Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Impasse

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Michael Gutchess on January 14, 2003 15:12:02 UTC

Dear Greg,
I am happy to "hear another voice" responding to my theory. You will notice, if you have not yet, that I do not have a huge scientific background. I am a pretty smart wood-be poet who can read and understand some physics. So I can not answer your questions with precise scientific rigour. But I will attempt to respond to your questions with logic.

1)***Electromagnetic waves can be blocked by objects or interfered with by other E.M. waves. There is no method I am familiar with that can interfere with gravity. If gravity and magnetism are different aspects of the same force should not there be a way to interfere with gravity?***
Yes, EM waves can be blocked, by solid material bariers which reflect or absorb the waves. But can the force of magnetism be blocked? I do not think so. Magnets will attract eachother across physical barriers thru which at least the visable portion of the EM spectrum can not pass. What about lead thru which not even x-rays or most other forms of EM radiation can pass? I believe that two magnets will transmit their forces thru a sheet of lead or other radiation blocking barrier. If this is true, the conclusion is that neither magnetism nor gravity can be blocked, while what we understand to be EM waves can be blocked. Maybe this has something to do with wavelength and amplitude. Consider water waves; a motorboat wave can be blocked (or interfered with) by a barrier at a height above the water level which is less than the wave amplitude. While a rowboat wave, with a lower amplitude will pass under the barrier, undisturbed. Lower the barrier to block (interfere with) the rowboat wave, then drop a small stone in the water; it's wave, with lower amplitude, will pass under the barrier undisturbed. I believe that our current understanding of EM waves does not encompass a broad enough spectrum of wavelengths and amplitudes. I think that when we go to the very smallest waves that matter produces, by the oscillations of charged atomic elements, the wavelengths are so small and disturbance amplitude so small that these waves can pass practically undisturbed thru most, if not all, forms of matter. And it is these waves, still EM nature - because they are produced as a result of the movement of a charged particle, that are responsible for the transmission of magnetism and gravity.

2)***You write of gravitons, but who has actually seen one or verified the presence of one?***
Who has actually seen a photon? We have verified their presence thru double slit experiments and photon multipliers, etc. But we have not seen one. Modern physics maintains that the photon is it's own anti-particle, but how can this be? It would annihilate itself. But it stays in existance and keeps its course. Any other annihilation results in energy flying away in many directions. Also, when we speak of an antiparticle we infer a duality. I say that the photon-graviton pair is this duality. Do they orbit one another, bounce off one another due to opposite spin in a sea of ether? We can not see the mechanism, but we can imagine it by observing the results of their interplay. If you are capable of critical analysis of a real theory I suggest that you visit http://www.lighttheory.com
I found this site while trying to learn more about EM waves and was startled how well it fits my theory, while stopping short of a theory of gravity or magnetism. Let me know your thoughts on that site if you go there.

3)Measure of energy? Measure of Gravity? these sound like trick questions. They certainly can be interpreted in several ways. Save me some time and let me know where you are going with this.

I look forward to hearing from you.
MOG

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2018 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins