On Jun 3, 7:03 am, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I dunno... jr.... your claim that gravity IS electromagnetic force...
jr writes> You are oversimplifying what I wrote making it unnecessarily complex. I am saying that in the planet surface case we have the phenomenon we witness and define as electromagnetism. This either involves an ordered array of atoms externally or an ordered array of atoms that are arranged optimally internally… or both (No proposal here now of the meaning of optimal although I have entertained that elsewhere).The other “non-electromagnetic matter” is arranged irregularly enough internally as to not behave electromagnetically as we define electromagnetism. We witness magnetism but we feel it secondarily not directly as a pull on us but indirectly as a pull on a magnet, etc. I have explained that gravity is a force that begins and ends in what we as living objects feel. If our atoms were arranged optimally we could feel magnetism directly. When our atoms are so arranged we are in the process of being electrocuted. The idea that gravity is a separate force from the universe than the manifestation of a force we feel causes us to invent absurd notions like blackholes… just as though electromagnetism is subservient to a force we feel. A force we feel will crush electromagnetism into a blackhole. A force we feel will cause electromagnetism a problem. Why is it only me that readily sees the absurdity here? Clearly gravity is a force we feel and electromagnetism is a force that fortunately we don’t feel most of the time. We can say since gravity is a force we feel it is fundamental and inanimate objects also are subservient to this force. Except that clearly inanimate objects are not alive and I assume then that inanimate objects do not feel anything. So whatever force is acting on us, since it is uniquely defined by each of our weights and our weights are a function of our matter and our matter is composed of atoms, then if gravity is the universal controller, the inanimate object also composed of atoms must feel the cumulative resistance of its atoms. But since it is not alive as a body of connected atoms, can at best only feel one atom at a time. Thus all atoms fall at the same rate in a vacuum never recognizing that together they exert a greater force together than apart. But if they could feel that collective force they would initially believe in it too. doesn't seem to hold too much factual accuracy.... at least not as electromagnetic forces are so far understood... jr writes> Electromagnetism is not understood at all. If it were understood blackholes would be understood as the foolishness they are. Blackholes are a direct consequence of our gravitational ignorance. Like a force we feel will commandeer electromagnetism… er uh the speed of light. . If gravity were just a plain electromagnetic force jr writes> How many times must it be written. Gravity is a force we as living objects feel. We can define what we feel consistent with a product of the quantities mass and acceleration. Mass does not change with location and [g] depends solely on location. The universe is a least action universe where mass [m] and acceleration [g] operate within that least action, thus enabling the functional use of mathematics which is least action consistent in all cases. We feel the pull of the planet as the product [mg]. We will feel this numerical least action consistent quantity everywhere. That does not mean that the universe is controlled by the force we feel. Electromagnetism acts on atoms. Gravity is what we feel acting on our atoms in total. We work against this cumulative pull. So we have gravity and electromagnetism each acting on our atoms. Can we get a consensus there? Gravity acts on atoms. Electro-Magnetism acts on atoms. then "we" could all just reverse the polarity between two objects and propel ourselves away from "Things".... like a spaceship could just "force" itself through space by bouncing off or hopscotching from one source of gravity to another... jr writes> You keep on treating the force you exert as the force that the universe exerts. What you feel and what you apply has been defined consistent with the universe action. I say that altho’ it is functional it is fantasy beyond your sense of force. this is nice science fiction, so far... still, however, "we" haven' t been able to build a motor to do it... jr writes> Gravity is convenient science fiction. Believe in the universality of the force you initiate in response to an attraction on your atoms because it is functional everywhere in the universe that you feel it and you and those who think like you will invent blackholes that eliminate the attraction on atoms and make that force subject to what you feel. Why should the force you initiate also be a force you respond to? Where the resistance you encounter is merely defined consistent with a force you feel. . maybe some ETs (if they exist) have.....I don't mean to ridicule.... but I think your proposed factual definition to me regarding gravity as an electromagnetic force requires further explanation or amplification... jr writes> You are correct. If I cannot explain it to others it is worthless. . you might just well know that what you are saying is absolutely true... but you need to explain it a bit better to my un- scientific "layman's" ignorant mind... jr writes> I better know what is absolutely false than what is absolutely true.. I still ask... can you better define what gravity is?....Is it a "force" that can be "generated"... like electricity.... or magnetism.... or nuclear level weak and strong et al... forces jr writes> OK let’s take nuclear forces. Do we really entertain the notion that gravity will eliminate nuclear force. Just compress it to a blackhumanhole immediately after it eliminates atomic forces as it travels inexorably on its gravitational crushing path based on what we feel as force when we apply force to resistance, and a rate of travel that exceeds the speed of…? The speed of light? Everything is subject to the speed of light? Where light is another sensory quantity that encompasses EMR because we see illuminated objects? Note the the description WE SEE and note the description WE FEEL. Don’t you think that nuclear forces can respond to excessive pressure. The extrapolation of what we feel. And is there pressure enough to cause atomic obliteration? Is there lotsa’ space in atoms. We know that atoms generate electromagnetism by optimal internal arrangement in conjunction with external arrangement. We know that such arrangements cause EM force to extend beyond the confines of the so ordered atoms. I say that long before a blackhumanfelthole occurs the nuclear and atomic lines of force will join to counter the measely human notion of gravitational pressure. A collapse will occur and a super atom will generate electromagnetism that will arrange control and attract all atoms, whatever their configuration. Like normal electromagnetism this super atom will act on atoms, but unlike the electromagnetism we encounter this super atom will act on all atoms and we will call it gravity. Have a good time. johnreed On Jun 3, 7:03 am, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I dunno... jr.... your claim that gravity IS electromagnetic force.... > doesn't seem to hold too much factual accuracy.... at least not as > electromagnetic forces are so far understood.... If gravity were just > a plain electromagnetic force then "we" could all just reverse the > polarity between two objects and propel ourselves away from > "Things".... like a spaceship could just "force" itself through space > by bouncing off or hopscotching from one source of gravity to > another.... this is nice science fiction, so far... still, however, > "we" haven' t been able to build a motor to do it.... maybe some ETs > (if they exist) have.....I don't mean to ridicule.... but I think your > proposed factual definition to me regarding gravity as an > electromagnetic force requires further explanation or > amplification.... you might just well know that what you are saying is > absolutely true... but you need to explain it a bit better to my un- > scientific "layman's" ignorant mind.... > I still ask... can you better define what gravity is?....Is it a > "force" that can be "generated"... like electricity.... or > magnetism.... or nuclear level weak and strong et al... forces? > > > > > > > > >on Jun 2, 9:06 pm, johnlawrencereedjr <thejohnlr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Nominal 9 wrote> > > I have nothing to tear away, really.... I don't have any "new" > > answers > > or theories to propose... It might be easier if "we" figured out > > whether gravity is some sort of actual energy force..... what about > > asking where gravity "originates" from? > > > jr writes> > > On the one hand this turns out to be a simple and illuminating answer. > > On the other hand the origination of anything hardly seems to be an > > obtainable answer. There is always another open question behind any > > solution. What we wind up with are perspectives that are less wrong > > rather than all encompassing and stone cold correct. > > What I meant to say was “are you with me so far” or “do you have any > > serious objections or points of absolute disagreement?” It hardly > > seems to make sense in continuing if you have a serious objection so > > far. > > I have already written where gravity originates from. Gravity > > originates from our tactile sense. An action is applied and we sense a > > “Force”. Our sense of force is in the effort we apply to an outside > > action of resistance. We lift a rock. We push a cart. We drag a sled. > > In all these actions we can say that we are acting in response to a > > “resistance”. We can ask what causes the resistance. If we ask what > > causes gravity while we assume that gravity causes the resistance in > > cases (the vertical mainly), we are bound to a path we have defined in > > our own image. > > We are assuming that the force we exert is equal and opposite to a > > force the universe exerts on us. We have defined the resistance we > > encounter [mg] as equal to the force we exert. > > So how is it we are enabled to do this? The answer is demonstrated > > with the function of the balance scale. The balance scale isolates the > > quantity mass [m] (because the planet attractor does not act on mass > > [m]) which does not change with location. The balance scale also > > measures what we feel [mg] where [mg] changes with location because > > [g] is dependent on location and not dependent on mass [m]. > > So [m] and [g] are consistent attributes of the universe that we can > > quantify in units that match what we feel, or weight [mg]. > > .is it an "attraction" > > jr writes> > > We feel resistance. We respond to an attraction. The attraction is not > > acting on our weight [mg]. Our weight is a measure of the resistance > > we feel. The planet attractor is not acting on what we think we feel. > > The planet attractor acts on our atoms. We feel the cumulative > > resistance of our acted upon atoms. > > generated within the atomic structure of things... drawing everything > > together?.... or is it some sort of "repulsion" whereby somehow > > things > > are pushed toward one another as long as some modicum of gravity is > > "there", in the "containment vessel of space"... but once gravity > > is ... overpassed... or the gravity field is left behind... then the > > "escaped" things just... spin off.... is gravity contained in a > > metaphorical "fabric of somehow "full" yet apparently "empty" > > space"... or is gravity just contained within the confines of the > > atomic structure of "things", themselves... and once the ties of > > attraction are severed.... so long attraction....so long > > togetherness... > > > jr writes> > > See my above explanation. Forget a universal cause called gravity. > > What you feel is equal and opposite to the force you exert. The > > attraction is on atoms to start, which is electromagnetic. When the > > number of atoms gets large enough to over power our subjective sense > > of Force in units of “gravity” a collapse to a black hole caused by > > our subjective super controller gravity does not occur. > > What happens in response to that pressure is a realignment of the > > individual atomic electromagnetic fields which realignment results in > > a collapse and a super dynamo (super atom) at the cores of planets and > > suns that attracts all matter not merely the matter composed of > > optimally aligned atoms that we recognize as electromagnetic matter. > > Have a good time. johnreed. > > > On Jun 2, 7:45 am, nominal9 <nomin...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > I have nothing to tear away, really.... I don't have any "new" answers > > > or theories to propose... It might be easier if "we" figured out > > > whether gravity is some sort of actual energy force..... what about > > > asking where gravity "originates" from?.... is it an "attraction" > > > generated within the atomic structure of things... drawing everything > > > together?.... or is it some sort of "repulsion" whereby somehow things > > > are pushed toward one another as long as some modicum of gravity is > > > "there", in the "containment vessel of space"... but once gravity > > > is ... overpassed... or the gravity field is left behind... then the > > > "escaped" things just... spin off.... is gravity contained in a > > > metaphorical "fabric of somehow "full" yet apparently "empty" > > > space"... or is gravity just contained within the confines of the > > > atomic structure of "things", themselves... and once the ties of > > > attraction are severed.... so long attraction....so long > > > togetherness... > > > On May 26, 2:59 am, johnlawrencereedjr <thejohnlr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > jr writes > > > > If you assume that an attraction called gravity exists between objects > > > > in general, because you feel an attraction toward the planet that is > > > > equal and opposite to the effort (Force) you apply… and if you want to > > > > generalize the effort you apply to the entire inanimate universe as an > > > > effort that acts on you by the inanimate universe, the universe can be > > > > successfully negotiated in terms that you work against ie, Force > > > > which is defined as the product [mass times gravitational > > > > acceleration] or [mg]. Since the universe can be negotiated with these > > > > concepts we have a pragmatic reason to insure that these concepts are > > > > well taught and anything that contradicts the actual veracity of the > > > > concepts must do so in an all inclusive manner. > > > > > The fact that you can lift a chunk of the planet say, a rock, and it > > > > is equal and opposite to your effort and therefore equal and opposite > > > > to the effort of the planet means that the planet acts on mass with > > > > the effort you apply in all cases. Our convenient mathematical term > > > > called mass [m] can be used quantitatively to account for this. > > > > > A fact that a planet exerts the precise amount of Force [mg] that > > > > you exert to lift any part of the planet allows us to declare that our > > > > effort is equal and opposite to the action of the planet. Joe’s > > > > effort, Tom’s effort, your and my effort… all equal and opposite to > > > > the effort of the planet. The planet just knows how to adjust to our > > > > effort when we think that the planet acts on mass. But of course the > > > > resistance must be equal and opposite to the effort we expend. > > > > > So let’s do some impact experiments in terms of the Force called > > > > weight which is also called [mg] but becomes [ma] when working free of > > > > the so called gravitational force with quantities like [mv] momentum.. > > > > [a] and [g] represent acceleration. [v] is velocity. [m] represents > > > > mass. > > > > > What we know for certain about gravity is that it is a Force that we > > > > feel. It’s magnitude [mg] depends on the product of the magnitude of > > > > [m] which does not change with location [g] or [a] which do change > > > > with location [g] or [a]. In the case of [g] an increase occurs until > > > > it impacts with the planet. In the case of [a] a decrease occurs > > > > absent a source of self power. Both an increase and a decrease in > > > > speed or velocity change is regarded as acceleration. > > > > > I seem to remember that "force"... can be separated into various > > > > sorts... gravity...electromagnetic ... and nuclear... > > > > then there are other "use" forces as applied in Physics... > > > > . > > > > jr writes> Yes Force is a term we understand. A term we feel. Gravity > > > > is something we feel and initiate in response to something that acts > > > > on us. We understand electromagnetic force as a force that acts > > > > between atoms. It was once believed that the atoms must be a certain > > > > type with a certain ordered internal and external arrangement, to be > > > > subject to or to generate electromagnetism. We have created plastic > > > > that acts like magnets by modifying a quantity we call spin. Nuclear > > > > Force has been demonstrated and no one doubts it’s existence. Force is > > > > something we can feel in all cases. The question is: is the force we > > ... > > read more » -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
