Gravity experiment

The diagram above illustrates the point on Earth in its orbit around the Sun where I predict gravity will be the strongest based on my theory that gravity is an effect of matter moving through space. The "tail" marks the point on the Earth where this increased gravity should be most apparent.

I propose that gravity measurements --- or weights --- will vary on Earth at different times of the year and day because the Earth is creating turbulence in spacetime as it orbits the Sun. The greatest gravity will be observed when the Earth is nearest the Sun --- January 3 --- and at a point on the Earth's surface which is between the point closest to the Sun --- a place in daylight --- and opposite the direction in which the Earth is traveling.

This variation will be small because of the Sun's overwhelming effect on the Earth, but my theory will explain the difference. It will not be due to an attractive force of matter because in that case gravity would be greatest at a point on the Earth's surface farthest from the Sun. In other words, if matter has an inherent attractive force then the gravity of the Sun and the Earth would combine to create the greatest gravity at a point opposite the side of the Earth facing the Sun --- a place in the night.

Instead, my theory explains that gravity is the effect of the Earth moving against the fabric of space as it orbits the Sun. This motion is due to the Big Bang, which is causing all matter to move through space. The variations in gravity on Earth are due to the density of matter and the speed of its motion, such that the Earth will exhibit the greatest gravity when it is moving the fastest and meeting the most resistance. In other words, gravity will be the strongest when the Earth is closest to the Sun.

It is just a theory, and it must take into account other variables in this context, such as the position of the Moon and other planets. But my prediction in this experiment may tend to prove that gravity is an effect of matter moving through space rather than an attractive force of matter.

Cosmic terminal velocity

I had stalled in my thoughts about gravity recently, needing to gain some perspective about my ideas and myself from a distance. I feel lonely sometimes on my path through creation. I am even ashamed of myself for believing that I --- an amateur astronomer --- have discovered a new truth about the universe.

But I cannot relent. I feel compelled to contemplate and test my ideas mentally. Sometimes I have insights that are exhilarating, even joyous, and I have concluded that either I am on the path to profound truth or to ignorant bliss.

For example, I was riding my motorcycle this week and enjoying the fresh ocean air. And, as it has become my habit, I was contemplating another application of my theory. It had to do with the concept of terminal velocity.

Falling bodies, such as a person jumping from an airplane, will accelerate towards earth until reaching a maximum speed, or terminal velocity. This occurs because the body meets air resistance sufficient to slow down its progress. Without such drag, however, the body will continue to accelerate at the uniform speed of 9.8 meters a second.

Objects with less resistance will fall longer and thus faster than those with more drag. And theoretically, an object without resistance will continue to accelerate indefinitely. It is Newton's first law of motion.

Applying my theory --- that gravity is the effect of matter meeting resistance in its motion through space --- it dawned on me that terminal velocity is a local frame of reference for this dynamic. It illustrates very well my theory as applied to motion through the cosmos, particularly as it applies to the accelerating expansion of the universe. Galaxies, stars, planets and other matter are moving through space with inertia from the Big Bang, and gravity is the effect of that matter straining against the fabric of space.

So just as we can see that falling bodies without resistance will accelerate towards Earth, we can see galaxies, stars and planets receding through space will accelerate as resistance diminishes. This explains the reason for the accelerating expansion of the universe.

It is my insight --- true or not -- that this is the dynamic set in motion by the Big Bang. That all matter is accelerating through space. That when we see an apple falling from a tree, we are witnessing the expansion of the universe on Earth. When we see galaxies receding through space, we are witnessing the same phenomenon.

As for me and my motorcycle, I was going about 45 mph. It was exhilarating.

The speed of gravity

What is the speed of gravity?

It's another puzzle about gravity that my theory may help solve. Because my theory says that gravity is the effect of matter set in motion by the Big Bang meeting resistance, the speed of gravity is proportionate to that motion. In general, the greater the mass the faster the speed of its gravity. The smaller the mass, the slower the gravity.

However, I think speed is a misnomer in this regard. Gravity does not move so much as it is an apparent effect. The following example, a modification of a common analogy to general relavity's curvature of spacetime, illustrates:

A baseball rolling on a trampoline equidistance between a small cannonball and a large bowling ball will move towards the dent left by the cannonball if it is removed at the same time as the bowling ball. That's because the apparent gravity (or loss of gravity) of the bowling ball will "reach" the baseball faster than the gravity of the cannonball, even though they are removed simultaneously.

This shows that gravity does not travel at a uniform speed, such as the speed of light. It travels very fast, however, because its effects are continuous. The bowling ball, for example, is continuously affecting the motion of the baseball. When it is removed, the effect appears instantaneous because the dent disappears at virtually the same time.

I think gravity speed will also change with the relative motion of the masses. But whatever the speed or mass of matter, the apparent speed of its gravity will be proportionate.

Publishing, not perishing

Amateur Astronomy Magazine published a version of my articles on gravity theory, and not an issue too soon. I was starting to think no one was interested in my ideas. (See http://www.amateurastronomy.com/)

Appearing in the 55th Edition, the article was titled "The Apple is Still Falling." It summarizes the basic principle of my theory that the Big Bang is the moving force behind gravity. In other words, the Big Bang put all matter in motion and gravity becomes apparent as matter meets resistance and slows down. That resistance is measured as weight.

I am grateful to Charlie Warren, the editor, for giving me some space in his publication. He said that he enjoyed the article very much and that he thought it would receive some good feedback.
It is nice to receive any feedback --- good or bad. Even criticism can be helpful.

Otherwise, I am left to wonder about my ideas in a vacuum and I don't know if they are valid or not.

Just dropping in

After taking a few weeks off from my writings on gravity, I made a few clarifications in my three articles at Wikipedia.

Hopefully, these changes will help readers understand the basic theory. For my part, they add to the viability of the theory.

For example, I incorporated into my third article, "The Core of the Apple," the observation that the Earth is orbiting the Sun at about 66,660 miles and hour. That translates to about 18 miles a second.

This more concretely illustrates my idea that falling objects, like apples, are not falling toward the Earth so much as they are falling towards the space where the Earth was. In other words, in the second an object falls to the ground the Earth is 18 miles removed.

If you take the journey through my gravity theory, I hope these changes help you enjoy the ride.

Now leaving the blogosphere

I am going to take a vacation from blogworld for a while.

I've been wrestling with a gravity theory for the past few months, and I feel like I need to get back to the regular busines of my life. If you are interested in my meanderings, you should read the theory in the succession of articles below:

1. The Big Bang Made the Apple Fall
The Big Bang set all matter in motion --- including Newton's apple. Everything is in motion, and the force we feel as gravity is simply the manifestation of matter slowing down due to resistance in space. 

http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Big_Bang,_the_Fabric_of_Space_and_the_Apple

2. The Apple Stopped Here
Newton's apple crashed into the Earth on its path through space. This same dynamic is apparent in the cosmos as galaxies, stars and planets strain against the fabric of space, as well as the molecular level where atoms move through space with different apparent weights. http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Apple_Stopped_Here

3. The Core of the Apple
Apples, like all Earth-bound objects, do not have gravity. Instead, objects on planets are caught in the gravitational turbulence caused by the planets moving through spacetime. http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Core_of_the_Apple.

Astronomy Day

I presented my ideas on gravity at a conference hosted by Astronomers Without Borders for Astronomy Day, April 21, 2007. http://www.meade4m.com/astronomy_day/meade.html

There were about 35 people attending my presentation, which was an overview of the history of astronomy and a summary of my theory. A few people complimented me for my talk afterwards, but no one gave me a substantive response --- I think they were just being polite.

However, I felt encouraged that I found an audience. One man, an electrical engineer, said I had given him a new perspective.

I asked Tim Thompson, a co-presenter at the conference, what he thought about my ideas. I was especially interested in his opinion because he is an astrophysicist from Jet Propulsion Laboratory.

"What did you think about my hooey?" I asked, knowing that my idea about gravity was novel.

"I've heard a lot more hooey than that," he said. "It was good."

Another wrinkle in spacetime

I don't know whether I am getting closer to or farther from the truth. But I am definitely getting somewhere.

Despite an overwhelming amount of legal work sitting on my desk, I have been preoccupied with my evolving theory of gravity. It claims my attention anytime I am not focused on more pressing business. My mind is working on it even in my sleep.

One day this week, I woke up with a new insight and so I published it. Basically, it applies my previous theory about gravity to the realm of atoms. It is online at http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Apple_Stopped_Here.

I do not have any real validation for my ideas other than logic and intuition. My theory just makes sense to me. In sum, I think that the Big Bang is causing the force of gravity.

In other words, when you see objects moving through space, you are seeing the Big Bang in action. That applies to the planets circling our sun and the electrons circling atomic nuclei. The Big Bang set everything in motion, and gravity is the effect of that matter slowing down. That effect is measured as weight.

If a tree falls in the forest . . . .

Yes, the falling tree makes a sound even if nobody is there to hear it.

And so it is with my notion that gravity is the effect of the Big Bang moving matter throughout the universe. Even if nobody is listening, it is still happening. I am convinced of it.

I think Newton would agree. In Newton's 1713 General Scholium in the second edition of Principia, he said:

"I have not yet been able to discover the cause of these properties of gravity from phenomena and I feign no hypotheses... It is enough that gravity does really exist and acts according to the laws I have explained, and that it abundantly serves to account for all the motions of celestial bodies... That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one another, is to me so great an absurdity that, I believe, no man who has in philosophic matters a competent faculty of thinking could ever fall into it." http://www.isaacnewton.ca/gen_scholium/

In other words, Newton recognized that his theory did not explain the cause of gravity. Einstein modified Newton's theory with his theory of general relativity, saying that gravity is an attribute of curved space instead of a force between bodies. But Einstein did not tell us what causes gravity.

In my humble opinion, my theory answers that question. Of course, I did not really come up with the answer. It is the product of discoveries by men like Friedman, Lemaitre, Hubble, Hoyle, Penzias, Wilson, Guth and Perlmutter, who contributed to the prevailing theory that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate.

But I do not know of anyone else who has proposed that the Big Bang is the effectual cause of gravity that we measure as weight. As I stated in my paper, the Big Bang made Newton's apple fall.

And even if nobody hears what I'm saying, the apples are still falling.

Hey, there is intelligent life out there

I received some feedback on my article, which theorizes that the Big Bang is the force behind gravity throughout the universe. In other words, the Big Bang made Newton's apple fall.

Anyway, I sent the article to members of the Orange County Astronomy Club, Amateur Astronomer Magazine online and to other sites in the Wikipedia community. I have a lot to learn, but a few people have offered encouraging words about my world view.

If anybody else is listening, please let me know what you think.

Welcome to my world

Hello.

I am entering the blogosphere because I am having trouble finding a home in the world. I'm speaking figuratively.

Actually, I have a home and family and much more to be grateful for in this world. But I have had a hard time finding a place to share some ideas lately, so I thought I would find out if anybody is interested in what I have to say here in the blogosphere.

Today, I am trying to get some substantive response to an idea I have about the universe. I wrote an article, and posted it at http://academia.wikia.com/wiki/The_Big_Bang,_the_Fabric_of_Space_and_the_Apple
It's a Wikipedia website for original ideas, but nobody has commented on it.

I sent a copy of the article to a science reporter and emailed a physics professor about it, but I have received no response.

Is anybody listening?