What is your thought?

[xelasnave]

Originally Posted by Baddad

Hey Astro Geeks,
Within our part of the universe, speculation exists and or proof, as to the existence of gravity, dark matter, white holes, black holes, etc.

Light has a finite velocity. What about gravity? Can it be somehow illustrated whether gravity has a velocity component or not.

Matter would need to be created and then the gravity detected I would assume?
If it can somehow be 'blocked' would be interesting.

I throw this to you "wolves" out there. What do you guys think?

Cheers Marty

Are you talking to me
or are you unaware that some folk have very define views on gravity

Maybe the Universe started like a cucumber..they swell up and explode to scatter its seeds all over...mmm now that one has to go near the top surely

alex

[Baddad (Marty)]

Hey xelasnave ,
Gravity does not Suck

I like that, Gravity does,,,,.

By inserting a beginning to the Universe Begins a tirade of repeated questions. What was before the cucumber? A seed?

What was before the seed? A "Green Thing"?

What was before the Green Thing?
Nothing!

Do I dare ask?

Personally I can not see a religious answer here and that subject is taboo anyway.

Infinity is beyond human comprehension. But we still put in some kind of alternative to satisfy the question and maintain peace of mind.

I wasn't talking to just you Alex. I'm asking questions on what others opinions are about gravity. It seems to me to be a key to both the quiesant and volatile states in the universe. There are other unknown factors but I'm not going in to that just yet.

Cheers Marty

[Ralbert Jastein (Raju)]

Originally Posted by Ralbert Jastein

Hi all!
Considering the theories of the formation of the universe, is it not more logical to think that anything is possible?
Can anyone somehow prove that absolutely anything is not impossible regarding the formation of the universe?
How do you think the universe was formed?
Is it as likely to have been formed from a giant vegetable as the 'Big Bang'?
Yes, why not?

Originally Posted by avandonk

This conjecture is crap. We may as well say the universe was created by a pink bunny rabbit. Is that valid? NO!

Unless your wild imaginings can be tested by experiment your imaginings are just that mild crap!

Sorry but go and learn some basic science. If that is too difficult stop posting drivel.


I make no apologies for this position as too many uninformed religious/deluded twits try to pervert real science with their drivel to lead the uninformed to an even worse position to the true believers of dross.

I just cannot help myself! Like shooting fish in a barrel!

Bert

I apologize for any misunderstandings, this was merely posted to prove the point that it is important to keep an open mind when it comes to the formation of the universe and to find out about other peoples thoughts as i find it quite interesting.
Raju

[Robh (Rob)]

Raju,
It worked for me. There was a bit of humour and some serious speculation.
I enjoyed reading most of the posts.
Can't wait for your next one.
Regards, Rob.

[ZL4PLM (Simon)]

I think the little green men did it ..........

[Baddad (Marty)]

Hey Raju and People of Astro Geek interests,

Originally Posted by Robh

Raju,
It worked for me. There was a bit of humour and some serious speculation.
I enjoyed reading most of the posts.
Can't wait for your next one.
Regards, Rob.

Keep it going, Rob has been reading my mind. I was about to say the same thing.

Has Rob been hangin' with that Green Lady? Developing telepathic powers?

Cheers Marty

[MrB (Simon)]

Raju, I'm gonna agree with the others, this thread is a success!
3 pages and only one negative comment, I think it's a record!

[joe_smith]

Originally Posted by marki

I agree Joe that Dawkins is well a complete dork but to say something we have not worked out yet is due to some great mystery or beyond our capacity to understand is a little nieve. It will take time and a great deal of effort but in the end it must be solved like a great deal of other mysteries have been solved. Please use this thread to have a bit of fun and not turn it into a religion vs science debate. It is a fruitless argument and and always ends up in the thread being locked much to the detriment of others who are just having a bit of a laugh.

Mark

I did not mention anything about the R word in my point and in no way was I referring to it.. The point was the way some people from the science community state things as being a proven fact, when in fact its not. I agree it will take a great deal of time looking for the answers, and to get them science might have to open some old doors they might not like, yes the R word. I believe that somethings in the universe and life are beyond our capacity to understand given any amount of time. Sure we will find the when and how of a lot of answers but we will never know the why.

I'm into a bit of a laugh as well. threads get closed because people (not referring to anyone) are so passionate with their views they close their minds to others. We are all different, I like this from a book I read "A man is literally what he thinks, his character being the complete sum of all his thoughts".

[marki]

Originally Posted by joe_smith

The point was the way some people from the science community state things as being a proven fact, when in fact its not. .....................I believe that somethings in the universe and life are beyond our capacity to understand given any amount of time. Sure we will find the when and how of a lot of answers but we will never know the why.

Hi Joe

I think you would be hard pressed to find any real scientist willing to state that "this is a proven scientific fact" certainly in my experience anyway. I think much of this sort of thing comes from media hype where journo's are trying to stir emotions in their readers. All that can ever be said is that from the large body of evidence gathered we believe that this may be the case. Quite frankly any other view is usually uninformed or just plain foolish. You only need to look at the history of science and the constantly evolving theories to see this is the case. I however do not believe that anything is beyond our understanding. Right now it may be a little cloudy but in the end we will be able to offer a plausable explaination or at least come up with a method of prediction that works.

Mark

[joe_smith]

Thanks for the reply mark

for a bit more food for thought This is out of a book and to me it sums up the view I am trying to get across, about how I think mainstream science and other types of view's work. to be taken with bit of humor

The Blind Man and the Elephant

It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant~(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation~Might satisfy his mind.

The First approached the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side, ~ At once began to bawl:
ʺGod bless me! but the Elephant ~ Is very like a wall!ʺ

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, ʺHo! what have we here?
So very round and smooth and sharp? ~ To me ’tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant ~ Is very like a spear!ʺ

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands, ~ Thus boldly up and spake:
ʺI see,ʺ quoth he, ʺthe Elephant ~ Is very like a snake!ʺ

The Fourth reached out an eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
ʺWhat most this wondrous beast is like ~ Is mighty plain,ʺ quoth her;
ʺ’Tis clear enough the Elephant ~ Is very like a tree!ʺ

The Fifth who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: ʺE’en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most; ~ Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant ~ Is very like a fan!ʺ

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Than, seizing on the swinging tail ~ That fell within his scope,
ʺI see,ʺ quoth he, ʺthe Elephant ~ Is very like a rope!

3

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion ~ Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right ~ And all were in the wrong!

Moral

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

‐John Godfrey Saxe

The book is called "The Hologram by Jeff Behnke and released under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0

[Baddad (Marty)]

Hey Joe,

The Blind Man and the Elephant

I like it. Difficult to live up to as we are all human. ( I hope).

Cheers Marty

[xelasnave]

Hi Marty just joking ..I have been known to express certain views and they tend to mention gravity.. well in truth I am obsessed with gravity and sometimes think that folk who know me drop the word just to see me go into a rave...

anyways it is my belief that your questions recognise the paramount importance of gravity and that with out a valid understanding of how it works then no other questions in the Universe can be correctly considered.

Gravity is a pressure system created from the infinite flow of particles throughout our Universe and such flow manifests as all energy ..electricity is the flow, magnetism is the flow, gravity is the flow.... however why these particles rush from one end of the Universe to the other is beyond my understanding..I have no idea why they should do this...but I feel if we could understand their lifes journey we may glimpse perhaps the reason and purpose of everything..which is of course a loose term to describe the Universe itself.

Great thread Ralbert I support your motives to stimulate thinking and discussion and say that your have enjoyed great sucess in manifesting your intention:thumb sup:.

It is great to see the wonderful inputs..so humerous, so well considered and even some very profound thinking.

alex

[yinyang23 (Geoffrey)]

Originally Posted by Baddad

Hey Astro Geeks,

Light has a finite velocity. What about gravity? Can it be somehow illustrated whether gravity has a velocity component or not.

Matter would need to be created and then the gravity detected I would assume?
If it can somehow be 'blocked' would be interesting.

Hi Marty,
Having only joined a few weeks ago, I am unsure of whether I should engage in such a discussion.
I am, however, prone to throwing caution to the wind so...

I had this idea a few years ago - does gravity act instantaneously or is there a lag effect? - as you stated, matter would need to be created to test this however.

What if we start with a large body, say a planet (to please the ethically minded the planet would be devoid of life) and proceed to transform the matter of the planet energy (in the form of, say, EM radiation).

Another body, a satellite of the first planet, would thus lose the gravitational force acting upon it and shoot off at a tangent.

We could measure the time difference between the matter-energy transfer and the shooting off at a tangent to determine if gravity does have a velocity component.

Am I in way over my head? Am I considering things I can not even begin to comprehend? YES. But I would like to know if my experiment is plausible or not.

[Baddad (Marty)]

Hey Geoffrey,
I like your style. I am just a newbie here too. I kind of make myself known to people and enter into anything that interests me.

Having read your idea I can't see it not working. Is good (Is Hans)...

Ofcourse there are people out there that are more knowledgeable than us and must have thought of such experiments in the past. Why we haven't heard any results? Who knows.

Also don't be timid in entering discussions. The established members always encourage you to have a go.

Cheers Marty

[Robh (Rob)]

Hi Geoffrey from Post 53,
Just read your experiment and had to come back in on this one.
Great idea! I think it could work if the speed of gravity is less than or equal to the speed of light. You have to time the start of the experiment i.e. the beginning of the mass conversion to energy. If you're relying on light to see this, the light has to get to the observer before or at the same time as the satellite shoots off. If gravity acts faster than the speed of light, the satellite would shoot off before the light signal got to the observer. Seemingly, before the timer started. Hey, wait a minute, it would still work but it would be negative time!
Regards, Rob

[marki]

Originally Posted by joe_smith

Thanks for the reply mark


The Blind Man and the Elephant

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion ~ Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right ~ And all were in the wrong!

Moral

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!

‐John Godfrey Saxe

Haha, That about sums it up. I remember many eons ago when I was doing a phys chem degree, my analytical chem proffessor recounting a recent spat he had with the biology crew. The biologists wanted to use one of the chemistry departments instruments to collect data for an experiment they were doing but had been told by the chemists that the instrument was not sensitive enough for their needs. They ignored all advice and went ahead anyway. What is worse is that they got their results published in a scientific journal. I still have visions of student biologists quoting this paper as valid evidence (read quoting random noise of an under whelmed sensor). Frisbee (the proffessors nick name due to the way he threw slides across the over head projector) finished his sermon with some very wise words. Don't believe anything you read and only half of what you see . This is the view I firmly suscribe to.

Mark