Why are we so fascinated with pushing an object for acceleration?

drwayne · Apr 3, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>The American scientists asked Wernher Von Braun how the Germans were able to develope such advanced rockets, Wernher looked puzzled and replied, "By studing the work of Robert Goddard!".  Posted by origin</DIV>There is a picture of Goddard next to the definition of the phrase "Unappreciated genius in his own land" as well as the word "pioneer".Wayne <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "1) Give no quarter; 2) Take no prisoners; 3) Sink everything." Admiral Jackie Fisher </div>

tdmikey · Apr 3, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>"What if you are not pulling or pushing via another galaxy but the gravity within/behind you at 1000 - 2 feet?  Decreasing as you accelerate via pushing or increasing associated with pulling.  Or how about both, pulling from in front and pushing from behind.  That would be the most “efficient” way." I'm not exactly clear on what your are promoting here.  What type of propulsion are you proposing and for what purpose?  Sounds similar to how a Maglev train works via electromagnetism.  Please elaborate. Posted by derekmcd</DIV>This one is a little hard for me to explain.  I am going to read up on current theories on gravity so I don’t sound too much like a fool.  My train of thought on gravity works like this.  Gravity is in all things.  Air, space, objects, matter ect., ect..  I understand that 2 particles will pull towards each other depending on their distance from each other according to Newtonian physics.   Gravitational force = (G * m1 * m2) / (d2)   But it doesn’t account for near objects that have linked together (i.e. Earth) that have a stronger gravitational pull on objects when talking about 3 or more different gravities.  Gravity in a particle is much weaker due to size than gravity of a planet.  I understand that gravity is considered the weaker force to physicists, but I beg to differ as gravity is too dominant in everything.  I think gravity is the parent force to electromagnetism force which is a parent to strong nuke force which is parent to weak nuke force.    w = Weak Nuke Force S = Strong Nuke Forcee = Electromagnetism ForceG = Gravity  w + w = S S + w = e   S + S = G  May explain why the sun is hotter on the outskirts than on the inside.  I don't know.  Now with that being horribly explained, gravity in particles has a north (positive pole) and a south (negative pole).  All objects above the surface of Earth are being attracted to the center of Earth via one of these poles.  So it maybe a possibility that all particles “gravity” is facing the same way.  Whether it being the north poles pointing out to space or vice versa.  In reply to Mr. Derekmcd’s question.  If you can attract the objects in front of you within 1000+ feet and repel objects below you from inches to infinite (if possible) then you may have a new way of travel.  And yes I do think gravity is located everywhere and anywhere in the cosmos.  I read up on the Maglev train and it is somewhat how I thought although using gravity instead of magnets.  Back to gravity.  This is Einstein’s theory in short.    The general theory of relativity addresses the problem of gravity and that of nonuniform, or accelerated, motion. In one of his famous thought-experiments, Einstein showed that it is not possible to distinguish between an inertial frame of reference in a gravitational field and an accelerated frame of reference. That is, an observer in a closed space capsule who found himself pressing down on his seat could not tell whether he and the capsule were at rest in a gravitational field, or whether he and the capsule were undergoing acceleration. From this principle of equivalence, Einstein moved to a geometric interpretation of gravitation. The presence of mass or concentrated energy causes a local curvature in the space-time continuum. This curvature is such that the inertial paths of bodies are no longer straight lines but some form of curved (orbital) path, and this acceleration is what is called gravitation.    Is it possible that mass cuts through gravity like a knife?  And that anything with mass has a pressure “gravity” forcing it to gravity’s wanted destination (center of Earth) or is this called friction?  Or is it both?  And that’s how our feet are sticking to the ground.  I know this contradicts my earlier statement in everything has a gravitational force.    Am I reading Einstein’s theory correctly?  I think he is saying that mass makes a curved path in time-space.  Since particles cannot be 100% solid, what if space-time gravity cuts through matter which in turn keeps us grounded.  Mike   <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "But you cant stop nothing, if you got no control, of the thoughts in your mind, that you kept and you know. You dont know nothing, that you didnt need to know, the wisdom's in the trees, not the glass window." "Breakdown" by Jack Johnson </div>

derekmcd · Apr 3, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Am I reading Einstein’s theory correctly?  I think he is saying that mass makes a curved path in time-space.  Posted by tdmikey</DIV> Yes, you are reading it correctly.  In other words, what he is saying is that gravity is not a force.  It is a geometry.  Objects do not have gravity 'inside' them that 'pull' other objects... they follow geodesic paths created by mass warping space.  The velocity of object (m1) will determine the geodesic path it follows around another object (m2). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div> <div>"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</div> </div>

tdmikey · Apr 3, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'> Yes, you are reading it correctly.  In other words, what he is saying is that gravity is not a force.  It is a geometry.  Objects do not have gravity 'inside' them that 'pull' other objects... they follow geodesic paths created by mass warping space.  The velocity of object (m1) will determine the geodesic path it follows around another object (m2). Posted by derekmcd</DIV> If I read your post correctly.  The speed of object 1 will determine the the shortest line between two points that lies in a given surface (geodisic) path it follows around object 2.  Wouldnt that be the definition of an orbit and not gravity?I dont know, maybe I am just confusing myself and everyone else.  I guess I will subdue for now until I can actually describe what I am talking about better. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> "But you cant stop nothing, if you got no control, of the thoughts in your mind, that you kept and you know. You dont know nothing, that you didnt need to know, the wisdom's in the trees, not the glass window." "Breakdown" by Jack Johnson </div>

derekmcd · Apr 3, 2008

Replying to: <DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>If I read your post correctly.  The speed of object 1 will determine the the shortest line between two points that lies in a given surface (geodisic) path it follows around object 2.  Wouldnt that be the definition of an orbit and not gravity?Posted by tdmikey</DIV> An orbit is just one of many possible paths around an object.  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div> </div> <div>"If something's hard to do, then it's not worth doing." - Homer Simpson</div> </div>

Mee_n_Mac · Apr 5, 2008

Here's just another line of inquiry for you to muse over.  Whatever force you use to push or pull your object, you'll still stuck with (at least at low velocities) the old acceleration = force/mass rule.  The interesting question to me wrt proulsion is ... what is "mass" ?  Could you reduce the mass/inertia of the object, weaken the bonds that seem to tie matter to the universe around it, so that a little force could be used to propel a normally massive object ?  <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> -----------------------------------------------------Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, STOP ! </div>

Search

Why are we so fascinated with pushing an object for acceleration?

drwayne

Guest

tdmikey

Guest

derekmcd

Guest

tdmikey

Guest

derekmcd

Guest

Mee_n_Mac

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page