Is Gravity as a Force of Attraction: the only explanation?

[RascalPuff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by everymansmedium
Hello RP:
Thinking:
The below thoughts do not seem to work. Or maybe I read something wrong.

The tides and sun moon observation are that of one that spent a few years fishing commercially.
We have rising moon low tides and setting moon low tides. There is a different way to fish either type of tide. A setting moon low tide means a very dark night. A rising moon low tide will be with the aid of the light of the moon. Most fishing on the banks begins at low and is best on a rising tide. Most fishing the shore at the mouth of a river is best on an outgoing tide.

Full moon cycle:
Could you explain to me how the tides on the earth work relative to the sun and moon.

Standard observation indicates that when the moon is full at midnight it will also be high tide.
At 6:00 am or pm the sun will be on one horizon and the moon will be on the other. This is low tide. Am is rising sun and setting moon. PM is a rising moon tide. Good for the banks at night.

New moon cycle:
On a new moon both the sun and the moon are on the same side of the earth at the same time. In the evening about 6:00 PM both the sun and moon are on the west horizon. It would be low tide at this time. At noon time both the sun and the moon are directly overhead. This is the highest of the high tides during the month. PM both the sun and the moon are setting it will be a dark night. Take the night off. Be ready to fish before dawn. As the sun comes up. Must be careful of very low water on the way out.. AM both sun and moon are on the east horizon. This is a very low tide. The fishing will be good as the sun comes up. Low water High fish concentration.


It also appears that the only explanation is an attracting force.
John
__________________________________________________ ________

Thanks very much for your interest and critique, John, apparently, you're an outstanding fisherman also:
You're right about the attracting force acting-at-a-distance, causing tidal effect - there are two force vectors, side by side; acting in opposite directions, just as they occur in the microcosms, where two charges, side by side, simultaneously attract - and repel against - one another.

On or near a major gravitational coordinate system we experience and observe the effects of GR - a repelling force...

At a distance, with the extended transitory electromagnetic influence of SR, the force of gravity is both impelling and repelling; based on Newton's Third Law - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Tantamount to the cosmological constant acting at even greater distances.

Please tell me what further thoughts you may have on this.
(Can I use your pm message here, in the book?)

- RP
__________________________________________________ ________

Quote:
Originally Posted by everymansmedium
Hi RP:

Is this the same as AE's original with the CC reintroduced?

Then you add the 5th and 6th dimensions relative to
electric field and magnetic field?

These are normally seen as being 90 degrees out of phase. I am thinking about this.

It seems to me that the configuration of the 5th and 6th dimensions must not be the same linear configuration as the first 4. It must go in the opposite direction. rather than a larger expanding creating dimension. It must turn inward toward itself.
resulting in an internal type. Would this be increasing in a negative direction?

It seems that it might be possible to see all of the other forces as a result of matter or matter as the result of the forces, or maybe both ideas are true?
Just thinking.
John

Imo, you think well, John.
There's an updated rendition of Total Field Theory to be posted shortly. There's more information; including more clarification of contraction and expansion - 'conspansion'; with some more narrative and documented information.

Nobody, Austin and I are editing it now. I would be honored with your further viewpoints on these issues after they're transferred to update what is presently posted in the ToeQuest Articles.

- RP

[matterdoc]

May I request your attention to http://www.geocities.com/matterdoc/tides.pdf

matterdoc

[RascalPuff]

Dear matterdoc:

Your guidance alludes to an url which cautions that it's usage may be harmful to computers.

Will you convey an abbreviation of the message at the cited url?

[matterdoc]

Dear matterdoc:

Your guidance alludes to an url which cautions that it's usage may be harmful to computers.

Will you convey an abbreviation of the message at the cited url?

Sir,
I tried from two computers but find no problem to download the article.

In case you find it difficult, you can go to http://www.geocities.com/matterdoc/index.html and find the said article in the articles section. You can find few more articles there.
If required, I can give you another site or even send the article directly to you in word.doc or adobe.pdf format.

Here is the abstract of the article;
Abstract: Due to constant motions of free bodies, it is practically impossible for a free body to orbit around another. However, they may orbit about each other and follow a common median path in space. Such motion, when viewed from a planet appears to be its orbital motion around the central body. This is merely an illusion created by the relative motions of the bodies. Changing inertial frames and arbitrary changes in the direction of motion, during analytical operations, help to bring their results in line with observations. Taking this apparent motion as a scientific fact and applying it to prove the validity of “laws of gravity” is illogical. Mechanism of orbit-formation and the limitations of orbiting bodies described in this article are based on a radically different dynamics from an alternative concept put forward in “Hypothesis on MATTER”. Planet’s parameters during initial entry into its datum orbit determine the size and eccentricity of its apparent orbit. Only those bodies, which approach the central body from the rear, on the outer side of its curved path, through a small window can form stable orbits. Hence, it is imperative that all bodies of a planetary system orbit in the same sense and are (almost) in the same plane. Perihelion/aphelion of an orbital path could be anywhere in the orbit, but the point at which the orbiting body has its highest/lowest linear speeds are fixed in relation to the central body’s path. All natural planets, whose perihelion are in front of their point of entry; arrive from outside the planetary system. Since the effects of bodies, outside a planetary system, on the parameters of central and planetary bodies are (almost) identical, such effects are negligible. Effects of other bodies, within the planetary system, on the parameters of central and planetary bodies are neglected in this article.

[RascalPuff]

Dear matterdoc:
Your Hypothesis on MATTER, an alternative concept, by Nainan K. Varghese (Is that you, sir?), I read with interest at the url you provided.

The first statement of the list of 18 seems particularly noteworthy ("Fundamentally, there is only one type of force and it is of a push nature.") since it parallels the member article (authored by myself) in the forums section of Theory of Everything:


http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...ies.html?ltr=T

Please review and express your comparative considerations of this work.

Sincerely,
- RP

[matterdoc]

Thanks for the post.

I think private discussions should be held outside the forum. Please sent me your email ID at matterdoc@gmail.com

With regards,
matterdoc

[RascalPuff]

Thanks for the post.

I think private discussions should be held outside the forum. Please sent me your email ID at matterdoc@gmail.com

With regards,
matterdoc

_________________________

Dear matterdoc:
Although I don't understand why, 'Outlook Express' mail is dysfunctional on my computer.
There is the option of communicating via Private Messages - is that acceptable to you?

Sincerely,
- RP

[matterdoc]

Dear RP,
Thank you very much. Since I could not get your email ID I will post my reply. Let me quote from one of my essay;

************
Analytically, force is defined as the product of mass (representing the matter content) of a body and the rate of change of “rate of change of” body’s displacement (its acceleration) in space. In this case, only the displacement of the body is tangible in space. Both the mass and force are usually defined, by circular logic from this relation. Since the rest-mass (mass of a static body) represents its matter content, under steady conditions, matter content of a body remains constant. This leaves the force as a mathematical relation between the matter content and the acceleration of a body. A mathematical relation is purely a functional entity. It has no real existence in space. It exists only in the calculations and in the mind of the operator. Rational beings, who do the calculation, assign its meaning.

In reality, a force is recognized by its action. That is, a force comes into existence only when there is an action. Even an attempt or application of an effort cannot create force. Force is the relation between the action to the change of state of a body and the magnitude of body’s matter content. State of (motion of) a body is the magnitude of its linear motion. Therefore, a force is a rate of change in a body’s state of motion at constant velocity. If there is no action, force does not exist. Action is the change in the magnitude of linear speed and it can be achieved by natural forces or forces derived from natural forces. All natural forces cause motions of matter bodies in linear directions. Motion in circular paths and rotary motions are resultants of simultaneous linear motions in many directions.

Over and above the separation, into attractive and repulsive forces by their nature of action, natural forces are classified into various categories according to the phenomena, which cause them. Thus, natural forces are manifested as gravitational force, electric force, magnetic force and weak and strong nuclear forces. Actions performed by all of them are similar and same. All actions change the state of motion of matter bodies. Rates of these changes are the forces. Thus, irrespective of the nature or phenomena causing the action, rate of an action is nothing but the change in the state of body’s linear motion. There is no distinction between the rates of changes of states of body’s linear motion with respect to the phenomena causing them. Hence, though forces are developed due to different phenomena, they are similar in all respects. All of them are mathematical relation between rest-mass of the body and rate of change of its velocity. Hence, there is no meaning in classifying forces into different categories according to the phenomena, which cause them and then trying to unify them buy analytical methods. Presently, within and outside the scientific establishments, thousands of scientists are working hard to achieve this unification of forces. Rightly, what they should try is to unify various phenomena causing the forces, as the author has done in his book. There are no different types of forces; all forces are similar in all respects, other than the phenomena that cause them.
************

I read three chapters of your book from the website. I beg to give my opinion on fundamental dimensions as below;

Dimensions are systems of measurements. To be meaningful to the rational beings, a measurement needs to be related to a reference. Measurements of space are of displacement or distance in space. (Space, is a functional entity that is a region, where matter bodies exist). Distance in space could be in any direction. To make definite meaning of distances or to compare them, it has to be related to a reference point in space. For this purpose, the rational beings divide the space about a reference point by three mutually perpendicular planes, passing through the reference point. Distance is then measured from each of these planes to specify the location of any point in space. Difference between the locations of two points gives the distance between them. Measurements in all planes are related to distance. This method of dividing the space gave us the three fundamental dimensions of space. There cannot be another fundamental dimension of space, unless the rational beings can divide the space by adding another plane with the three mutually perpendicular planes, already existing. The same fundamental measurement – distance - is used all three fundamental dimensions of space.
It is up to the rational beings to assign meanings to functional entities designed by them. Dimensions are functional entities. They have no material existence or physical forms. A body without physical form cannot distort or deform. Fundamental dimensions of space (as we use them presently), being functional entities, can neither expand nor contract nor move in any direction.

With regards,
matterdoc

[RascalPuff]

dear matterdoc:
Truly Yours requests that at your convenience you read the remainder of
http://www.toequest.com/forum/toe-th...ies.html?ltr=T
and offer your continued comparative views, as you have so generously done regarding the first three chapters.

[AntonioLao]

Is Gravity as a Force of Attraction: the only explanation?

One alternative explanation is that gravity is a collective force of matter (mass). If mass increases then gravity increases. If mass decreases then gravity decreases. Down to the size of an atom gravity practically vanishes and the dominant force is taken over by the force of electromagnetism. If the size decreases to the nuclear dimensions then the EM force is replaced by the weak and the strong nuclear forces.