitational field in deeper space, Saturn, will further support the constant speed of light or it will also show just how gravitational field can affect light.

    I believe the whole scientific community has been trying to capture magnetic monopole, even in the LHC. Reiterating, it cannot succeed.

    It takes a lot of time and analysis to realize what is this gravitational field of such bodies as earth, stars, galaxies that completely occupy all of outer space and even interior of atoms. Where does it come from? What is its source? Is it not that such gravitational field emanates, a projection, from such mentioned suspended bodies. Therefore, such projected field inherits its quality, has the quality of its source. If the source has such indestructible positive and negative property, then the projected aura (gravitational field) also has such quality. Such new concept appears unacceptable now....

    What is electro-magnetism? Here is something new: it is the friction of magnetism, rubbing against one another that activates it, call it, electro-MAGNETISM. .

    jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Moving light? Light moves in all direction and in case of Cassini, the beam from earth is specifically designed, directed toward Cassini, besides, motion of Cassini can be taken into consideration in the measurement. It is still intriguing why, with due respect, to NASA, such experiment has not been attempted or if attempted, it would be to our benefit. Reiterating, with this new experiment in gravitational field in deeper space, Saturn, will further support the constant speed of light or it will also show just how gravitational field can affect light.

    I believe the whole scientific community has been trying to capture magnetic monopole, even in the LHC. Reiterating, it cannot succeed.

    It takes a lot of time and analysis to realize what is this gravitational field of such bodies as earth, stars, galaxies that completely occupy all of outer space and even interior of atoms. Where does it come from? What is its source? Is it not that such gravitational field emanates, a projection, from such mentioned suspended bodies. Therefore, such projected field inherits its quality, has the quality of its source. If the source has such indestructible positive and negative property, then the projected aura (gravitational field) also has such quality. Such new concept appears unacceptable now....

    What is electro-magnetism? Here is something new: it is the friction of magnetism, rubbing against one another that activates it, call it, electro-MAGNETISM. .

    jsaldea12
    This is just bizarre.

    Did you forget your medication ?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Yes, it is quite bizarre, at first. But continue ask yourself, where does the gravitational field came from? What is the source? Is it not that gravitational field the projection of earth, stars, etc. in space. Thus, as such, is it not that gravitational field has inherently the same property as its source…An apple bears a fruit, it is an apple, plant the seed, it grows up an apple.

    Jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    It is still intriguing why, with due respect, to NASA, such experiment has not been attempted or if attempted, it would be to our benefit.
    It wouldn't be to our benefit. The speed of light is already known to far greater accuracy than this experiment could possibly measure, and the relativistic effects would be too small to measure. Oh, and the experiment wouldn't actually work...

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Reiterating, with this new experiment in gravitational field in deeper space, Saturn, will further support the constant speed of light
    Unnecessary. The speed of light is not in doubt, and this experiment would not improve the accuracy of the figure we already have.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    or it will also show just how gravitational field can affect light.
    Which, of course, we already know, and can observe in circumstances where the effects are great enough to be measurable.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    I believe the whole scientific community has been trying to capture magnetic monopole, even in the LHC. Reiterating, it cannot succeed.
    Why can't it? The existance of magnetic monopoles is predicted by an otherwise very successful theory, why should they be unable to exist?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    It takes a lot of time and analysis to realize what is this gravitational field of such bodies as earth, stars, galaxies that completely occupy all of outer space and even interior of atoms. Where does it come from? What is its source? Is it not that such gravitational field emanates, a projection, from such mentioned suspended bodies. Therefore, such projected field inherits its quality, has the quality of its source. If the source has such indestructible positive and negative property, then the projected aura (gravitational field) also has such quality. Such new concept appears unacceptable now....
    Abstract and meaningless.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    What is electro-magnetism? Here is something new: it is the friction of magnetism, rubbing against one another that activates it, call it, electro-MAGNETISM. .
    Oh, an entirely new phenomenon? Well, that being the case, surely you can show me experimental evidence where this new force is at work? And surely you can show me experimental evidence that friction generates magnetism?

    If you are going to make a scientific claim, you have to be ready to support it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    But continue ask yourself, where does the gravitational field came from?
    Where do magnetic fields come from? Electric fields? It's the same question, and it's equally irrelevant and unanswerable. "Why" something is, is not scientific but philosophical - in science we determine what is the case, rather than the reason for it.

    And approaching things scientifically, there is no reason to assume that gravitational and electromagnetic forces are one and the same. They act on different properties of objects, operate on vastly different scales of magnitude, and follow entirely different laws.

    As I said before, your extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence - which you have not provided.
    "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  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    What they can affect, is the percieved distance bewteen two points, but from the distance traveled and the time taken, you will always calculate the light as moving at c (unless, of course, it passes through gas or other material en-route).
    In case of isaldea,s ideas C does not have to be constant in all direction. From a black hole C will be decreased but towards the blackhole it will be increased just as much.

    This can still be independant for all observers it just means C locally is related to the local field of gravity and direction with a difference for both directions.

    As for experimental proof against this most cases I know of the signal direction is two ways back and forth with a reflection in between.

    The difference for both directions is automatically ruled out then and become insignificant for the results of the experiment. Back and froth compensates for each other. Like for a biking trip starting from the same point as ending energywise it makes no difference if the wind influences the speed/energy of the biker.

    But such experiments (or practical uses) can't be used to proof that the wind does not have influence then.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Ghrasp
    In case of isaldea,s ideas C does not have to be constant in all direction. From a black hole C will be decreased but towards the blackhole it will be increased just as much.
    Nope. The wavelength of the light will change, but the speed will not.
    "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  
     

  28. #27  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Is the suggested beam experiment to NASA beneficial? It is, it will be for the progress of science.!! This is a new experiment from OUTSIDE earth gravitational field!!! Reiterating, the extra-territorial beam experiment could further affirm the constant speed of light and/or further show how deeper gravitational field could have effect on speed of light. I am sure, it will not cost much to send that beam. The experiment will work: Saturn could be moving at 8 miles, more or less per sec., thus, even in 2 hours travel and change of location, Saturn would still be in immaterial 56,800 miles new location by the time a beam transmitted from earth reaches Cassini in Saturn, and then to transmit back automatically to earth. Such immaterial movements of Saturn and also movement of Earth can be easily considered in the measurement of the light speed in comparison with physical astronomical telescope measurement.

    Also, no matter how predicted and/or theoretically proven: science can never find a magnetic monopole. (pls. refer to the other posting: What is the unified field theory)

    Just keep on analysing: where does gravitational field comes from, what is the source? If the source has indestructible positive and negative property (even in atom), does it not its projection, call it gravitational field, inherit such property? even though gravitational field is awesomely universal.

    Jsaldea12.

    Jsaldea12
    12.1/10.
    .
    j
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    Nope. The wavelength of the light will change, but the speed will not.
    To meassure or calculate a distance you have to determin and agree on a unity for reference first but also on how to determin it.

    For time in fysics the second is determined by a natural frecquency (atomic clock).
    Therefor and because of the subjekt it,s logic (and done also) to use a specific wavelength for the unity of distance and maybe even from the same source. As you mention the wavelength will change thus every wavelength will, also the one the meter is determined by, the unity. The unity is susceptive for direction in a gravitational field then.

    A ruler (length) or standard meter it will make no diifference if you turn it around 180 degrees or whatever...it stays the same ruler with a specific length as an objekt it,s symmetric and reading cm,s from zero to hundred or vice versa (mirrored) makes no difference.. But a wave length implies a direction thus a direction in a gravitational sense also.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Ghrasp, I have no idea what you're trying to say.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Is the suggested beam experiment to NASA beneficial? It is, it will be for the progress of science.!!
    I'm quite sure you're not actually reading/understanding my posts any more...

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    This is a new experiment from OUTSIDE earth gravitational field!!!
    The Earth's gravitational field has an infinite range. You can't be outside the Earth's gravitational field and still be in the universe.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Reiterating, the extra-territorial beam experiment could further affirm the constant speed of light
    Which is not a useful thing to do. The speed of light in a vacuum has been determined to a greater precision by numerous, more accurate experiments.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    and/or further show how deeper gravitational field could have effect on speed of light.
    There would be no reason to "show" this. We can calculate the amount of deflection and red-shifting and so on, using equations from general relativity - a theory which is in itself incredibly well supported by a range of different experiments.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    I am sure, it will not cost much to send that beam.
    Any good experiment will have re-runs, and re-re-runs. This experiment would take up a significant amount of time, from a probe that cost millions of dollars to launch and has a finite lifetime. If there's no good reason to do it, therefore, we shouldn't do it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    The experiment will work: Saturn could be moving at 8 miles, more or less per sec., thus, even in 2 hours travel and change of location, Saturn would still be in immaterial 56,800 miles new location by the time a beam transmitted from earth reaches Cassini in Saturn, and then to transmit back automatically to earth. Such immaterial movements of Saturn and also movement of Earth can be easily considered in the measurement of the light speed in comparison with physical astronomical telescope measurement.
    Irrelevant. I never claimed that simple circular motion mechanics were not possible to calculate.

    What I do keep saying, however, is that the reply from Cassini will NOT be instantaneous, and the delay between the signal being recieved, and the reply being sent, will vary. This would massively alter the results: the error bounds would be huge.

    So, to summarise: your proposed experiment would be hopelessly inaccurate, hopelessly imprecise, and hopelessly irrelevant. These are my main objections to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Also, no matter how predicted and/or theoretically proven: science can never find a magnetic monopole. (pls. refer to the other posting: What is the unified field theory)
    You cannot say something is impossible because an unproven hypothesis states that it is. That would be logically inconsistent. Especially when that same phenomenon is predicted by a very well-supported theory...

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Just keep on analysing: where does gravitational field comes from, what is the source?
    Who cares? Where it comes from is of little consequence to how it works. We can directly measure how it works; we can but speculate about 'why' this is the case.

    Where does magnetism come from?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    If the source has indestructible positive and negative property (even in atom)
    But where did these properties come from? How do they work? Why?

    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    does it not its projection, call it gravitational field, inherit such property?
    No. Demonstrably not. Why doesn't gravity repell, if it is electromagnetic in nature, for instance?

    Do you naturally face magnetic North, on account of being made of particles with electric and magnetic properties?
    "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  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    Ghrasp, I have no idea what you're trying to say.
    I wasn,t trying but obviously you are not understanding.

    "Consequently, a practical realisation of the metre is usually delineated (not defined) today in labs as 1,579,800.298728(39) wavelengths of helium-neon laser light in a vacuum".

    I was referring to this way to come to an idea of a meter.

    You can,t go from a constant length for a meter derived from this and same time proclaim that a wavelength is influenced by gravity in length.

    If you meassure a wavelength for this laser beam it can be kept horizontal or vertical and if vertical upward or downward. If vacuum or not there is gravity involved (or this is done somewhere in outerspace vacuum and gravity can also be ignored if that,s the case .....in this context it still can,t be).

    You mentioned that meassured downward the wavelength will be different then if the laser shines upward or horizontal.

    The same amount of 1,579,800.298728(39) wavelengths of this laser would then be shorter distance in meters then if it shines horizontal ?

    If you don,t understand this you obviously don,t understand you,re own words.
    You mentioned this yourself .....the wavelength is influenced by gravity.

    I don,t know where you want to get an inconclusive meter as distance from.

    From the speed of light ? Then you take the meter from a constant speed of light (not influenced by gravity) and next conclude the meter has to be constant because the speed of light is constant. That,s no logic but circular reasoning.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Moderator Moderator TheBiologista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,569
    Time to move.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    is it trash time for this thread yet?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    A wavelength is meassured coming from a direction not as a property of something.

    I could meassure the wavelength from a lightbulb and position the meassuring ecquipment above or below it or to the left or the right. But not random.

    Or better question is is it random ?

    Drowsy Turtle says no...wavelength depends on gravity.

    But the wavelength of the laser then also depends on this direction.
    I assume then the wavelength of the laser would use the same direction and hence undergo the same influence. That way the lightbulb keeps the same wavelength in all directions (as the effect for unity and meassured distance compensates)and still has different length for intuition.

    So I really don,t understand hence would like explanation.

    It reminds me of a situation where two people climb a mountain. Meassured by our standards the distance upward and downward is the same. But if meassured by the standards of the climbers steps using his steplength or a certain amount of steps as unity he needs more steps and hence experiences a longer distance upward then downward.

    Mirrored ...in this case first climbing then descending ...the distance will be the same as measured to the - somewhat primitive -standard of length but still the distance in upward direction is longer then.

    It,s only the same for our standards as long as we can (or think we can) meassure distance by the length of a road meassured in old fashioned idea of meters holding a ruler to the road comparing ecquals. But that is meassuring lengths, not a distance (in vacuum).

    Assume a kight with a long rope. The distance of the rope is same in both directions ? No the length is..it,s the ropes length.

    Now I send a signal along the rope to the kite and back with the same laser as used to establish a meter as unity.

    Drowsy Turtle mentioned the wavelength will be different for the laser in both directions of the rope.
    If the mentioned amount of wavelengths of the laser is a meter distance back and forth the distance is different both directions and the rope could be understood as having a different length...But the rope can,t have two different lengths as the rope itself defines it,s own length by what it is, a rope not two ropes. Hence the distance compared to this length (meassuring distance and length both in meters) has to be different for the light as well as for someone who would try and climb the rope. Or better ; even if length and distance are same direction here they can,t be compared as ecquals. Length is a symmetric notion distance is not symmetric, not for climbing and not for looking. So viewed upward to the kight the distance really would be longer then opposite direction.
    Confusing ? The only thing that makes it confusing is the fysics convention - and daily life usage - to meassure and relate to lengths and distances with one unity, expression ; meters. Hence they get confused constantly especially if it,s not distance in a horizontal plane.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    The constant speed of light has been exhaustively experimented ON EARTH GRAVITATIONAL FIELD. Everything on earth, including moon, moves as one with earth and its gravitational field. The measurement of light by Michelson-Morley and modern laser beam experiment, re-laser beam sent to and from reflector on moon have been done, all on earth gravitational field. All move as one: earth, the moon, the gravitational field of earth and light, laser move as one in motion of earth, just like passengers inside the jet.. It is like in a jumbo jet. All passengers inside move as one with the jet. So how can you detect the movement OUTSIDE inside the jet without looking at the windows? The suggested beam experiment to Cassini in Saturn has another gravitational field INDEPENDENT OF EARTH GRAVITATIONAL FIELD, such field moves on its own. Thus, it is relevant to perform the suggested NASA beam experiment. It will not cost much. Cassini is hi-tech that I believe it is versatile that it ca be commanded or with forward command to Cassini, beforehand, that once the CODED, CODED suggested beam to be transmitted is transmitted, upon received by Cassini, to be transmitted AUTOMATICALLY back to earth (no need to store in memory bank of Cassini). It must be added that the hi-tech antenna of Cassini and the super giant antenna on earth are pointing toward one another daily for 8 to 12 hours!, Thus, reiterating, such suggested NASA experiment us very possible, can be made easy and cheap but it will heap valuable info about the speed of light, and its relation to the separate, independent greater gravitational field of Saturn.

    It is hard to accept it now, it took me some 5 years to realize there is no other explanation about the nature of these gravitational fields unbreakably connected to one another, such field called also cosmological constant of Dr. Einstein (his greatest mistake or not), or simply his spacetime.

    Jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Jsal, we can observe light travelling along a curved path around the Sun, as well as other, further away examples. It is well established how light is affected by gravitational fields. In fact, there is a very accurate theoretical framework which all the evidence so far adheres to; general relativity.
    "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  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    It has been proven, experimentally, that a light from an eclipsing star, is curved when earth is passing in front of such star proving that light is affected by the gravitational pull of the sun. It proves that light, unquestionably electro-magnetic, is pulled/curved by the equally electro-magnetic property of the gravitational field of the sun. Does not two magnets placed nearby one another pull one another? Does not electro-MAGNETIC property of such entity as light is pulled by the equally electro-MAGNETIC property of a body such as earth? Here is, actually, a proof that gravitational field has electro-magnetic property. Here is too a proof that electro-magnetic light has a medium, that electro-magnetic fields, on which to propagate.

    Reiterating, that suggested pre- coded beam experiment to be automatically relayed back to earth is very possible and very cheaply, Cassini is expected to relay some trillions of data to earth! Thus, this simple request will not be a burden and a waste. Hope NASA will pick up the suggestion. Very relevant.

    jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    574
    It has been proven, experimentally, that a light from an eclipsing star, is curved when earth is passing in front of such star proving that light is affected by the gravitational pull of the sun. It proves that light, unquestionably electro-magnetic, is pulled/curved by the equally electro-magnetic property of the gravitational field of the sun.
    Isn,t this inconsequent coming from you ?

    If gravity is electro-magnetic for this phenomena it,s also not certain it is the sun to which the star is attracted (or curves towards).
    This phenomena is interpreted going from gravity as a seperate force (or spacetime with an existence on itself). As you don,t regard it as seperate why accept this so easy.

    Don,t forget the moon here.....with an eclipse the moon is also between the star and the earth. Gravitation as seperate force "only size matters".
    Electromagnetic there will be other differences (plus -minus) between the sun and the moon that can put weight in.

    Scientifically this is not un-controllable maybe by also comparing the position of the same star (or other stars) in situation where the moon is eclipsed by the earth and from earth the position of stars seen close beside the moon is checked.

    Maybe we allready know this somewhat from experience with an eclipse of the sun. The moon we see is bigger then normal then and the sun also seemingly "curves" around the edge of the moon. A star seen nearby the edge of the moon the same effect is a similar "change of position" for the star as with the eclipsed sun.

    With current idea of gravity as seperated force this curving round the edge of the moon is explained seperate also offcourse (as diffraction). With you,re ideas of plus minus the consecquence would be that both phenomena can be explained by diffraction then ; The further from the edge of the moon the more the diffraction decreases but without disappearing.

    Defromation of spacetime (as curvation) becomes a local shrinkage of spacetime towards the moon then ; with gravity (moon-sun, moon-stars) increasing closer to it.. As this is just one component of spacetime it leads to what semes to be a deformation but is just a change of relationships between it,s basic components..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    it proves that moving light has inertial mass, not that gravity is electromagnetic, which it isn't.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Does not two magnets placed nearby one another pull one another?
    Do not these same magnets repell if they are placed with the alike poles nearest? Can you show me a case where gravity is a repelling force?


    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Very relevant.
    It just isn't. You're proposing an imprecise and inaccurate method to demonstrate effects which have been observed more accurately for decades.
    "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  
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    December 5, 2010

    Ms. Candace Rypist
    Director
    Center for Student Services
    California Institute of Technology
    stf@caltech.edu


    Dear Ms. Rypist:

    I awfully don’t know how to go about jargon of wide, wide NASA and even Caltech. Thus, thru you, please permit me to request you to bring this matter to the right officials, teams, office of Caltech in charge of Cassini-Huygens spacecraft now in Saturn.

    Permit me to propose to Caltech/NASA to perform a simple beam experiment to be transmitted to Cassini- Huygens probe now in Saturn, such beam, CODED, to be transmitted back to earth automatically by Cassini-Huygens. The object is to measure the speed of light based on that beam transmission in comparison with actual astronomical telescope measurement of speed of light based on measurement of the distance of Saturn. This is a new experiment which would affirm the constant speed of light, and/or would show how greater gravitational field of farther Saturn affects the speed of light. This is very relevant and important.

    Permit me to detail how such CODED beam experiment can be performed and achieved:

    a. First, an advance coded beam shall be transmitted by Caltech/NASA to Cassini-Huygens now at Saturn, with a COMMAND to hi-tech Cassini that upon received of such CODED beam, Cassini will automatically transmit such CODED command back to NASA on earth.

    b.Next, five hours after, the actual CODED beam is transmitted to hi-tech Cassini-Huygens spacecraft and thus, upon received of such CODED BEAM, command is obeyed and such CODED BEAM IS automatically transmitted back to earth
    c.Once the actual coded beam returns and is received on earth, the computation of the speed of light can be easy.

    d.But an hour and a half after such coded beam is transmitted by NASA to Cassini (per item b), an actual astronomical telescope measurement of the distance of Saturn, after considering the immaterial motion of Saturn and Earth, shall be performed.

    e.Thereafter, a comparison of the stated two experiments, re-coded beam and astronomical telescope measurements is possible and simple, accurate at the same time.

    Reiterating, this simple experiment is relevant and significant, is very possible to perform with great accuracy. It is hoped earnestly that Caltech/NASA WILL PERFORM IT. All experiments, from Michelson-Morley to the laser beam experiment have been performed INSIDE earth gravitational field. But it is like inside a jumbo jet, the passengers, and everything inside move as one with the jet, including light from flashlight pointed anywhere INSIDE. But the suggested coded beam experiment is from outside earth gravitational influence…Saturn.

    It was Dr. Einstein, himself, to whom alluded the dictum, “The speed of light is simply constant”. But it was also to him alluded the making of black hole when he said that even light cannot escape the strong gravitational force. There is no conflict, just progressive thinking. Thus, this simple beam experiment is a test just how greater gravitational field of Saturn can affect the speed of light.

    I shall be willing to answer all objections if, in case, it will be considered irrelevant to perform? Because it is very relevant and significant..

    This is posted in science forum - scientific discussion and debates under pseudoscience, posting,"Are all gravitational fields. electro-magnetic?"

    I shall appreciate very much a response. My e-mail is: jsaldea12@yahoo.com. Thank you.

    Very truly yours,

    Jose S. Aldea
    Chairman – Capiz Scientists & Inventors Society
    Roxas City, Philippines
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    the hell is that?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Quoted, "Welcome to Costco, I love you".

    What the hell is that?

    Honestly and seriously speaking, it takes lot and lot of time, and analysis to realize what this gravitational field is all about. What is the source, where do they come from? When you come to a point that you will grasp what I mean, then you will see the meaning of what I have realized already...that the universal gravitational field has electro-magnetic property. What is realized so far by all scientists is that all of outer space, there is vibration...is it not? this is leading to what I have been telling you.

    jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    I wasn't even aware that gravity acted in "waves". As far as I've learned it is a phenomena due in large part to the curvature of space from the presence of mass. With no apparent carrier particle, how can it be electromagnetic in nature? Plus, electromagnetism is an attraction and repulsion force, where placement in the field and orientation are both important. Gravity is wholly attractive, can you provide a counter example against that assertion supported by centuries of observation?

    Plus, good job on not getting the reference in my quotation. It's a line from an American movie about the future of earth due to people like you.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by drowsy turtle
    The strong and weak forces are nothing to do with electric attraction/repulsion either. Clear evidence of this would be that the nucleus composed of individual positively charged protons is held together by the strong force, despite there being an electric repulsion.
    Maybe this should be pointed out a few more times.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    By the way, I have finally located Dr. Richard Seligman, Associate Vice President of the Office of Research Department, Caltech. Sent him that proposed coded beam experiment.

    Modern science has been searching for “gravitational waves” in supernova and lensing of clusters of galaxy to detect “gravitational waves” of curvature of spacetime, created by such exploding star.Inside the protons and neutrons are quarks of colors, actually positive and negative, just like magnet. (it was thought that proton and neutron are only positive) Stretch that positive and negative inside the nucleus and the longer the stretch, the stronger the force that is almost unbreakable. Such is created strong force. Just like in magnet, the longer the length of bar magnet, the stronger force at both end. But unstretch, contract the same positive and negative to shortened length toward the middle of the nucleus, and the force is weakened, as if, free willing, call it asymptotic freedom. Just like the same magnet but contracted to shorter length, the force at both end is weakened. Inside the protons and neutrons are inherent positive and negative property. If such property is present in the nucleus of atoms, whatever it exudes, in macrocosm, such as accumulated matter, such as earth,..inherently has such property too. See?

    Jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Honestly and seriously speaking, it takes lot and lot of time, and analysis to realize what this gravitational field is all about.
    this is true. If you spent less time posting crap on this forum you might be able to devote some of it to realising what gravity is all about. (Here's a clue: at the moment you don't.)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Reptile Dysfunction drowsy turtle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,256
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    the hell is that?
    Apparantly, jsal emailed caltech requesting they perform an experiment that would approximately measure the speed of light, and give a rough indication as to whether the equations for gravitational time dilation are accurate. :?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jsaldea12
    Honestly and seriously speaking, it takes lot and lot of time, and analysis to realize what this gravitational field is all about. What is the source, where do they come from? When you come to a point that you will grasp what I mean, then you will see the meaning of what I have realized already...that the universal gravitational field has electro-magnetic property.
    That's what we call a 'personal revelation'. It's the same kind of thing that gets people to kneel down and apologise for being human to an invisible man in the sky. It's not the kind of thing that makes good science.
    "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  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    25
    Quote Originally Posted by jsaldea12
    Inside the protons and neutrons are quarks of colors, actually positive and negative, just like magnet. (it was thought that proton and neutron are only positive) Stretch that positive and negative inside the nucleus and the longer the stretch, the stronger the force that is almost unbreakable. Such is created strong force. Just like in magnet, the longer the length of bar magnet, the stronger force at both end. But unstretch, contract the same positive and negative to shortened length toward the middle of the nucleus, and the force is weakened, as if, free willing, call it asymptotic freedom. Just like the same magnet but contracted to shorter length, the force at both end is weakened. Inside the protons and neutrons are inherent positive and negative property. If such property is present in the nucleus of atoms, whatever it exudes, in macrocosm, such as accumulated matter, such as earth,..inherently has such property too. See?
    I think I understand what you're saying. That the strong force really is magnetism. That the strong force doesn't repel, due to a weak field on that small of a scale.

    If every force is really magnetism, and the strong force ignores magnetism, then what causes the attraction? How can it be that an attraction is caused, but a repel is ignored? You said earlier, there are no magnetic monopoles.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    December 6, 2010


    Dr. Richard Seligman
    Associate Vice President of the Office ofRe4search Administration
    California Institute of Technology
    Richard.Seligman@caltech.edu

    Thru: Mika Walton
    Office of Research Administration
    Mika.Walton@caltech.edu


    Re- Proposed coded beam experiment to Cassini spacecraft in Saturn


    Messrs:

    Please permit me to propose to Caltech/NASA to perform a simple beam experiment to be transmitted to Cassini- Huygens probe now in Saturn, such beam, CODED, to be transmitted back to earth automatically by Cassini-Huygens. The object is to measure the speed of light based on that beam transmission in comparison with actual astronomical telescope measurement of speed of light based on measurement of the distance of Saturn. This is a new experiment which aims to affirm the constant speed of light, and/or would show how greater gravitational field of farther Saturn affects the speed of light. This is very relevant and important.

    Permit me to detail how such CODED beam experiment can be performed and achieved with accuracy:

    a.First, an advance coded beam shall be transmitted by Caltech/NASA to Cassini-Huygens now at Saturn, with a COMMAND to hi-tech Cassini that upon received of such CODED beam, Cassini will automatically transmit such CODED command back to NASA on earth, without a second delay..

    b.Next, five hours after, the actual CODED beam is transmitted to Cassini-Huygens spacecraft and thus, upon received of such CODED BEAM, command is obeyed and such CODED BEAM IS automatically transmitted back to earth, not a second delay.

    c.Once the actual coded beam returns and is received on earth, the computation of the speed of light can be easy.

    d.An hour and a half after such coded beam is transmitted by NASA to Cassini (per item b), an actual astronomical telescope measurement of the actual distance of Saturn, after considering the immaterial motion of Saturn and Earth, shall be performed, and from such data, computation of the speed of light is simple..

    e.Thereafter, a comparison of the stated two experiments, re-coded beam and astronomical telescope measurements , will be an added affirmation pf the constant speed of light and/or will show how gravitational field of farther Saturn with different stronger gravitational field affects light.

    Emphasizing, this simple experiment is relevant and significant, is very possible to perform with great accuracy. It is hoped earnestly that Caltech/NASA WILL PERFORM IT. All experiments, from Michelson-Morley to the laser beam experiment to the moon have been performed INSIDE earth gravitational field. But it is like inside a jumbo jet, the passengers, and everything inside move as one with the jet, including light from flashlight pointed anywhere INSIDE. But the suggested coded beam experiment is from outside earth gravitational influence…Saturn.
    It was Dr. Einstein, himself, to whom alluded the dictum, “The speed of light is simply constant”. But it was also to him alluded the making of black hole when he said that even light cannot escape the strong gravitational force. There is no conflict, just progressive thinking. Thus, this simple beam experiment is a test just how greater gravitational field of Saturn can affect the speed of light.

    Sir, I shall be very much willing to answer all objections if, in case, it will be considered irrelevant to perform? Because it is, reiterating, very relevant and important..

    This is posted in “physics forum – scientific discussion and debates”, under” pseudoscience”, posting: ”are all gravitational rields electro-magnetic?’

    I shall appreciate very much a response. My e-mail is: jsaldea12@yahoo.com. Thank you.


    Very truly yours,


    Jose S. Aldea
    Chairman – Capiz Scientists & Inventors Society
    Roxas City, Philippines
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Quoted, "If every force is really magnetism, and the strong force ignores magnetism, then what causes the attraction? How can it be that an attraction is caused, but a repel is ignored? You said earlier, there are no magnetic monopoles."

    Wait for my next article: "Why gravity is all attraction"

    jsaldea12
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    25
    I'd like to believe that reason is just being lost in translation somewhere but I'm becoming less and less sure
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    . DrRocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    5,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Dunce
    I think I understand what you're saying. That the strong force really is magnetism. That the strong force doesn't repel, due to a weak field on that small of a scale.
    The strong force cannot possibly be magnetixm, for a myriad of reasons. One is that it increases with distance.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    25
    I wasn't agreeing with him in the least, I was just pointing out that he's even contradicting himself. I don't think he realizes it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    260
    Almost missed. Quoted dated Dec. 8, 2010, “The strong force cannot possibly be magnetism, for a myriad of reasons. One is that it increases with distance”.

    Jsaldea12 response: Exactly, the force is increased on both ends of the bar magnet, the longer the bar magnet. Call that force at both ends “strong force” while at the middle of the bar magnet is the weakest force, call that “asymptotic freedom”. Such too is the explanation of the intriguing behavior of quarks which have both equal positive and negative property of magnetism. in the confinement of nucleus of atom. Pls. refer to "Unified field theory 2010".

    Jsaldea12
    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
  •