The Rubber Sheet Illustration of Gravity Should be Banned

The illustration of gravity using balls (objects) on a rubber sheet should be banned

or at least come with a strong warning label that it is actually the inverse of gravity's real geometry.

A stretching rubber sheet expands what is supposed to represent space-time when in fact gravity/time-dilation is analogous with shrinking space.

The reason a moving object is influenced by a gravity field is because it is finding a shorter/staighter path, not a longer one.

My analogy of time dilation,

An object is moving one foot per second in 'flat' (no gravity field) space.
Then it hits a time-dilation region where time passes only 1/3rd as fast as in 'flat' space.
So it seems to speed up & travel what used to be 3 feet in one dilated 'second'.
From the standpoint of inertia it still travels one foot per second but what used to be 3 feet has now shrunk down to one foot (in the gravity field) & it is following that shorter path, which is why it veers towards gravity.

So the actual geometry of gravity is functionally a shrinkage of space, a dilation of time.

I realize our (at least my) brains can't even understand how orthogonal 3D space can even shrink, but functionally that what it does.

In my mind/imagination i reflexively try to grasp gravity with that darned completely misleading illustration stretching/expanding space-time when factually some opposite hard to comprehend space-time shrinkage is what i need to work/imagine with.

It is very aggravating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unclear Engineer
Jan 2, 2024
294
41
210
Visit site
The illustration of gravity using balls (objects) on a rubber sheet should be banned

or at least come with a strong warning label that it is actually the inverse of gravity's real geometry.

A stretching rubber sheet expands what is supposed to represent space-time when in fact gravity/time-dilation is analogous with shrinking space.

The reason a moving object is influenced by a gravity field is because it is finding a shorter/staighter path, not a longer one.

My analogy of time dilation,

An object is moving one foot per second in 'flat' (no gravity field) space.
Then it hits a time-dilation region where time passes only 1/3rd as fast as in 'flat' space.
So it seems to speed up & travel what used to be 3 feet in one dilated 'second'.
From the standpoint of inertia it still travels one foot per second but what used to be 3 feet has now shrunk down to one foot (in the gravity field) & it is following that shorter path, which is why it veers towards gravity.

So the actual geometry of gravity is functionally a shrinkage of space, a dilation of time.

I realize our (at least my) brains can't even understand how orthogonal 3D space can even shrink, but functionally that what it does.

In my mind/imagination i reflexively try to grasp gravity with that darned completely misleading illustration stretching/expanding space-time when factually some opposite hard to comprehend space-time shrinkage is what i need to work/imagine with.

It is very aggravating.
In a sense, space does shrink around gravity wells. The extreme case of a black hole best illustrates this with another analogy. Think of a black hole as a whirlpool; water pouring in from all directions (ignore spin). The analogy is to substitute space for water. The idea is that anything in the water (space) is swept into the black hole.
The Expanding space of the Hubble constant does not (apparently) take place within gravity-bound systems. That is to say, for example, our galaxy and its satellite galaxies are one gravity-bound system.
It is the space between such systems that expands. There is the issue however that all the mass in the universe might be sufficient to stop the expansion and shrink space (in the way you suggest) resulting in a Big Crunch.
The problem is that the universe appears to be very close to the critical point where it is not completely certain what will happen although some have a strong opinion.
 
Jan 12, 2024
29
3
35
Visit site
The illustration of gravity using balls (objects) on a rubber sheet should be banned

or at least come with a strong warning label that it is actually the inverse of gravity's real geometry.

A stretching rubber sheet expands what is supposed to represent space-time when in fact gravity/time-dilation is analogous with shrinking space.

The reason a moving object is influenced by a gravity field is because it is finding a shorter/staighter path, not a longer one.

My analogy of time dilation,

An object is moving one foot per second in 'flat' (no gravity field) space.
Then it hits a time-dilation region where time passes only 1/3rd as fast as in 'flat' space.
So it seems to speed up & travel what used to be 3 feet in one dilated 'second'.
From the standpoint of inertia it still travels one foot per second but what used to be 3 feet has now shrunk down to one foot (in the gravity field) & it is following that shorter path, which is why it veers towards gravity.

So the actual geometry of gravity is functionally a shrinkage of space, a dilation of time.

I realize our (at least my) brains can't even understand how orthogonal 3D space can even shrink, but functionally that what it does.

In my mind/imagination i reflexively try to grasp gravity with that darned completely misleading illustration stretching/expanding space-time when factually some opposite hard to comprehend space-time shrinkage is what i need to work/imagine with.

It is very aggravating.
I do not have all the answers, but try this:
With out much evidence to ascertain an answer to the question, a mind experiment might solve the problem. Imagine our milky way galaxy and remove any thoughts of dark energy or dark matter. Imagine also that the Milky Way universe has a halo around it that produces particles of space and radiation. The particles of space produced are allowed to move in any direction. Space particles moving inward will become part of the intragalactic space and the remaining space will become part of extragalactic space. The velocity of space coming out of the halo is determined not by gravity but by the amount of space created in the halo. The high speed particles of space headed inward will be called dark matter for no better system. They will maintain the constant velocity seen in a galactic rotation curves. As the particles move in, speed will increase to maintain conservation of volume. The funnel is getting smaller. Outside of the galaxy space will appear to be expanding. Inside of the galaxy space will appear to be contracting. It’s the same space, its use determines how it will appear to an observer. Every piece mentioned has a logical origin. Never does something appear from nothing. This will allow MOND to work by decreasing inertia in the masses. The speed discrepancy will occur, if you believe that the movement of space being controlled by the central gravity of the galaxy. It is instead mostly controlled by the pressure exerted by the halo's production of space. With this information, you will be able to answer what is dark matter or dark energy. Where do they come from and why do they appear to be different.
 
Jan 26, 2024
1
0
10
Visit site
I wonder if mass inhibits the expansion of the universe at a local level. All other space further away from mass would continue to expand. The relative volume difference would simulate the bending of light moving though space. Further, if the mass was extreme could a point be reached where extreme mass could de-expand space. Not so much absorbing mass (black hole) but space it self along with whatever incidental mass was present.
It might be necessary to think of the the beginning of the universe and time (big bang) as a expansion from within rather than an explosion outward (in to what). We see the early universe all around us in every direction. This implies to me that we are within the expanding universe. All matter, galaxies, etc are not moving in the explosion sense. The space between all objects is increasing and so the galaxies themselves are not moving in space, space is expanding all around making everything move further apart. If mass inhibited the expansion, then mass would be constantly "falling" together because of the lack of space expansion between.
 
Jan 12, 2024
29
3
35
Visit site
Try to imagine space as a having the dynamics found in a sink and source environment.
Each galaxy has a halo that acts as a source of space particles. The sinks are the masses that absorb space particles.
With this conbination, you will find expansion and contraction possible at the same time.
The expansion is carried out by left over particles that were not absorbed by the massses.
You have a good imagination,
Good luck
 
The only instance where man has mathematically described gravity is with static mass. As soon as you give the masses relative motion, the equation fails. All gravity simulations have failed.

We have never had a math equation for gravity that works. Never.

One would think that this is obvious and apparent and we would look for another narrative and equation. But instead we invent a new universe. With new unknown, undetectable entities. And they tell us this is real science. I was raise in the country, and learned to recognize korn, and manure, at a young age.

Anybody with any sense at all can see that we have something wrong with our fundamentals. But today the protection of the institution and the group think of it, is the goal.

They can get away with this because they proclaim reality on the atomic and cosmic scale is different than reality in our existence scale. Different physics for different scales.

I believe that I have found that error. And I believe that I can explain the illusion of expanding space.....and the illusion of old high velocity galaxies.

But gravity remains a mystery. I don't think gravity is fundamental. I don't believe that a charge particle has the property of gravity. Only pairs of particles express gravity. Dipoles. And these dipoles can only attract other dipoles. A dipole property. Dipole interaction. An electrically neutral interaction. And much, much weaker that charge.

The other mystery about gravity is the resonance of an orbit. Most see an elliptical orbit. I see a one turn helix. A small rotation stretched and turned into another rotation. TWO angular accelerations.

One inside the other. This unrecognized dynamic can be seen by the trail of a moon flying thru a debris field. Nature's orbits are unlike man's elliptical orbits.

This orbital dynamic shows why our star velocities and momentum's are off. We are not aware of this extra length of a galaxy star orbit. And the helical and wavy trajectory of it.

There is a perpendicular component of gravity. Two perpendicular angular components that result in stability. An oscillatory resonance. one to one. One small rotation(momentum and inertia) inside one large rotation(momentum and inertia).

Our planets and moon velocities and circumferences(orbit length) are off too.

None of our gravity equations come close to these dynamics.

In my opinion it takes more blind faith today for science than religion. And it's truly remarkable to witness this.

But for many, undetectable(faith) space particles solve everything.

I guess everybody does truly live in their own little world. I know I do too.
 
The way i conceptualize it now is with space remaining relatively orthogonal ('flat') and gravity is a redistribution of time over (in relationship with) space.
Mass slows the 'progress' of time in a regular radial pattern around it.

A black hole compresses matter to infinite density and time is brought to a halt at the event horizon.

Inside the event horizon I'm not sure.
Does time go backwards?
Does space itself bend into higher dimension or shrink into lower dimension?

It seems reasonable to me that whatever happens is likely related to the 'dark matter' effect & not due to some hypothetical invisible matter.

That would fit with the fact that most 'quantifications' of DM are proportional to the size of the respective central black holes.

It might be a means of working backwards into what goes on inside the event horizon of black holes.
 
Einstein said the tick toc of time was the EM phase change between the magnetic and electric.
How would one invert that to make time reverse?
Some kind of de-perturbation of the electric and then likewise the magnetic domain(s)? cyclicly?
 
Einstein said the tick toc of time was the EM phase change between the magnetic and electric.
How would one invert that to make time reverse?
Some kind of de-perturbation of the electric and then likewise the magnetic domain(s)? cyclicly?
You have time that is relative (coordinate histories' SPACETIME), then you have time that is timeless (spontaneous concurrent REALTIME ("Where in @#$% did that come from?!" said the quantum mechanic)).
 
Last edited:
I think that temperature may have an effect on gravity, but not directly or controlling it. Or manufacturing it.

If not for the electron, temperature would not have an analog scale. And heat would not travel. Without electrons heat would be singular, discreet and large quick steps. It would also be sticky. Hot spots and cold spots would remain. It's the electrons in matter that uniform and transfer background EM flicker.

If I hold a match under Neptune, will it change orbit?

Our current gravity equations and theories have never given us a successful simulation and we do not observe and measure what the equations say. And now use an expanding array of new abstract theories, entities and properties to hold on to these failures. It's never ending.....what's next?

I believe that everything we see and measure can be explained with the proper classical physics. The motions that we all know and are use to.

ALL EXCEPT GRAVITY. But I think we will find it's also a classic solution.
 
Time reversal probably has as many permutations as forward time, so finding the (nearly?) exact inverse sequence is wildly improbable unless there might be 'guidelanes'/'landmarks' to help reconverge it.

Maybe the 'dark matter' effect is a reverse time 'gravitation' effect?
Prospectively from the event horizon interior of 'proximate' black holes.

It doesn't trace directly through space-time, but is proximately powerful enough to cause the effects we observe.
And as with the 'dark matter' effect is seemingly not completely consistent everywhere.