Language:
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.
 Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here: https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

Custom Search

Author Topic: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass  (Read 67918 times)

sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3942
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2011, 02:38:33 AM »
I agree with the proposal that the sun is increasing the mass of the planets. This comes in the form of ionic matter streams ("solar winds") that encompass most of our solar system.

These are composed of charged protons, neutrons, and ionized atoms that gather enough energy to be ejected out of the sun's gravitational pull.

It is the earth's gravity that traps some of these partcles and brings them down to earth, thus increasing the mass of our planet.

Now, what this may or may not have to do with gravity actually having a mass of its own, im not sure...

----------------------------------------------------------------
As for photonic-mass increasing the mass of the earth...  I would say yes. But this is because i consider a photon to actually HAVE mass.

We know a photon has mass, because it has Momentum. in fact, we can calculated and measure the mass of a photon of given energy, by its momentum, and velocity (c) .

Science does not accept this, because it contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity, so they therefore, assume an anomoly exists with respect to a photon, having momentum without mass.

This, however, contradicts our definition of momentum, as well as the way in which we define "time", therefore, Einstein cannot be entirely correct..
This is one of the major reasons why Einstein's theories are not, and never will be considered "laws".

So, if you accept a photon as "having mass", then the light from the sun, is increasing the mass of the Earth.

Again, i dont have a way of relating this back to the "mass of gravity".
Except in an obscure relationship between the effects of gravity and the angular vector of a photon of a given mass - but hey, we may be onto something there....

brian334

• Hero Member
• Posts: 633
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2011, 02:43:39 AM »
Apply the same standard to the experiments you use to prove mass changes when things move.

onthecuttingedge2005

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1336
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2011, 02:49:11 AM »
Brian is right.

there are 'no' Gravitons. Gravitons went out the window with the Higgs particle(God Particle). it doesn't exist. Gravity remains a tensor field period.

Jerry

sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3942
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #48 on: June 08, 2011, 02:51:49 AM »
You half to ask the question-why donâ€™t the planets get sucked into the sun by gravity?
Something is making the planets move away from the sun.
The combination of sunlight pushing the planets away from the sun and the increased mass of the planets makes them move away from the sun.

the planets do infact get sucked into the sun, very slowly..  This will not entirely occur with all the planets within the lifespan of our sun, but Mercury will surely be the next to fall into the sun. We are observing Mercury's orbit amidts the enevetable orbital decay, its orbital velocity is decreasing, as is its rotational speed (increase in the length of "days"), and eventually it will slow fall into the next closer orbital ring, and be closer to the sun than it currently is,  some time after that, it will fall even closer, and closer until the sun consumes the entire planet, then my very excellent mother will only have 7 pizza pies [R.I.P. Pluto 1930 - 2006]

onthecuttingedge2005

• Hero Member
• Posts: 1336
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #49 on: June 08, 2011, 03:07:26 AM »
the planets do infact get sucked into the sun, very slowly..  This will not entirely occur with all the planets within the lifespan of our sun, but Mercury will surely be the next to fall into the sun. We are observing Mercury's orbit amidts the enevetable orbital decay, its orbital velocity is decreasing, as is its rotational speed (increase in the length of "days"), and eventually it will slow fall into the next closer orbital ring, and be closer to the sun than it currently is,  some time after that, it will fall even closer, and closer until the sun consumes the entire planet, then my very excellent mother will only have 7 pizza pies [R.I.P. Pluto 1930 - 2006]

I have to agree with smoky on this one, planets are like the diamond needle on a vinyl record being played on a record player, the planet follows the grooves in the record until it reaches the inward event horizon of the star in question. the solar system doesn't play 45's does it?

sorry, I had to say it.
Jerry

brian334

• Hero Member
• Posts: 633
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #50 on: June 08, 2011, 07:24:02 PM »
the moon is moving away from earth.

fritznien

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 294
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #51 on: June 08, 2011, 07:36:30 PM »
the moon is moving away from earth.
3.8cm a year, and the earths rotation slows which is where the energy comes from.
as for mercury falling into the sun i thought that had to do with the sun becoming a red giant.
fritznien

brian334

• Hero Member
• Posts: 633
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #52 on: June 09, 2011, 02:10:41 AM »
So mercury is falling into the sun and the moon is moving away from the earth.
I guess you have to be a intellectual to understand how that works.

sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3942
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #53 on: June 09, 2011, 06:48:31 AM »
@ fritz
that is basically what i was implying when i mentioned  the "life span of the sun".

The sun will lose enough mass and energy (even with the consumption of mercury) that it will expand into a giant, long before the orbit of Venus decays enough to "fall into the sun".

So, by the time the Sun consumes the earth, it will be caused by expansion of the star, not by gravity.

@ Brian,

The moon moves both closer to, and away from the earth during different parts of its cycle. Its a complex elliptical pattern, influenced not only by the earth, but also by the gravity of other masses in our solar system.

fritznien

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 294
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #54 on: June 09, 2011, 08:06:22 AM »
@ fritz
that is basically what i was implying when i mentioned  the "life span of the sun".

The sun will lose enough mass and energy (even with the consumption of mercury) that it will expand into a giant, long before the orbit of Venus decays enough to "fall into the sun".

So, by the time the Sun consumes the earth, it will be caused by expansion of the star, not by gravity.

@ Brian,

The moon moves both closer to, and away from the earth during different parts of its cycle. Its a complex elliptical pattern, influenced not only by the earth, but also by the gravity of other masses in our solar system.
you made it sound like orbital decay was the only thing going on. when it would be the sun's red giant phase.
and what is an orbital ring? planets do not have orbitals like electrons do.
something slows a satelite it goes lower and moves faster. no set amount to move lower it depends on the loss of energy, isn't nature grand.
fritznien

sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3942
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #55 on: June 09, 2011, 03:16:43 PM »
what i meant by ring, was basically its current position and and directional vector / speed

distance, angular velocity

its not just the speed that matters, but also the angle it is traveling with respect to the sun (or whatever mass the sattellite is orbiting)
As the orbit decays, the angle of approach becomes steeper, which is why it speeds up, and also why it moves to the next closer step towards the sun. Remember, gravity is an accellerating force, and although the sattellite isnt falling "straight down", gravity is still pulling on it, the closer it gets, the more accelleration is imparted onto it, but not in the right vector-angle to push it outwards, its moving closer.

its a giant, slow spiral path, but each closer lap is at a slightly different angle than the one that preceeded it, and the orbit is slightly shorter around as a result. The overall angular momentum is conserved (minus losses), so, change the angle and the velocity changes.

If it simply sped up, without changing the angle - the orbit would assume a path further out. If you just gave it small bursts of speed, to maintain its current path, it would become "constant" like our man-made sattellites.

fritznien

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 294
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #56 on: June 09, 2011, 08:13:13 PM »
what i meant by ring, was basically its current position and and directional vector / speed

distance, angular velocity

its not just the speed that matters, but also the angle it is traveling with respect to the sun (or whatever mass the sattellite is orbiting)
As the orbit decays, the angle of approach becomes steeper, which is why it speeds up, and also why it moves to the next closer step towards the sun. Remember, gravity is an accellerating force, and although the sattellite isnt falling "straight down", gravity is still pulling on it, the closer it gets, the more accelleration is imparted onto it, but not in the right vector-angle to push it outwards, its moving closer.

its a giant, slow spiral path, but each closer lap is at a slightly different angle than the one that preceeded it, and the orbit is slightly shorter around as a result. The overall angular momentum is conserved (minus losses), so, change the angle and the velocity changes.

If it simply sped up, without changing the angle - the orbit would assume a path further out. If you just gave it small bursts of speed, to maintain its current path, it would become "constant" like our man-made sattellites.
an increase in energy takes the satellite into a higher slower orbit.
a decrease in energy takes the satellite into a lower faster orbit.
yes you can push one into a lower energy orbit where the satellite will reach a higher point for part of its orbit and lots
of other neat combinations.people like Brian are confused enough, how about you concentrate on writing
as clearly as possible so that they might learn something.
fritznien

brian334

• Hero Member
• Posts: 633
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #57 on: June 09, 2011, 11:11:47 PM »
The proposed test will prove gravity has mass.
Than maybe all of the nonsensical stuff posted here will go away.

sm0ky2

• Hero Member
• Posts: 3942
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #58 on: June 10, 2011, 07:20:18 AM »
The proposed test will prove gravity has mass.
Than maybe all of the nonsensical stuff posted here will go away.

None of the tests you have proposed are possible to perform with a degree of accuracy necessary to answer the question at hand..
If you truly wish to test such a thing, the test must be pheasible, and within the scope of human abilities.

The ground-based test i proposed, using equipment we are already familiar with, and well known methods currently in use - based on the direction of motion of the earth with respect to the direction of its' gravitational force, will definitively answer the question one way or the other.
The results (if gravity does indeed have mass) can be calculated mathematically, and compared to the results of the test.

brian334

• Hero Member
• Posts: 633
Re: A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass
« Reply #59 on: June 10, 2011, 10:03:35 PM »
The silly people that believe the mass of a object changes when it moves fast base there belief mostly in test performed in particle accelerators.
Therefore to prove mass does not change and gravity has mass why not use a acceptable method like a particle accelerator?