Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

My Anti Gravitational Theory

Rate this topic


bukhari
 Share

Recommended Posts

What force is acting on the less dense "mouth air" filled balloon causing it to fall towards the earth? What about a stone dropped in water? No gasses there (essentially).

U are misunderstanding the core concept of the theory

My theory based on two things

Density

Pressure

In case of mouth air ballon is under the influnce of atmospheric air.As the densities of the atmospheric air and the air which is present in the ballon are almost the same thats why ballon remain on the earth.

And in case of water,the affecting medieum is water not the gases because the stone that is falling in the water already coming after crossing the air.when it crosses the medieum of air it will enter in the next medieum that is water now.if the density of the object is less than water it will float on the surface of water e.g paper

if it is more dense then it will penetrate into the water just like stone

Edited by bukhari
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you've got some new testable predictions of previously unexplainable phenomena, or some laboratory results that contradict the accepted theory of gravity, by all means write a paper, submit it to a physics journal, and wait for your Nobel prize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about physics? They must teach that there. Maybe you went to some school teaching Pre-Socratic Greek "science" or something. ;)

very funny

Dr. Abdull Salam won the Nobel prize in Physic.From here you can measure our caliber and approach in Physic.We do not read the science just like a story or a holy subject

that can never be changed or modified.

Try to prove your objection on my theory through knowledge and examples

Link to comment
Share on other sites

complete balderdash! your theory cannot explain the Cavendish experiment.

In this universe every positively charged object will attract the negatively charged object and the same charged object will repel each other e.g if you rub a comb with a cloth it will be negatively charged then closer a piece of paper it will be attracted by the comb same is the case with Cavendish experiment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look, you can't get away with purely particle-mediated forces.

Existence is a sub-divisible whole You can't escape it. The essential feature of a whole is that it maintains its integrity in spite of any gyrations of its parts. Existence acts as a single entity, the purpose of which is at minimum to contain all other entities.

Containment is a fundamental concept, I would go so far as to suggest it is a "fourth axiom", implied in any attempt to dispute it or any of the other axioms. Why? Because, before you can even consider experience, you must be contained within it. I'll grant this is probably deducible from "existence exists", but haven't quite seen how yet.

Existence insists on containing that which exists. We feel the effect of existence containing its parts, because the effect acts to govern and limit our range of motion outward and away from the other parts of existence. For two parts to increase their separation requires effort against the effect. For two parts to increase their proximity goes with the flow of the effect.

Gravity is the "force" that implements containment by existence.

Without containment by existence, you are out of this world. You can't base a theory of physics solely on local, directional interactions, you must have a global containment to create systems. (This is true conceptually too, but that is a much more involved topic.)

- David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dr. Abdull Salam won the Nobel prize in Physic.From here you can measure our caliber and approach in Physic.We do not read the science just like a story or a holy subject

that can never be changed or modified.

You're using the authority and esteem of the Nobel prize to help argue that the past fifty years of Nobel prize winners have all been wrong? I'm pretty sure they've all accepted the theory of gravity in some form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gravity is the "force" that implements containment by existence.

Without containment by existence, you are out of this world. You can't base a theory of physics solely on local, directional interactions, you must have a global containment to create systems. (This is true conceptually too, but that is a much more involved topic.)

- David

I agree with you David

Let 's take an example

Took a pipette and filled it with water then hold it by putting the thumb on the top of the pipette.You 'll see the water will never fell down although the gravity is there then what is the factor that is controlling the water in the pipette

Actually the water that is traped in the pipette is suspended due the air.Air is a refrence medieum in this earth.When we closed the top of the pipette the connection of the water with the air became vanished and the water became suspended in the pipette because there is no more refrence medieum or force according to the 1st law of motion.When you remove your thumb from the top after that the water will fell down very quickly ,air pushed the water that is the real refrence medieum.

In this experiment ,some more factors are also involved but essence is the diffrence in densities of object and the medieum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're using the authority and esteem of the Nobel prize to help argue that the past fifty years of Nobel prize winners have all been wrong? I'm pretty sure they've all accepted the theory of gravity in some form.

But i also believe no one get this prize due to gravity.

This is not my aim to show any one inferior.My basic point is that there is always some cousion of improvement .Due to this improvement we are achieving and getting a new aspects in science every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you start out with the goal of disproving gravitational theory, or did a chain of empirical evidence lead you iductively toward your new idea?

I just trying to correct the this misconception in science.

I do not have any resourses to disprove .I can just discuss it on different forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you start out with the goal of disproving gravitational theory, or did a chain of empirical evidence lead you iductively toward your new idea?

I just trying to correct the this misconception in science.

I do not have any resourses to disprove .I can just discuss it on different forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very funny

Dr. Abdull Salam won the Nobel prize in Physic. From here you can measure our caliber and approach in Physic.We do not read the science just like a story or a holy subject

that can never be changed or modified.

Try to prove your objection on my theory through knowledge and examples

If you mean Dr. Abdus Salam, he went to college and received his PhD at Cambridge, England.

I assume you did not receive that education, or a similar one to his. The only connection between you and Abdus Salam is your nationality. In fact, you're his exact opposite: you're probably the most irrational person to ever post on this site.

If you want anything you have to say on the subject to be taken seriously, I suggest you study Physics, and the scientific method, first. Nothing you can come up with has any value until you do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you start out with the goal of disproving gravitational theory, or did a chain of empirical evidence lead you iductively toward your new idea?

I just trying to correct the this misconception in science.

I do not have any resourses to disprove .I can just discuss it on different forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you start out with the goal of disproving gravitational theory, or did a chain of empirical evidence lead you iductively toward your new idea?

I just trying to correct the this misconception in science.

I do not have any resourses to disprove .I can just discuss it on different forums.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you mean Dr. Abdus Salam, he went to college and received his PhD at Cambridge, England.

I assume you did not receive that education, or a similar one to his. The only connection between you and Abdus Salam is your nationality. In fact, you're his exact opposite: you're probably the most irrational person to ever post on this site.

If you want anything you have to say on the subject to be taken seriously, I suggest you study Physics, and the scientific method, first. Nothing you can come up with has any value until you do that.

Thanks for your suggestion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well actually this Abdus Salam guy got his Masters in Pakistan if you want to believe Wikipedia ( who knows if this is really the case). But in any case it is hardly that important as it does not change the fact that the individual we have here does not have the faintest clue what he is talking about. No amount of appealing to the authority of those that do is going to change that.

And by the way, I am wondering if he might be some sort of barely functional bot. I mean really, his English is definitely the worst I have seen on here and he keeps repeating posts, some of which are blank.

Well anyway, have fun with him. I am out, this guy is beyond help if he is serious (hopefully it is some sort of sick joke).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well actually this Abdus Salam guy got his Masters in Pakistan if you want to believe Wikipedia

In British India, to be exact (Pakistan was established a year later). He got his masters in Lahore, and his PhD at Cambridge. My only point with going through Dr. Salam's education was to make it clear he was in no way the product of Pakistan's public school system (which, by all accounts, is horrible).

Edited by Jake_Ellison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

and the greater the density the stronger the gravity. The closer the neutrons are packed together the more it warps the space around it. creating a gravational pull. some say it is an effect not a force. so in a sense the only way you could ever defy gravity is to alter the warped space around you. thus cancelling out the gravational effect

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and the greater the density the stronger the gravity. The closer the neutrons are packed together the more it warps the space around it. creating a gravational pull. some say it is an effect not a force. so in a sense the only way you could ever defy gravity is to alter the warped space around you. thus cancelling out the gravational effect

Both of your statements are incorrect. Increasing density does not increase gravitational pull. The gravitational pull between two objects is proportional to the mass of each object, and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. Nowhere in that statement does density enter into the equation.

To illustrate: if the Sun were replaced with an extremely dense blackhole of the *same mass* as our Sun, the Earth's orbit would not be changed.

Galileo demonstrated this fact at the leaning tower of Pisa. Commander David Scott also demonstrated it on the moon with a hammer and feather, which have very different densities.

Edited by brian0918
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...