A new hypothesis about the origin of gravity!

Talk to Jaspar 10, he has his own views on gravity and magnetism and loves to argue the toss with anyone.

This coming from an atheist (me) but I just think God went to Costco and bought all of the gravity in one bulk purchase. Really great deal. She initially went to Costco just to get all of the free food samples then saw how cheap the entire universe’s of gravity (per unit cost). What a deal! What a wonderful at whim purchase!

I went to Costco. I paid a membership fee only to find that its offers weren't any better than the local discount store which didn't require a fee and took credit cards.

When my membership expired I left it at that.

So did God btw, I saw in the Co-op just last week.

What are the units for k?

Gravity? …..What is gravity?

Here is another theory for you……electromagnetic fields were around at exactly the same time as big bangs and big crunches.Why do electromagnetic fields have to come after big bangs? That is just a guess based upon modern day science’s HALF logic science/philosophy…..which incidentally starts off with the assumption/guess that good is bad and bad is good at the philosophical level and then continues on into its science with 0/1…1/0 only logic.This is the foundation for all modern day scientific equations…..What about 0/0…1/1 logics?…don’t forget them.The magnetism theory doesn’t.

The magnetism theory is a better theory than the gravity theory because it is a full theory that allows for all 4 off logic combinations 0/0…0/1…1/0…1/1.Ha Ha …..This stuff does izzy’s head in.

The magnetism theory states that the cosmos (macro/micro) operates due to electromechanical processes which produce the above 4 off +/- logic force combinations.This is confirmed by the 4 off possible interactions we observe when you bring two magnets together.Therefore nature confirms the legitimacy of the magnetism theory.

The magnetism theory is a full theory that can explain big bangs and big crunches.The gravity theory is a half theory that can only explain big crunches.

The magnetism theory is therefore a better theory than the gravity theory.

The magnetism theory states that as electromagnetic fields were around at the same time as big bangs/big crunches then this is the reason things spin in the cosmos thus producing the electromagnetic effects which result in the 4 off possible force interactions that explain big bangs/big crunches.

The faster things spin the greater the magnetic force produced.

Sciency sounding nonsense. The track record for people who do physics without math isn't good.

I like the hypothesis - novelty points awarded - but it needs more work. Compare your hypothesis with those of some professional scientists. What's your task at hand mon ami?

Why do electromagnetic fields have to come after big bangs? Because, before the B.B. there was only the singularity of origin: the infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small Singularity from which this entire universe originated.

The singularity from which this universe was created, is recreated in the Big Crunch, when all the universal elements are ripped apart leaving only the photon quantum components which are crushed together so tightly that its density is infinite and the volume of space is zero, meaning that there can be no momentum and therefore, no time.

A singularity is a region of space-time in which so-called matter is crushed so closely together that the gravitational laws explained by general relativity break down. Scientists believe such a singularity exists at the core of a black hole, which occurs when a super-massive sun reaches the end of its life and implodes.

General relativity also demands such a singularity must exist at the beginning of an expanding universe, before anything, even light has been created.

Yes according to atheistic science.

The singularity is proven nonsense though so why are you making reference to it? We can have a laugh with any scientist from around the world who wishes to counter this if you want.

The singularity was embarrassingly claimed as fact up until only a few years ago maybe but it was nonsense from the start.

The magnetic fields were in place prior to or at least at the same time as the MULTIPLE big bangs and big crunches that are happening all the time in the cosmos.

It has always happened this way.

All of atheistic science is nonsense.It is lost down a rabbit hole and will make up anything at all as long as it sells.

You cannot explain the psychological with a made up force and GLUE!

Keep trying jasper, somehow, somewhere, sometime, someone, might be tempted into taking you seriously, although I can't really see that ever happening.

So what you mean is you don’t understand.

It’s not all about inward only dualistic reasoning The Anointed.

All of atheistic science is based upon that.

Look through your eyes there is an outward as well.

Yea! Like I said, perhaps one day someone might take you seriously. There are many fools out there, so you can live in expectation.

But the fools are those who believe in atheistic science.

That is established now,The Anointed.

Have you not been listening? the 2 electromagnetic forces in nature don’t cancel out as those foolish atheistic scientists claim.

They balance if you create a system.

If you had awareness you would understand the implications of this.

Goodnight Jasper, enjoy your long wait in expectation for something that I believe will never happen.

It already has happened.

The notion of "velocity" of a celestial body confuses me from here to Hell and back.

Velocity has to be measured against a fixed point. What is the fixed point for a celestial body?

Yes, I was also wondering how the physicists have "measured" that velocity of 108000 km/h.
I don't believe I will find the answer even if I search through the whole web.

However, in my view, it is undeniable that the celestial bodies are moving through the space and have an absolute (not relative) velocity.

If you see something that touches on this, please post it.

I can understand measuring the velocity of a celestial body in relation to Earth...but I cannot understand the notion of Earth moving at ANY velocity, because I have no idea of what it is being measured against.

I am not sure of what you mean by an absolute velocity. It still seems to me that velocity must be measured against some...thing.

One cannot measure any velocity directly.
The velocity can be "measured" only indirectly by measuring the distance traveled and the time for which that distance is traveled.
So, I suppose that one has somehow estimated the circumference of the Earth path around the Sun and subsequently this length is divided by 365 days.

But it cannot be the real velocity of the Earth because the whole Solar system, including the Earth, is also moving through the Space.