Strength of Gravity [inversely proportional] to the Speed of Light

I will begin propounding my various ideas of Theoritical Physics. I am not a physicist by profession. I most certainly am not a Mathematician. BUT, I am an abstractionist. These are some thoughts that I have been playing around with in my mind for a few years. I decided that its better that I have them written down and witnessed now, before I find 20 years down the line scientists suddenly waking up to my ideas!

We know JUST how simple E=mc2 really is. I believe that the rules of the Universe would be able to be described in around 2-3 simple formula’s, rather than a single formula. I believe I have been Blessed with an insight into some of the details of that which there are those who are dedicating their whole lives to – the movement in search of the GUT[Grand Unification Theory]. My ideas are rather esoteric and may not be readily understood, but, they are simple abstract concepts based on the rules that we already know; Unfortunately, I am afraid they may be oversimplifications, and thus, the purpose of these posts(I’m looking for comments from the rest of y’all on in|validating the suggestions I’ve presented.). To begin with:

Einstein was infatuated by light.
I’m infatuated by gravity, black holes, and making fun of people who like strings(and their useless theory).
I would like to begin by suggesting the following:

The Strength of Gravity is inversely proportional to the Speed of Light.

which means:

If the Speed of Light Increases, Gravity decreases.
If the Speed of Light Decreases, Gravity increases.

But the Speed of Light is Constant?

Yes, but, what happens when you keep the rules[formulas\equations] and the determined constants the same – in relation to the others[outputs of those formulas\equations] – when you DO change the speed of light? What are the results of the formulas of physics when you start changing the value of the constant in relation to some of the other established information; ie., time, distance, & gravity.

There’s no supporting evidence???  

I think black holes provide evidence. Nice place for gravity, time, mass, and the speed of light to change, eh. It’s all relative.

An article I read today and its implications to what I’ve Suggested: Einstein was right: space and time bend

The article suggests that space\time bends, as the evidence seen in observations. This means, the speed of light stays constant, so when space[ie., distance] changes, the time to travel the distance directly changes proportionately. That seems to be breaking a few rules. What about the effect of gravity, and, at the same time, the effect ON gravity?Is it not possible to view things, just a slight bit differently; As the effect of gravity causes the geodetic effect, the Constant[Speed of Light] changes inversely in relation to it, and thus, distance and time bend.

All of this requires detailing, which will be done as I continue to reveal additional basics of my understandings. I’m just wording things out, so that someone can point out to me that the things I’m saying are just plain wrong and I can stop believing that I’ve understood something truely vast and awesome and apply those brain cells to other tasks. Or, they keep presenting me problems, which help clarify a correct understanding. As an abstractionist, very detailed concepts will be built on various simple posts which will all fit together over the period of time. As my understanding gets more fine tuned, it will allow me\us to correct any mistakes that have been made, thereby leading us correctly and sooner, to a conclusion.


9 Responses

  1. Thanks for the comment! Regardless if its only a metaphor, it still messes with my mind 🙂 But you provide a great summary of it!

  2. Hello Matthew.
    Like yourself, I am infatuated by gravity. My obsession started years ago with the thought that gravity was less at the time of big creatures- namely dinosaurs. I’ve conjured up four possible events that could possibly explain this change.
    The one that interests me the most is the recent- relatively so- annoucement that the universe is expanding- yes- but that the expansion is speeding up! Could that have possibly effected the constant of light? I think we can all agree that nothing is constant but change. Einstein’s example of the elevator is my favorite- what really is the speed.
    Some have said the idea that creates the most derision, the most ridicule- that’s the one with the most promise. Good luck with this and keep on thinking. Ed Myers

  3. a lot of dinosaurs were small…
    A lot of mammals that came much later were big, but they have nearly all become extinct.

  4. illiterate cretin

    no pax
    no God
    bloody /you/

    scattering is inversely proportional to speed
    gravity affects velocity/direction

    there /are/ two time dimensions

  5. I found this page through the response of Shree Mulay’s Oct. 12, 2007, 3:47 pm post in the web forum on “Are We Missing A Dimension of Time”. But I was initially directed here through a group discussion on the site (The Group name is “SCIENTIFIC- FROM EVOLUTION TO STRING THEORY”).

    I find this subject very interesting. As a novice to particle physics, I am quite inquisitive of how the world works, and how reality can be perceived in so many different ways. But I do not comfortably understand gravity. Or how it would play in the ideas you present. But something you said, regarding speed made me think of the recent news I heard about the moon moving away from the earth at approx. 2 inches a year.
    If the moon’s gravitational pull has an effect on the earth’s rotation, then the gradual distancing of the moon from the earth would alter the rate at which the earth spins…is that a correct line of thinking, or am I missing a crucial component in my amateur analysis of this? If that is the case, then wouldn’t the altered rate at which the earth spins effect our perception of reality (or our available perception and recognition of a different dimension)?

    Again, I know very little, and I pretty much suck at math, so I may be missing the point. Either way, I find your thoughts to be interesting. I appreciate you sharing this knowledge openly. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. What you are doing is important.

    Here is a link to the discussion forum held on blackplanet, that – ultimately, lead me to read your information.

    West Yarmouth, Massachusetts, USA.

  6. Hey there, I have always been intrigued by the world we live in and I am an avid searcher of truth in all it’s forms. Lately my attentions have turned toward the universe and some recently gained knowledge has simply blown me away. You see I never did believe Einsteins theory of relativity, one of the main reasons being that I did not believe that time existed, but that it simply was a measurement of the rate at which thngs change. While this definition is true, I have been awakened to the reality of E=MC2. In short; if time didn’t exist then the atomic bomb would never have worked.
    I know that you already know all of this, but I am telling you as a preface to what I have to say. Almost immediatly following the revelation of relativity and the existance of space-time I instantly thought of how gravity must fit into the theory. I conjectured that if matter degenerates into energy at a rate of the speed of light squared, then the amount of gravity which is generated by matter is likely to be inversely proportional to that equation. Unfortuanately I am not a physicist and I presently do not know where I might go to find the data I would need to confirm or refute my theory. There is a lot of data that is relavent and very likely usefull, but I think the ratio of the strength of electromagnetism relative to the strength of gravity would be the most usefull data I could consult. Anyway, if you know where to find what I am looking for please do so, or direct me to it. Any effort would be appreciated.

    I very much enjoyed reading your article and I too share a passion for the simple reasons for everything which is complex. Even though this has little to do with what we are discussing, I would like to share a scenario involvng relativity which perplexed and amased me.
    Imagine for a moment that there are two planets in geosynchronized orbit (I don’t know what you call it in relation to stars…..) around a star which spins. One because of it’s mass has settled relatively close to the star and the other has settled very VERY far away in it’s orbit. Both planets have identicle rotations and planetary tilts/axis. I know that this is all nearly statistically impossible, but for the sake of a thought experiment bare with me. Because of these factors neither planet ever moves away from the other and in fact relative to each other they are completly stationary and static in every conceivable way. They experience their days and their seasons at the exact same moments, and in the course of one year they both reach the same radial point in space relative to the star. The thing that makes this possible are the different speeds and angles that the two planets travel. However, let us assume that the further one must travel at half the speed of light to stay geosynchronized because of the much greater distance to the star. According to relativity, this would cause time on that planet to be (roughly) one half the speed of that of the other planet. So, let’s say that two civilizations form at the same time on each planet. The one on the planet of lower orbit would develope twice as fast, and the inhabitants of the other would live twice as long. This is fairly easy to imagine in relation to a spaceship or something, but these two planets would have days, weeks, months, seasons, and years which would take EXACTLY the same amount of time, and yet time would be completely different on both planets. One could leave the planet of lower orbit for a year, experience the days and seasons exactly the same and at the same time as the their relatives back home, but when they returned they would have aged half as much as those they had left behind.
    Perhaps the most startling thing to me about this scenario is that all the while these two planets and groups of people would always be the exact same distance apart! Relative to each other neither one is moving and yet time is completely different.
    To me this is a very interesting phenominon. One, because it is just so amazing, and two because it might actually open up some doors for understanding the relationship between space, speed, and time. I am beginning to think that space-time, energy, mass, and gravety are all deeply connected by geometry. At present I lack the understanding and ability to fully express what I think and why I think it, but perhaps you could give it some thought as well.
    Anyway, sorry for such a long post, but I just thought you might be interested. Also, thank you for the interesting thoughts you provided and thanks in advance for anything you might do in relation to what I have suggested.

    Thanks again,

  7. Gravity is the weakest of the four fundamental forces.

    The electromagnetic force is 100 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 times stronger than gravity.

    Gravity however has a much longer range.

    The electromagnetic force has both positive and negative charge, over larger scales these cancel each other out.

    With regards to the time dilation of the planets consider the Dyson scaling hypothesis that implies that the subjective time experienced by a living creature depends upon its operating temperature. For lower temperatures, the effective pace of life is slower, and it takes longer for a creature to experience the same number of instances of consciousness.

    We also have to bear in mind that gravity does cause a time dilation. You relate that the importance of mass to the planets distance from the star and that their orbits are exactly synchronized.

    As the outer planet would have a much greater velocity than the inner it would require a much smaller mass to negate time dilation caused by its gravity. The greater the mass of the outer planet, the greater the mass and increase in time dilation.

    Were you to orbit very close to the event horizon of a black hole time would almost stand still.

    I think

  8. classical/newtonian physics is nearly a shadow/manifestation of the true universal functions.

    the string theory:
    “gamma function” it describes the strong nuclear force. the 200 year old formula sims to manifest a sting that is elastic and vibrant.

    quantum mechanics:
    the super position, quantum entanglement/quantum non-local connection

    you are to aggressive in your approach to the caos, there is no elegance, no sophistication in your pattern of thought. you are a prisoner of Plato’s cave. you have much more and then some to learn.

  9. Well er Yes
    There is no way in hell you can enter into meaningfull understanding of the concepts involved without you reduce them to mathematical relationships.
    1 this is required to measure and validate concept a provide a starting point for development of ideas.
    2 What is hidden from empirical examination, and all but a hyper brain, not us mate, may become evident in the course of mathamatical analysis. Been there and it works in other fields.

    Now if we asume the physical universe is to a point ordered, processes oceuring will follow known pathways.

    Now we can modle new pathways by aplying current knowledge an push at the boundaries bit by bit; backing up each step with “REPEATABLE EXPERIMENT” over and over again till we get bored with it. —–that bit’s OK thats a fact then—-

    Move on a bit further. Keep the eyes wide open for anything that is not covered by current understanding and rigerously investigate producing direct realtionships or parameterisations.

    There is no way you can aproach this from without (as against within) the diciplin of astro / quantum / nuclear physics.

    I come from a line of engineers going back 3 generations on both sides. Physics is “where engineering and Philosophy meet”
    and spent 23 years in atmospheric research.

    a spanner monkey turned scientist

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: