*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #40 on: March 15, 2019, 03:31:30 AM »
Density laws.

 0.179 kg/m3 Helium density

1.225 kg/m3 air density

997 kg/m³ water density

7 874 kg/m³ density of iron

Then there are displacement laws that can win over density like the shape of air plane wings and ships bottoms.
These laws have learned how to over come density issues.

Hmm. Those aren’t density “laws,” those are just densities. Like, the values of them. Laws are rules that explain how things will behave.

Do you have laws to accompany those numbers?

If you do, I’d also love to hear about the displacement laws as well.

Correct, the law of what goes up and what goes down based on the density of the atmosphere. Those are laws because they can't change.
They are an absolute. Its the rule.

Displacement laws with airplane wings and boats are easy to find on google.
Like the shape of the wing is design to have more air flowing over one side then the other to create lift etc.

But that law can’t be right, because I can violate that law very easily. A ball should be on the floor, because it is more dense than air. But I can throw it up into the sky, and it is then moving upward in violation of the law.

Is there some corollary that is added to this law to account for such cases?
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

Offline retlaw

  • *
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #41 on: March 15, 2019, 03:44:52 AM »

But that law can’t be right, because I can violate that law very easily. A ball should be on the floor, because it is more dense than air. But I can throw it up into the sky, and it is then moving upward in violation of the law.

Is there some corollary that is added to this law to account for such cases?

Thrust just like a airplane motor and wing design.
With out thrust an air plane isn't moving.

With the ball once your thrust runs out it over.
No matter how hard you through your ball its coming back to the floor.

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #42 on: March 15, 2019, 03:52:06 AM »

But that law can’t be right, because I can violate that law very easily. A ball should be on the floor, because it is more dense than air. But I can throw it up into the sky, and it is then moving upward in violation of the law.

Is there some corollary that is added to this law to account for such cases?

Thrust just like a airplane motor and wing design.
With out thrust an air plane isn't moving.

With the ball once your thrust runs out it over.
No matter how hard you through your ball its coming back to the floor.

Okay. What is thrust, exactly?

You see, I have two magnets. And I can suspend one of the magnets above the other, and it just stays there. I put guard rails on each side so that bumping the table doesn’t knock it off alignment. It has been this way for several years, in fact.

Is this also thrust? If so, what is “thrusting?” And will the thrust ever run out, or is this an exception to the law of density and the law of thrust?
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

Offline retlaw

  • *
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #43 on: March 15, 2019, 04:01:51 AM »
Okay. What is thrust, exactly?

You see, I have two magnets. And I can suspend one of the magnets above the other, and it just stays there. I put guard rails on each side so that bumping the table doesn’t knock it off alignment. It has been this way for several years, in fact.

Is this also thrust? If so, what is “thrusting?” And will the thrust ever run out, or is this an exception to the law of density and the law of thrust?

Its a force. I will try to find this video about a magnet track that a guy made and says this is what holds the sun up.

Offline retlaw

  • *
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #44 on: March 15, 2019, 04:17:11 AM »
Here it is.

Quantum locking of the electromagnetic field.


*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #45 on: March 15, 2019, 04:32:08 AM »
Here it is.

Quantum locking of the electromagnetic field.



A force! So this is yet a third term (law?). So there are densities, thrusts, and forces. Magnets make forces, everything else makes thrusts, and they both can fight against densities. Do I have this correct?

Here’s something that’s strange. When I turn a corner too fast in my car, I feel pushed outward. I also feel this way when on a merry-go-round. The only problem is that I cannot identify a magnet or anything thrusting on me. So what causes that? Is there yet a third thing that can fight against densities?
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

Adrenoch

Re: Gravity
« Reply #46 on: March 24, 2019, 11:30:05 AM »
Here it is.

Quantum locking of the electromagnetic field.



A force! So this is yet a third term (law?). So there are densities, thrusts, and forces. Magnets make forces, everything else makes thrusts, and they both can fight against densities. Do I have this correct?

Here’s something that’s strange. When I turn a corner too fast in my car, I feel pushed outward. I also feel this way when on a merry-go-round. The only problem is that I cannot identify a magnet or anything thrusting on me. So what causes that? Is there yet a third thing that can fight against densities?

There are four known forces: nuclear strong, nuclear weak, electromagnetism, and gravity. Gravity has an asterisk next to it for a bunch of reasons.

The cornering "force" you're feeling is the seat belt pulling you in a new direction. You were going straight until the seat belt pulled you slightly to the side. If you keep turning, the seat belt keeps pulling you in the new direction.

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #47 on: March 24, 2019, 02:19:07 PM »
Here it is.

Quantum locking of the electromagnetic field.



A force! So this is yet a third term (law?). So there are densities, thrusts, and forces. Magnets make forces, everything else makes thrusts, and they both can fight against densities. Do I have this correct?

Here’s something that’s strange. When I turn a corner too fast in my car, I feel pushed outward. I also feel this way when on a merry-go-round. The only problem is that I cannot identify a magnet or anything thrusting on me. So what causes that? Is there yet a third thing that can fight against densities?

There are four known forces: nuclear strong, nuclear weak, electromagnetism, and gravity. Gravity has an asterisk next to it for a bunch of reasons.

The cornering "force" you're feeling is the seat belt pulling you in a new direction. You were going straight until the seat belt pulled you slightly to the side. If you keep turning, the seat belt keeps pulling you in the new direction.

Yep. Except 2 of them have been unified into the electroweak force. Super symmetry unifies the electroweak with the strong force.

I dunno, it sure FEELS like there’s a force pushing me against the car door when I make a turn. You’re telling me that this force is really my inertia, and the feeling of a force is just the result of being in a non-inertial reference frame. Well that’s all nice and sciences and mathy, but my EXPERIENCE and FEELINGS don’t match your fancy words.

So which one of us is correct?
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior

Adrenoch

Re: Gravity
« Reply #48 on: March 24, 2019, 03:45:11 PM »
Yep. Except 2 of them have been unified into the electroweak force. Super symmetry unifies the electroweak with the strong force.

I dunno, it sure FEELS like there’s a force pushing me against the car door when I make a turn. You’re telling me that this force is really my inertia, and the feeling of a force is just the result of being in a non-inertial reference frame. Well that’s all nice and sciences and mathy, but my EXPERIENCE and FEELINGS don’t match your fancy words.

So which one of us is correct?

We both are!

We can measure and account for inertia in an accelerating reference frame.

And you can feel like it's a new force, based on what you imagine a new force might feel like.

That said, general relativity says there is no distinction between gravity and an accelerating reference frame, as I'm sure you're aware.

*

Offline QED

  • *
  • Posts: 863
  • As mad as a hatter.
    • View Profile
Re: Gravity
« Reply #49 on: March 25, 2019, 01:51:07 AM »
Yep. Except 2 of them have been unified into the electroweak force. Super symmetry unifies the electroweak with the strong force.

I dunno, it sure FEELS like there’s a force pushing me against the car door when I make a turn. You’re telling me that this force is really my inertia, and the feeling of a force is just the result of being in a non-inertial reference frame. Well that’s all nice and sciences and mathy, but my EXPERIENCE and FEELINGS don’t match your fancy words.

So which one of us is correct?

We both are!

We can measure and account for inertia in an accelerating reference frame.

And you can feel like it's a new force, based on what you imagine a new force might feel like.

That said, general relativity says there is no distinction between gravity and an accelerating reference frame, as I'm sure you're aware.

Almost. Fictitious forces are identified by non inertial frames, and do not follow from a potential. So in terms of the car example, YOU are actually correct. The seat produces a normal force on me. My feeling of being pressed to the side is a consequence of being in a rotating reference frame. I am not feeling the real force.

What GR says is that there is no experiment one can perform which can distinguish between gravity and an accelerating frame. It does not actually say they are equivalent.
The fact.that it's an old equation without good.demonstration of the underlying mechamism behind it makes.it more invalid, not more valid!

- Tom Bishop

We try to represent FET in a model-agnostic way

- Pete Svarrior