There should be no doubt that in the future humans will wish to play sports in the colonies they create off world. Indeed we know which sports humans love to play most, especially in the United States. There is baseball, soccer, hockey, basketball, and football to name a few. But let's talk about football and its future in space. Is it even a viable sport?
Will mankind built giant stadiums on other planets and moons? Over time they might, but at first they will not be able to afford to, and they will not have the manufacturing facilities on the Moon or Mars to do so. Therefore if they play inside, they will have to make the football field very small. We know here on Earth that folks play indoor football, and it is a very fast paced sport. Is that the type of football they will play in future colonies? Perhaps they will have expandable blowup habitat facilities, and play football inside.
Indeed, the first football fields will be very small, and therefore the speed of play very fast. Also consider if the colony is on the Moon or Mars, there is less gravity. The players will have more agility, and they will end up hitting each other harder, and more often. Luckily, by then there will be space-age materials which will be able to protect them with the proper pads so they don't break any bones. Remember if someone is injured in a space colony it's a much bigger deal than merely going to the hospital here on Earth.
Perhaps they can play football outside using special breathing apparatuses that are incorporated within their uniforms. If so, they can level off a small field and play there, but still realize a low gravity environment will increase the speed of play, athletes will jump higher, they will throw the ball further, and they can run much faster. An opponent who's ready to be tackled may merely leap over several players at a time. And much of the tackling may go on 15 feet above the surface. Are you beginning to imagine a picture this your mind.
Monday 17 October 2011
What is Gravity on Clickbank
If you are looking for a product to promote on Clickbank then you have probably noticed a statistic that they use called gravity. This is one of the most misunderstood statistics on Clickbank, but once you know the definition of gravity it is actually quite simple. What is Gravity? Well, gravity is simply a weighted number of affiliates who have sold at least one product over the last 8 weeks, with the more recent sales counting for more than those made 8 weeks ago.
Gravity does not tell you how much money the product has made or what percentage it converts at. Gravity only counts the first sale each affiliate makes, so it isn't necessarily a solid indication on the overall profitability of promoting the product. However, if it has a super high gravity it's probably because people are having good success with it.
Pros and Cons of Promoting A High Gravity Product
If many people are promoting a product, and making sales, then there is a good chance that it coverts well. Most people aren't going to continue to promote products that don't make them very much money. One thing you need to watch out for is a product having high gravity only because it just launched. Many marketers get affiliates to push their product heavily during the launch, so that will give the product a very high gravity to start. Even though you know a high gravity product is probably making its affiliates a lot of money, there is a downside to promoting a high gravity product. If a product has a lot off affiliates promoting it, that means you are going to be up against a lot of competition for traffic. It might be very difficult to break into a niche that has a product with a super high gravity.
Pros and Cons of Promoting A Low Gravity Product
Sometimes it can pay off to promote a low gravity product. If a product has a gravity of 10-20 than it means they've made a decent amount of sales in the last few weeks. Many people who have products on Clickbank aren't the best marketers, and even though they have a great product in a great niche they do a poor job of getting people to promote it for them. If you can find a product like this it is possible to dominate that niche and sell the heck out of a good, but unknown product. If you do really well with a product like this you should consider using your superior marketing skills to make your own product, and really make a ton of money from that niche.
Gravity does not tell you how much money the product has made or what percentage it converts at. Gravity only counts the first sale each affiliate makes, so it isn't necessarily a solid indication on the overall profitability of promoting the product. However, if it has a super high gravity it's probably because people are having good success with it.
Pros and Cons of Promoting A High Gravity Product
If many people are promoting a product, and making sales, then there is a good chance that it coverts well. Most people aren't going to continue to promote products that don't make them very much money. One thing you need to watch out for is a product having high gravity only because it just launched. Many marketers get affiliates to push their product heavily during the launch, so that will give the product a very high gravity to start. Even though you know a high gravity product is probably making its affiliates a lot of money, there is a downside to promoting a high gravity product. If a product has a lot off affiliates promoting it, that means you are going to be up against a lot of competition for traffic. It might be very difficult to break into a niche that has a product with a super high gravity.
Pros and Cons of Promoting A Low Gravity Product
Sometimes it can pay off to promote a low gravity product. If a product has a gravity of 10-20 than it means they've made a decent amount of sales in the last few weeks. Many people who have products on Clickbank aren't the best marketers, and even though they have a great product in a great niche they do a poor job of getting people to promote it for them. If you can find a product like this it is possible to dominate that niche and sell the heck out of a good, but unknown product. If you do really well with a product like this you should consider using your superior marketing skills to make your own product, and really make a ton of money from that niche.
Falling - Gravity As A Spiritual Lesson
I'm in danger of sounding like I do nothing but watch TV, but I won't apologise for watching another excellent TV programme - The Wonders of the Universe.
The subject was gravity, and Dr Brian Cox completely blew me away with this simple explanation of a complex force. Gravity means that absolutely everything is falling into everything else, irresistibly and continually following the curves of space time created by the pulls from all the stars, planets and galaxies in the universe. Gravity is by its very nature both creative and destructive. It creates by pulling and holding together the necessary elements for life, but ultimately it destroys too, compressing things down and exerting impossible pressure that eventually crushes to death.
It made me really think about our experience of life. Perhaps on some deeply subconscious level we are aware of this falling, and it makes us uncomfortable as it is beyond our control. Is that why we often feel a need to organise and structure our lives so rigidly and neatly? Is that us fighting the inevitable? And then that set me to thinking about the way we use the word "falling" in day-to-day language. Isn't it interesting that we describe entering physical, mental and emotional conditions as "falling" too? We fall in love, fall asleep, fall apart. Again, giving that sense of inevitability, that we can't control these things but despite our best efforts they happen to us. It also suggests the microcosm/macrocosm in action; these personal everyday experiences are reflecting a greater universal pattern of truth. I wonder if we knew that when we coined the phrases...
People often dream of falling when they're going through a challenging situation (loss of a job, caring for many dependants, studying for exams). Again, it usually indicates subconscious feelings of being out of control, hurtling towards a potentially disastrous end and not being able to do anything to stop it. At the same time we are also drawn to the excitement and exhilaration of falling. You only have to look at the popularity of roller-coaster and funfair rides to see that. There's that thing where a fall can stop time for you, where you become intensely present in the moment and a second seems to last a lifetime. It's almost as if we catch up with ourselves in the process of falling to such an extent that we can stand outside of it. We feel light and free from our physical bodies. It's a sanitised fall to a certain extent - we're securely strapped in, the ride is of a specified length and we know where we'll get off. Oh how we wish sometimes that everything in life was like that! The monster of control raises its ugly head again.
So if we are in a constant state of falling, as the universe shows us we are along with everything else that exists within it, then why be scared? There is nothing we can do about it, so why don't we just enjoy the drop? Images come into my head now of free-fall skydivers, somersaulting and tumbling freely through the air while whooping and laughing with joy. They know that inevitably they're going to touch down on the ground but my goodness they're going to enjoy the ride while it lasts. Instead of tensing up and worrying about hitting the ground we can just enjoy the process and revel in the exhilaration. When I was training for parascending we were taught to relax the body and give at the knees when our feet touched the ground - this prevents injury because you're not resisting the fall, you're moving with the flow of energy.
The subject was gravity, and Dr Brian Cox completely blew me away with this simple explanation of a complex force. Gravity means that absolutely everything is falling into everything else, irresistibly and continually following the curves of space time created by the pulls from all the stars, planets and galaxies in the universe. Gravity is by its very nature both creative and destructive. It creates by pulling and holding together the necessary elements for life, but ultimately it destroys too, compressing things down and exerting impossible pressure that eventually crushes to death.
It made me really think about our experience of life. Perhaps on some deeply subconscious level we are aware of this falling, and it makes us uncomfortable as it is beyond our control. Is that why we often feel a need to organise and structure our lives so rigidly and neatly? Is that us fighting the inevitable? And then that set me to thinking about the way we use the word "falling" in day-to-day language. Isn't it interesting that we describe entering physical, mental and emotional conditions as "falling" too? We fall in love, fall asleep, fall apart. Again, giving that sense of inevitability, that we can't control these things but despite our best efforts they happen to us. It also suggests the microcosm/macrocosm in action; these personal everyday experiences are reflecting a greater universal pattern of truth. I wonder if we knew that when we coined the phrases...
People often dream of falling when they're going through a challenging situation (loss of a job, caring for many dependants, studying for exams). Again, it usually indicates subconscious feelings of being out of control, hurtling towards a potentially disastrous end and not being able to do anything to stop it. At the same time we are also drawn to the excitement and exhilaration of falling. You only have to look at the popularity of roller-coaster and funfair rides to see that. There's that thing where a fall can stop time for you, where you become intensely present in the moment and a second seems to last a lifetime. It's almost as if we catch up with ourselves in the process of falling to such an extent that we can stand outside of it. We feel light and free from our physical bodies. It's a sanitised fall to a certain extent - we're securely strapped in, the ride is of a specified length and we know where we'll get off. Oh how we wish sometimes that everything in life was like that! The monster of control raises its ugly head again.
So if we are in a constant state of falling, as the universe shows us we are along with everything else that exists within it, then why be scared? There is nothing we can do about it, so why don't we just enjoy the drop? Images come into my head now of free-fall skydivers, somersaulting and tumbling freely through the air while whooping and laughing with joy. They know that inevitably they're going to touch down on the ground but my goodness they're going to enjoy the ride while it lasts. Instead of tensing up and worrying about hitting the ground we can just enjoy the process and revel in the exhilaration. When I was training for parascending we were taught to relax the body and give at the knees when our feet touched the ground - this prevents injury because you're not resisting the fall, you're moving with the flow of energy.
Does Gravity Control Orbit of the Electrons Around the Nucleus
From the study of Physical Chemistry (which includes Quantum Mechanics) we know that the structure of matter and the periodic table that results is a consequence of the only the electromagnetic force and nothing else, unless gravity is very strong-so strong that it dominates other forces. Such conditions do not exist on Earth.
Of course gravity pulls atoms down to Earth, but it does not affect the electronic structure...However the question does not ask about the pull of gravity on particles, but rather about the orbits of electrons around an atom, and if gravity plays a role.
Let us consider one H atom. The mass of a proton is 1.67262158 × 10-27 kilograms and the electron rest mass is 1800 times lighter 9.10938188 × 10-31 kilograms. The Coulomb attractive force between these two charged particles is many orders of magnitude larger than gravity between them.
More specifically we can compare the gravitational attraction between an electron and a proton, to that of their electrostatic attraction. Using Newton's Law and Coulomb's law and plugging in the fundamental electron charge, and for gravity, the above masses, and known constants, shows that the Coulomb force is a whopping 1040 times stronger than gravity in the Hydrogen atom.
That is 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0... (40 zeros) times stronger!!!
Electronic Structure of Matter
Understanding of Physical Chemistry also explains that electronic structure of matter is governed solely by Coulomb's law: the attraction and repulsion between charged particles: But read on.
We only know of four forces: gravity (range: infinite), electromagnetic (range infinite), weak nuclear force (leads to beta decay) (range only within a nucleus); the strong nuclear force (range only within a nucleus). That's it folks.
The nuclear forces are much stronger than the electromagnetic force over the same distance. The energy released in nuclear reactors is many orders of magnitude greater than chemical energy because E=mc2.
Gravity and Black Holes
Having said all that, I want to think a bit more about the question outside the box. What is a neutron star? a black hole? A neutron star has a mass so great that it overcomes the electromagnetic force and pushes the electrons down onto the nucleus.
Proton+ + Electron- ->Neutron
I have put a plus charge on the proton and a minus charge on the electron to emphasize that they repel each other. So to push an electron out of its orbit and down to the surface of the proton must overcome the electrostatic repulsion between them.
The gravitational field needed to do this is more than 1040 times stronger than on Earth!! That star is basically made up of neutrons. Recall that Ernest Rutherford found that an atom has a very dense nucleus. Imagine the gravitational field of a star made up of nuclei rather than atoms! Under such strong gravitational fields, the electronic structure does depend upon gravity.
Same for black holes. Gravity is so strong that nothing can escape it, and it appears to dominate all other forces.
Finally, physicists seek a unified theory to describe the mechanics of all forces. Of the four forces, three have been unified (using quantum mechanics (quantum field theory really)). Only gravity is not understood.
Of course gravity pulls atoms down to Earth, but it does not affect the electronic structure...However the question does not ask about the pull of gravity on particles, but rather about the orbits of electrons around an atom, and if gravity plays a role.
Let us consider one H atom. The mass of a proton is 1.67262158 × 10-27 kilograms and the electron rest mass is 1800 times lighter 9.10938188 × 10-31 kilograms. The Coulomb attractive force between these two charged particles is many orders of magnitude larger than gravity between them.
More specifically we can compare the gravitational attraction between an electron and a proton, to that of their electrostatic attraction. Using Newton's Law and Coulomb's law and plugging in the fundamental electron charge, and for gravity, the above masses, and known constants, shows that the Coulomb force is a whopping 1040 times stronger than gravity in the Hydrogen atom.
That is 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0... (40 zeros) times stronger!!!
Electronic Structure of Matter
Understanding of Physical Chemistry also explains that electronic structure of matter is governed solely by Coulomb's law: the attraction and repulsion between charged particles: But read on.
We only know of four forces: gravity (range: infinite), electromagnetic (range infinite), weak nuclear force (leads to beta decay) (range only within a nucleus); the strong nuclear force (range only within a nucleus). That's it folks.
The nuclear forces are much stronger than the electromagnetic force over the same distance. The energy released in nuclear reactors is many orders of magnitude greater than chemical energy because E=mc2.
Gravity and Black Holes
Having said all that, I want to think a bit more about the question outside the box. What is a neutron star? a black hole? A neutron star has a mass so great that it overcomes the electromagnetic force and pushes the electrons down onto the nucleus.
Proton+ + Electron- ->Neutron
I have put a plus charge on the proton and a minus charge on the electron to emphasize that they repel each other. So to push an electron out of its orbit and down to the surface of the proton must overcome the electrostatic repulsion between them.
The gravitational field needed to do this is more than 1040 times stronger than on Earth!! That star is basically made up of neutrons. Recall that Ernest Rutherford found that an atom has a very dense nucleus. Imagine the gravitational field of a star made up of nuclei rather than atoms! Under such strong gravitational fields, the electronic structure does depend upon gravity.
Same for black holes. Gravity is so strong that nothing can escape it, and it appears to dominate all other forces.
Finally, physicists seek a unified theory to describe the mechanics of all forces. Of the four forces, three have been unified (using quantum mechanics (quantum field theory really)). Only gravity is not understood.
Home Decor Wall Decoration on a Budget
Home decor can be expensive, but there are many creative ways to add wall decoration to any home, on a budget!
Look for frames at thrift stores, yard sales and even dollar shops. Even is it is filled with ugly artwork, look past it for the frame. One of my favorite frame finds was a large wood carved frame I found in an antique shop for $10 because it had "damage". That damage is what gives it character and a vintage feel! I love that frame!
Use frames themselves as artwork. Hang a grouping of empty frames of different shapes, sizes and finishes. Make sure you hang them only a few inches apart, and use an odd number of frames for a natural look.
If you are looking to fill a wall with inexpensive artwork, try using a common theme to tie all the framed art together. A floral theme, all black and whites, or a common color throughout will give a designer look to your grouping.
Frame pretty pieces of fabric as art. You can splurge and buy a little designer fabric because it's such a small amount, or you can really save bucks and cut pretty fabric form worn out dresses or blouses from your closet or a thrift shop. They don't pay those fabric designers the big bucks for nothing, its art!
Paper can also be used as wall art...check out the scrap booking section of your local craft shop for attractive paper in your rooms theme to frame and hang. Also look into handmade papers for a high end look.
Got gardening magazines? You have art! Cut out garden photos you love and frame for a perfect cottage or traditional accent. You can also search used book stores for art books you would be willing to cut up to hang. Botanicals, landscape photography, and even black and white graphic art can all be easily found for a couple dollars...and you can get dozens of pictures from some books!
Go non traditional for your wall art. Have old love letters in a drawer? Frame them! Hang you daughters dress from her christening, or the flowers you pressed with your son when he was three. Your Grandfathers hand tools, or a quilt from your Grandmother will make memorable wall decoration. Get the idea? Think outside frames and paintings, and create home decor that is warm and personal.
Look for frames at thrift stores, yard sales and even dollar shops. Even is it is filled with ugly artwork, look past it for the frame. One of my favorite frame finds was a large wood carved frame I found in an antique shop for $10 because it had "damage". That damage is what gives it character and a vintage feel! I love that frame!
Use frames themselves as artwork. Hang a grouping of empty frames of different shapes, sizes and finishes. Make sure you hang them only a few inches apart, and use an odd number of frames for a natural look.
If you are looking to fill a wall with inexpensive artwork, try using a common theme to tie all the framed art together. A floral theme, all black and whites, or a common color throughout will give a designer look to your grouping.
Frame pretty pieces of fabric as art. You can splurge and buy a little designer fabric because it's such a small amount, or you can really save bucks and cut pretty fabric form worn out dresses or blouses from your closet or a thrift shop. They don't pay those fabric designers the big bucks for nothing, its art!
Paper can also be used as wall art...check out the scrap booking section of your local craft shop for attractive paper in your rooms theme to frame and hang. Also look into handmade papers for a high end look.
Got gardening magazines? You have art! Cut out garden photos you love and frame for a perfect cottage or traditional accent. You can also search used book stores for art books you would be willing to cut up to hang. Botanicals, landscape photography, and even black and white graphic art can all be easily found for a couple dollars...and you can get dozens of pictures from some books!
Go non traditional for your wall art. Have old love letters in a drawer? Frame them! Hang you daughters dress from her christening, or the flowers you pressed with your son when he was three. Your Grandfathers hand tools, or a quilt from your Grandmother will make memorable wall decoration. Get the idea? Think outside frames and paintings, and create home decor that is warm and personal.
Fancy Lighting Home Decor Enlightenment
Light is one of those basic necessities we take for granted, without it we couldn't see a thing! Lately however, lighting has been lifted into the spotlight of home improvement circles. The art of interior design can be taken to a whole new level, by employing various lighting solutions that will help in giving a certain space a totally unique atmosphere.
The art of employing lights and fixtures for accomplishing dramatic effects, designed to achieve a specific mood, have become a hot trend among home decor designers nowadays.
Ideally the lighting system should be great from both a functional and viewpoint and information show that pendant lights and similar products are taking up more and more space in stores committed to home planning.
Various styles of recessed lighting are not exactly a new innovation, but nowadays they are turning up in scenarios you might not have encountered them before - such as out on a patio, for example.
Seeing a subtle yet, effectual recessed patio lighting, working in part by solar power for the first time is indeed a model that get's the inspiration going for getting into to decorate up the outside of your home as well.
From the purely practical/economical point of view, the solar powered alternatives are of course most interesting. But, in many cases, combining appealing design and some sort of solar panels are not always easy or affordable. Once in place though, you can get literally unlimited energy without paying a cent for it, provided that you live in a location that provide enough sun that is.
Among other widespread lighting trends right now are innumerable forms of accent lighting that may, for instance, be aimed onto a wall in order to complement the light directed by the fixtures in the ceiling or from a selection of recessed lighting.
Accent lighting is great for drawing awareness to precise features in the room, and as a rule can add amazing amounts of dimension and depth to the space. For those who want to go really cutting-edge, there is also the option to install the lighting system in such a way that it can be "programmed" for several scenarios.
Depending on the time of day, the mood you want to set, and which architectural features or things in the room you want to highlight, all can be effectively accomplished by a well designed lighting arrangement.
Particularly elaborate and expensive lighting systems are of course typically installed in official buildings like hotels, big company headquarters etc. But stylish lighting can definitely be employed in decorating privately owned homes as well. And, compared to other forms of home improvement or re-decorating, it does actually not have to be terribly expensive either.
The art of employing lights and fixtures for accomplishing dramatic effects, designed to achieve a specific mood, have become a hot trend among home decor designers nowadays.
Ideally the lighting system should be great from both a functional and viewpoint and information show that pendant lights and similar products are taking up more and more space in stores committed to home planning.
Various styles of recessed lighting are not exactly a new innovation, but nowadays they are turning up in scenarios you might not have encountered them before - such as out on a patio, for example.
Seeing a subtle yet, effectual recessed patio lighting, working in part by solar power for the first time is indeed a model that get's the inspiration going for getting into to decorate up the outside of your home as well.
From the purely practical/economical point of view, the solar powered alternatives are of course most interesting. But, in many cases, combining appealing design and some sort of solar panels are not always easy or affordable. Once in place though, you can get literally unlimited energy without paying a cent for it, provided that you live in a location that provide enough sun that is.
Among other widespread lighting trends right now are innumerable forms of accent lighting that may, for instance, be aimed onto a wall in order to complement the light directed by the fixtures in the ceiling or from a selection of recessed lighting.
Accent lighting is great for drawing awareness to precise features in the room, and as a rule can add amazing amounts of dimension and depth to the space. For those who want to go really cutting-edge, there is also the option to install the lighting system in such a way that it can be "programmed" for several scenarios.
Depending on the time of day, the mood you want to set, and which architectural features or things in the room you want to highlight, all can be effectively accomplished by a well designed lighting arrangement.
Particularly elaborate and expensive lighting systems are of course typically installed in official buildings like hotels, big company headquarters etc. But stylish lighting can definitely be employed in decorating privately owned homes as well. And, compared to other forms of home improvement or re-decorating, it does actually not have to be terribly expensive either.
Wednesday 12 October 2011
NASA Study - Saggy Pants Problem Tied to Earth's Gravity
Washington, DC
It seems like just 345 years ago, Sir Isaac Newton was sitting under a tree, sipping a Caramel Macchiato, and doing a Sudoku puzzle when an apple fell on his head compelling him to realize his Laws of Universal Gravitation. In what seems to be such a simple principle, has managed to escape and baffle physicists for the past 2 decades. "Sagging," refers to a style in which a person wears their pants below their waist exposing much of their underwear. It was originally believed to have derived from inmates in prison, who were not allowed to belts, in fear that they would hang themselves. It was then adopted by the hip-hop culture, then spread throughout urban, suburban, and rural areas, to all races. In recent years, municipalities have been clamping down on Sagging, stating that the youth of this country has become so lazy and defiant, that they refuse to keep their pants up. In June of 2007, the Town Council in Delcambre, Louisiana passed an indecent exposure ordinance against people who wore their pants saggy.
As time goes on, pants have been sagging lower and lower, inching their way to the point where teenagers in Brooklyn, NY have been literally walking down the street with their pants around their ankles. We spoke with State Senator Adams who had this to say, "Residents are furious, and they demand justice! We can't sit back another minute and lets these pants get any lower! Before you know it, it will be winter. We can't have our kids walking around in the snow without pants. We want answers, damnit!" One Brooklyn teenager, a member of the notorious gang, the 6th Street Shannigans, Juan Carlos Greenberg, had this to say, "We ain't doin' nothin', man! What is this guy's trip? I am not my pants keeper. That's just how we roll, Dog." One person has heard the cries, and is now playing an active role in solving the epidemic. His name is Charles Wheatley, an Astrophysicist for NASA. Wheatley, who has been working on the problem for the past 3 years, believes he has found a scientific explanation.
At a press conference at NASA's headquarters this morning, Wheatley stated, "After hundreds of tests, I have found the cause for sagging pants. There appears to be a definite link between sagging pants and gravity. The problem is more universal than we thought. If we were on the moon, the pants wouldn't sag, but the minute that we enter the Earth's atmosphere, the pants head straight to the ground in a fashion that is consistent with Newton's Gravitational Law that gravity equals 9.81 m/s^2. It really isn't the youngster's faults. The only way to combat the force of gravity is an equal, opposite force. The only way to achieve that is either by people holding their pants up, or to take more desperate measures, a belt." At this time, lawmakers will have to cool their heels until a reasonable solution can be dealt out. In the meantime, some religious and political leaders, not satisfied, are calling for the Government to take more proactive measures by building an anti-gravity machine. President Obama acknowledged the request today stating, "I understand America's frustration with saggy pants, but if we solve that by doing away with gravity, we'll have to nail everything else down. And that would be a huge pain in the ass.
The Nature Of Grab-Ity Gravity
Say you drop something and it falls, as you'd expect, vertically to the ground. A routine happening! You can easily explain what happened (and where and when), but can you explain how it happened, or why that something fell vertically down and not in some other direction? You probably can not.
Gravity is associated most strongly with two physicists - Newton and Einstein. Post Newton, gravity just had something (mathematical) to do with how massive objects are and how far apart they are. There was no real explanation of why or how. Gravity was just the way it was, and Newton's Laws of Gravity were mainly predictive, not explanatory. [At least the ancients had an explanation. Objects (air, earth, fire and water) sought their natural place in the ordered scheme of things - as if they had minds of their own obeying cosmic laws. Thus, solids were at the bottom and rocks fell down because their place was with solids; water fell down but sat atop of solids; air rose to sit above water; and fire wanted to rise above the air to be with the sun, an obvious ball of fire in the sky.]
Post Einstein, gravity was just a phenomenon that was attributed to joint interactions between mass and space-time. Gravity was a property of the geometry of space. Mass distorts the shape of space-time, and so other objects move in accordance with that warped shape just like moving objects on the surface of the Earth follow the contours - the warps.
Today, physicists are trying to absorb gravity (which is a continuous phenomenon) into the now well established realm of quantum physics (which is not continuous). So far, no dice, but it's not for lack of imaginative trying. The basic reason for trying to merge the two is that there are several things in nature that can only be adequately explained by unifying the two - primarily the singularities at the heart of Black Holes and the Big Bang.
So what exactly is gravity? Well, at first glance, gravity is obviously a force - it forces you to fall downwards or conversely, you have to apply a force to overcome it.
Traditional physics texts list four known forces at work in the Universe - gravity, electromagnetism, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. Unfortunately, gravity is pretty much now the exclusive property of Einstein's General Relativity Theory while the other three are based around quantum physics. Physicists have as a first Holy Grail the desire to link as one the three quantum forces, or GUTs (Grand Unified Theories), and have just about succeeded - at least in combining convincingly the weak nuclear and the electromagnetic forces - electroweak theory. The second Holy Grail is to link all four into a TOE - a Theory of Everything, or in more common physics language, finding a quantum theory of gravity or quantum gravity as mentioned above.
Alas, despite intense effort (over several generations by theoretical physicists), no such link has ever been experimentally shown. The only thing to date that has achieved this TOE is the solely mathematical theory of strings, which, alas, has no experimental runs on the board some thirty years on. Even so, it takes string theory to require some ten or eleven spatial dimensions to achieve this, again something for which there are no experimental (and no common sense) evidence. It's proving an interesting area for nerdy thinkers, but it (string theory) remains, 30 years on, theory, Theory and more THEORY!
What if one assumes the opposite (for a refreshing change)? So perhaps it just isn't possible to relate or link gravity (hence General Relativity) to the other three known (quantum) forces. TOE is not only elusive, it's impossible. Gravity and the other three forces can't be combined any more than one can turn an apple into a pear. ["Heresy, heresy" I hear you cry!]
So how is gravity different? Perhaps gravity is just so different that it not only stands alone, it must stand alone.
Gravity is different #1: Unlike the other three forces, gravity has an opposite - anti-gravity, or in today's cosmology, 'dark energy' which is causing the Universe's expansion rate to ever increase or accelerate. You'd be hard pressed to come up with a concept of an anti-strong or anti-weak nuclear force, or an anti-electromagnetic force! What would an anti-magnetic field be? Could you have anti-light? Such concepts only induce headaches!
Gravity is different #2: Two of the three quantum forces operate over atomic (or sub-atomic) lengths. Both gravity and electromagnetism (EM) can, in theory, extend their influences to infinity. But, while EM can be blocked (at least for a while) by placing an object or insulator in front of the EM source, gravity can't be. No known physics can block gravity. Place a sheet of metal in front of a lamp, and you block the light. Place the same sheet between you and the Earth, and you won't start floating upwards!
Gravity is different #3: What can gravity do that quantum forces can't - bend light - that's a pretty neat trick! [See below for more details.]
Gravity is different #4: Of all the four known forces, gravity is by far and away the weakest of the weak. If gravity were on the beach, gravity would get sand kicked in its face! Now you may not think gravity is all that weak while in freefall from a 12 story building roof heading for the concrete sidewalk far below, but it is - relative to the rest. [In fact it's the electromagnetic force that terminates your 12 story fall, and presumably you!] I mean it is easier to lift up a paperclip from your desk with the entire mass of the Earth trying to stop you, than it is to separate that same paperclip from a reasonably strong magnet. In fact you could use that magnet to pick the paperclip up in the first place. Magnet one; Earth's gravity zero! And you certainly would have to use a lot more force trying to walk through brick walls, or other solid objects, so the electromagnetic forces acting between the atoms and molecules holding them together as a solid must be pretty strong. And don't even think about trying to pull apart the nucleus of an atom or to separate the quarks that make up a proton or neutron. No, we may think of gravity as a giant force, but it's still the smallest of the four giants, sort of like a gnat compared to elephants.
Gravity is different #5: If string/membrane (brane) theory is right, then gravity alone of the four known forces can 'travel' off our brane (actually termed a braneworld) to another braneworld (and vice versa) through what is termed 'the bulk'. The other three forces are stuck to our braneworld, and presumably, those three forces would also be glued to another braneworld. Thus, relative to the other three forces, gravity is diluted and thus is experienced as being a weaker (the weakest) force. It also explains how two braneworlds can attract one another and collide. Such a collision results in a Big Bang for each braneworld, but a Big Bang that occurred in pre-existing space and time. [Look up 'Ekpyrotic Universe' for the nitty-gritty details.]
Gravity is different #5 (continued): Invoking the braneworld concept and associated forces further helps to explain 'dark matter', which one recalls has positive gravity, yet is invisible or 'dark' (apparently it has no association or interaction with electromagnetic energy). Anyway, the idea is that 'dark matter' is in fact just ordinary matter, but on another braneworld (or in another universe - part of the Multiverse). We feel 'dark matter's' gravity cause gravity can travel through 'the bulk' or leak between braneworlds, but we can not see 'dark matter' because electromagnetic energy can not travel across 'the bulk' that separates braneworlds. (String theory may still be, thirty years on, only pure mathematics and theory, but it can explain some real physics phenomena! Now if only someone could figure out how to slot 'dark energy' into this scenario, they'd be a candidate for the Nobel Prize!)
Presumably for there to be gravity there has to be mass (or matter), so an electron has gravity; you have gravity; the Planet Earth has gravity - and so on. But a photon, that 'particle' that carries the electromagnetic force, doesn't have gravity since it can't have any mass (because it travels at the speed of light and only something without mass can do that).
So gravity can deflect the electromagnetic force. We've all read about that famous experiment where the positions of stars were pinpointed that should be very near the limb of the Sun during a solar eclipse. The starlight from those stars was deflected by the Sun's gravity and thus, during the eclipse, the stars seemed slightly out of position in the sky. This was in accordance with Einstein's General Relativity predictions and the merger of theoretical prediction and observational reality elevated the physicist from that of a scientist known and respected by colleagues to that of international superstar known to the masses - the scientist who overthrew Newton's Theory of Gravitation. There's another astrophysical effect of the deflection of electromagnetic radiation by gravity, and that's known as gravitational lensing. While predicted by Einstein, he felt it would never have any practical applications. But today's astrophysicists have used the phenomena - that of massive (high gravity) objects in space deflecting and focusing the light (like a lens) from more distant objects behind them - to study same. It's by this technique that the presence of 'dark matter' has not only been confirmed, but mapped, as 'dark matter' has gravity and can act as a gravitational lens!
Can gravity deflect gravity? In Newtonian physics, the gravitational force travels instantaneously. If the Sun were to somehow vanish now, we'd feel the Earth orbital effects, now. In Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, gravity travels at the speed of light, and thusly gravity and EM (of which light is a part) share a common bond. Thus, if the Sun were to somehow vanish now, it would be eight minutes before we'd notice Earth's orbit being perturbed. Experiments have to date only proved gravitational influences travel at very close to light speed, but as yet, not an exact match. Close, but no cigar. Of course it's only fair to point out that these experiments are incredibly difficult to carry out, and the final verdict is still far off.
All the four forces have particles associated with them - particles that convey the force from Point A to Point B. In the case of the electromagnetic force, it's the mass-less photon. The strong nuclear force has the gluon. In the case of gravity, the assumed theoretical particle (it hasn't been actually detected yet) is the graviton.
If the particle assumed to carry the gravitational force (the graviton) travels at light speed, it should be mass-less, and with analogy with the photon, be deflected by another gravitational field. If a photon passes near a Black Hole (a high gravity object), its pathway will be bent. If a graviton (say part of a gravitational wave - something predicted by Einstein's General Theory of Relativity) were to pass near the same Black Hole, its pathway should be equally bent. If a graviton has some mass and thus travels at somewhat less than light speed, that too will show up as a change in its pathway as it passes close to a Black Hole. Equally, a graviton, if there is such an animal, should be sucked into a Black Hole if it hits the Black Hole's bulls-eye.
It might be surprising that if gravity can deflect gravity as well as radiation, then how can gravity 'escape' from a Black Hole and radiation* can't? Of course gravity is an intrinsic property of mass, and there's certainly lots of mass in a Black Hole, so obviously a Black Hole has gravity and it's not as if it were escaping or leaking out. Of course one could, perhaps should, argue that gravitational waves are just ripples in space-time geometry, and gravity is just geometry, and geometry can't be sucked into a Black Hole the way matter/energy can be. Translated, gravity again is just different - it's not a force like the other forces, it shares no commonality with electromagnetism or the strong and weak nuclear forces, its just geometry in which case there might be no need for a gravitational force particle.
An interesting side question is can light deflect light? Unfortunately, light doesn't stand still, but what if, as a thought experiment, one fired a laser beam in one direction and another laser beam at right angles to it, but say just a fraction higher (so the two beams don't make contact). Would the pathways of the two laser beams alter as they crossed? Would two laser beams fired off in parallel slowly be drawn together and eventually merge? How about two laser beams fired head on towards each other? I suspect the two beams would just pass through one another. To the best of my knowledge, light only interacts with light as wave phenomena, not as particle phenomena, causing constructive or destructive interference. So, two beams at right angles, or fired in parallel, wouldn't display any particle sorts of properties - that is, deflections. Again, the photon is mass-less so shouldn't have any sort of deflection influence on other photons. That's my guess anyway. So...
John's musings one: gravity is a quantum phenomenon; gravity is not a continuous phenomenon; there is a unit of gravity that can not be subdivided; the graviton is the fundamental particle that conveys the force we feel as gravity. There will eventually be an experimentally verified TOE.
John's musings two: gravity is a consequence of geometry. Mass distorts space-time's geometry (which would be absolutely flat in the absence of any mass) which in turn distorts how mass moves (which would be in a straight line in the absence of any geometry other than flat space-time geometry). Gravity has bugger-all to do with quantum physics and just can not be reconciled with it. There is no fundamental unit of gravity and no need for a gravity-bearing particle.
Now this mass/space-time dynamic is very interesting. Mass tells space-time how to curve or warp (which determines the geometry); space-time geometry tells mass how to move, movement which in turn alters the geometry, which in turn alters the motion, and so on, and so on. Very dynamic! It's also very circular, sort of like the chicken and egg question.
How exactly does space-time affect the motion of mass? Well, that's pretty straight forward - I think. It's one of the fundamental axioms of physics that an object once set in motion, stays in motion, and travels in a straight line - unless acted on by an external force. If you hit a hockey puck across the ice, it keeps on going on (if you ignore friction) in the direction you hit it. If some other player then hits the puck, the puck (probably) changes both speed and direction. But, what if, instead, the puck hits a slight slope in the ice. The puck will change direction. Geometry has affected the motion of a mass. Geometry has mimicked a force. Or, take the unfortunate S.S. Poseidon sailing along on a smooth sea until a sudden rogue wave rudely alters her course and speed in real quick-smart time. The sea's geometry changed, resulting in, in this case, a good cinema experience!
So how exactly does mass warp space-time? I don't know exactly (in case you were expecting a revelation at this stage). You might think the entire concept crazy. I mean we've all seen the Sun and the Moon, and the Apollo astronauts have seen the Earth from afar, and we know these objects have mass and hence gravity, but have you, or the astronauts, seen any warping of space-time in the vicinity of the Sun, Moon and the Earth (unlike that - by analogy - the bowling ball on the rubber sheet illustration beloved in all physic's texts)? Okay, there's noting apparent to the naked eye that anything is warped, there's no psychedelic effects apparent, no distortions, etc. The Moon doesn't appear as a shimmering now-you-see-it-now-you-don't object. But then, we do have that starlight defection experiment verified during solar eclipses (tick to Einstein). Perhaps these worlds aren't massive enough to imprint their distortions on our retinas. The more the mass, the more dramatic would be the result, and anyone who has seen long duration time exposure photographs of massive galactic-sized objects, the gravitation lens at work, witnessed the formation of Einstein's Rings (or arcs), has certainly seen space-time warping or the pathway of light deflected by mass (tick to Einstein).
I suspect the answer as to how exactly mass warps space-time is probably straight forward. As the Earth travels in its orbit around the sun, space (or space-time) has to give way to accommodate our planet. Or, if you toss a ball through the air, the air is displaced as the ball passes through. The air has been slightly, and briefly, warped. Or, back to the S.S. Poseidon, her sailing along on calm seas causes displacement in the ocean and generates bow waves causing the ocean's geometry to change. The bow waves, radiating outwards (like gravity waves?) hence cause a rocking of a small rowboat far away.
So, experimental conclusions (to date): Einstein one; quantum physics/string theorists zero.
In matters of theoretical physics and accompanying mathematics, one must temper the 'thought experiment' results with liberal does of healthy common sense - attention string theorists. In matters of observational and verified experimental physics, healthy common sense must take a back seat to confirmed results. Despite gravitational lensing, etc. gravity (the how and the why) still seems to reside largely in the theoretical realm, and I'm sure we'd all like to see this very mysterious force emerge in the light of total understanding based on a lot more experimental data. In the meantime, in the here and now, string theorists, and those proposing models of quantum gravity, better get their experimental act together!
A further recommended reading about gravity:
Schutz, Bernard; "Gravity from the Ground Up: An Introductory Guide to Gravity and General Relativity"; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2003:
*Actually theoretical astrophysicist Stephen Hawking showed that Black Holes weren't entirely black; some radiation can escape from them, know known as Hawking Radiation. It's actually a now and then quantum phenomena. Normal everyday electromagnetic radiation can't escape from a Black Hole once trapped behind the Black Hole's event horizon. However, the energy associated with a Black Hole, via Einstein's famous equation relating mass and energy, can morph into virtual particles outside the Black Hole's event horizon - that region and below of no escape.
Interview With J Matthew Neal Author of Specific Gravity
Dr. J. Matthew Neal was born in Muncie, Indiana, where he has resided much of his life. Although he has been a medical writer for many years, "Specific Gravity" is his first novel. As a physician and residency program director, he has found plenty of inspiration in the medical field for his fiction.
Tyler: Welcome, Matt. Thank you for joining me today. To begin, I understand "Specific Gravity" is a thriller with Dr. Alexander (Alex) Darkkin as its main character. Will you tell us a little bit about Alex and why you think readers will find him to be an attractive character?
Matt: Alex is a complicated guy with lots of problems, and at first probably won't seem likeable to readers at all. He's a brilliant cancer specialist who has also created his own medical software company. He's good-looking, smart, and has money-but is also an obnoxious, womanizing alcoholic who is unhappy with his superficial life and self-destructing relationships. He's tried therapy, AA, and religion, none of which seem to be working.
But he has a deeper side that he doesn't yet realize, and much of the story revolves around his self-reflection and realization that he can do much to help those other than himself. He just needs a special person to show him the way.
Tyler: Is Alex haunted by demons that led him to womanizing and alcoholism? Would you tell us a little bit about his past before the book begins?
Matt: Alex felt he didn't have a very good paternal role model; his father Conrad was an alcoholic who cheated on Alex's mother on numerous occasions. His sister left town after high school and developed a relationship with a normal, "surrogate" family (the Mendozas); meanwhile Alex stayed fairly close to home, and lives in Nashville. He never saw his parents in a loving marriage, and as a result, finds it difficult to engage in lengthy relationships. Despite seeming arrogant, he actually suffers from low self-esteem and depression, and this has resulted in dependence on alcohol and frequent one-night stands.
Tyler: What is the situation Alex finds himself in that is the focus of the novel?
Matt:Alex, hoping that a change of location will do him some good, relocates to San Diego for six months to fill in for his sister Wendy's friend who is taking a sabbatical. After his arrival, he curiously inspects the files of a patient who recently died-billionaire pharmaceutical CEO John Markham. His software background leads him to discover that Markham's medical records may have been altered, and he comes up with a theory that Markham may in fact have been murdered. Unfortunately, he can't seem to convince the police or anyone else, and realizes he can't do it alone. He then reluctantly seeks the aid of Wendy's best friend, Bonnie Mendoza.
Tyler: Tell us a little bit about Bonnie and her involvement in the story.
Matt: The arrogant Alex finally meets his match in deaf forensic scientist Bonnie Mendoza-a mathematical and lexical genius who inherited from her mother the rare neurological trait "synesthesia," which means, literally, "a union of the senses." She sees numbers and letters as colors, for example. Living humans have unique colors and smells as well. These odd sensory perceptions allow her easily to manipulate words and numbers.
Her physical disability has compelled her to exceed in other ways, also. Like her other family members, she is a gifted athlete. She cares deeply about sick and disabled children, and she frequently performs for charity as stage magician "Mendoza the Miraculous." Her mathematical powers allow her to perform amazing mentalist tricks, but she is best known for being an escape artist who has become somewhat of a local celebrity. The last ability is extremely important in the plot of the story.
The seemingly perfect Bonnie has many flaws, though-she often seems to lack common sense and makes rash decisions. Like many strong synesthetes, she has perceptual problems-she cannot tell left from right, for example, and has poor direction sense. The geeky, mild-mannered scientist has a bad temper, is virtually fearless, and can be lethal to anyone who tries to harm her. Her training as a forensic scientist has given her the knowledge of how to use weapons most effectively. But, despite these abilities, she has an almost childlike, naïve quality, and Alex becomes strongly attracted to her.
Tyler: Wow, she sounds like quite a character. Where did you get your ideas for Bonnie, and how do her abilities enhance the novel's plot?
Matt: Alex is an arrogant blowhard who always wants his way, and I needed a strong female character who can take anything he dishes out and throw it right back at him. At first, they have strong disdain for one another, but, paradoxically, this strength eventually attracts Alex to her, and they develop an unlikely relationship. She seems, on the surface, quite different from Alex, but we soon learn that they share many tendencies.
In addition, I have long been a fan of magic and escapology, and wanted to feature a character who used those abilities in the story. To my knowledge, other female escape artist characters in the popular media are pretty nonexistent.
Alex is a skilled physician and software engineer, but doesn't understand the intricacies of forensics and police work, and needs Bonnie for that. In addition, her abilities are important in solving several puzzles and getting them out of a number of tight situations.
Tyler: Tell us a little bit about Alex's sister Wendy, who appears to be an important character in the story.
Matt: Wendy is Alex's younger sister by two years, and is also a physician. The extroverted, plus-sized pediatrician moved to San Diego after high school to attend college. She began volunteering at a pediatric rehabilitation center, where she met wiry deaf teen Bonnie Mendoza. Over the years, the two developed a special friendship, and Wendy helped Bonnie improve her self-esteem and physical strength.
She is an avid charity fund-raiser who often performs magic acts with Bonnie. She even has a local public access TV show, "Dr. Wendy's Science Squad," which teaches children about science and technology. She is married and has one child.
Tyler: I understand "Specific Gravity" is categorized as a techno-thriller. Will you give us a bit of a definition of a "techno-thriller" and explain why this kind of novel appeals to you?
Matt: Techno-thrillers are works of fiction where "technology" is, in essence, a character in the story. They tend to include a large amount of technical detail in subject matter, and focus on the inner mechanics of science. Much of the novel centers on the detailed workings of computers, medical information systems, forensic science, and even magic tricks. This genre allows me to do what I like to do best-write in great technical detail about science and its inner workings.
Tyler: What difficulties do you find in writing a techno-thriller? Do you have concerns about readers following the details around technology, and does technology give you artistic license to create technologies and make them believable to readers?
Matt: I think one problem is that it's possible to include too much technical detail. I have gone to great trouble to ensure the accuracy of the science and disciplines in the book-but I realize that some readers may not have the same interest in detail as I.
Personally, I enjoy reading techno-thrillers where I may not understand all the science and technology-this allows me to read about it elsewhere and learn new things. I think, in a way, techno-thrillers may be harder to write than other types of fiction, because the science must be believable. Attention to detail is a must, and requires a lot of revision. The research takes almost as much time as writing the book.
Tyler: Are techno-thrillers a form of science-fiction, or do you see a difference between them? Are techno-thrillers striving more for realism, or at least to appear realistic?
Matt: I think there are a lot of similarities between the two genres. To me, science fiction tends to explore scientific disciplines (such as robotics, time travel, cloning, etc.) for its own sake. Techno-thrillers are kind of a hybrid of science fiction and mystery, usually about espionage or a threat to society that the protagonists must solve. There is a subgenre of science fiction called "hard SF" where there is rigorous attention to accurate detail in the quantitative sciences (such as physics and chemistry). I think there is some overlap.
Both genres can be realistic, but I think the main difference is the mystery/puzzle angle of the techno-thriller. The latter also may focus on societal and political issues; "Specific Gravity" takes aim at some of those.
Tyler: What sorts of influences have you had in writing techno-thrillers? For example, other writers or medical TV dramas?
Matt: I'm actually more of a non-fiction reader than fiction. For fiction, my major influences have been Michael Crichton, Martin Caidin, Robin Cook, and Tom Clancy, all of whom go into great technical detail in their stories. I also read a lot of Isaac Asimov's science fiction stories growing up. Although I enjoy watching medical TV dramas, they really don't influence my writing.
Tyler: Why did you choose the title, "Specific Gravity"?
Matt:"Specific Gravity" refers to the physical measurement of the relative density of a liquid to water. The mystery unfolds when the protagonists decipher some of John Markham's unusual laboratory values, which leads them into a heap of trouble. I chose the title because of its importance in the story. It also sounds scientific and technical.
Tyler: Matt, I understand you're a doctor yourself. How has your profession lent to your interest in writing novels?
Matt: Well, most physicians' lives are not nearly as exciting as they are portrayed in the popular media. Nevertheless, medicine gives one many plot ideas, and a large hospital gives a writer access to many interesting people. It's like a small city, in a way.
Tyler: Why did you decide to write, "Specific Gravity"? Is there a message about our modern world in the book that you were trying to express?
Matt: As our healthcare information becomes more and more electronic, we must be certain that safeguards are present to protect those data and their possible manipulation. My novel shows what could happen if malicious individuals tried to use that information for their own evil gain. These events, however unlikely, could happen.
But most real-world medical errors aren't malicious in intent-they are simply mistakes, but mistakes that can cost lives. We must carefully examine our own healthcare delivery systems to make certain that hospitals are the safest places in the world.
The book is also about a selfish, unhappy physician's journey to redemption-to try and do something for someone other than himself, to make the world a better place. To succeed, Alex has to confront his demons, and also must face his greatest "moment of desperation"-the possibility of losing the most important thing in his life. During these times, he finds inner strengths he never knew he had.
Tyler: Matt, would you tell us one of the plot twists, or what you find to be the most exciting moment in the novel?
Matt: There are many, and I don't want to divulge too much-but I think one of the most exciting parts is when Alex and Wendy discover that the true villain is someone who has been lurking right under their noses all along. Another is Alex's realization of what the murder weapon is-something so bizarre that it's almost incomprehensible.
Tyler: Would you give us an example of how the novel is a techno-thriller? What kind of technology is involved in the plot?
Matt: There is much detail in the description of computers and medical informatics-the theoretical development of a "quantum" computer, for example. The unusual murder weapon also demands a great deal of explanation. Bonnie's forensic science tactics, such as voiceprint, mathematical, chemical, and facial analyses, are explored in detail. Finally, the intricacies of Bonnie's escape artist tricks probably qualify as "technology," and are discussed in depth.
Tyler: Matt, what made you first want to be a novelist?
Matt: I had wanted to write a novel for years but simply hadn't found the time. Believe me, it was a lot more work than I thought it would be. The best part of writing fiction to me is creation of characters-you can make them whoever you want them to be. It's fun, but also a lot of frustration and hard work; some ideas simply end up in the trash can.
Tyler: I understand you also write books for the medical field. Will you tell us a little bit about those works, and what challenges you find in writing both fiction and non-fiction?
Matt: I have written three medical textbooks which have been used in traditional classroom settings. After I began writing a novel, I soon realized that the lessons learned in medical writing don't necessarily apply to fiction-it's totally different. Each has its own set of challenges. One similarity in a techno-thriller to a medical textbook is that both must pay meticulous attention to detail. But the structure and pacing of a novel is vastly different. I went to several writers' conferences and took several courses on fiction writing, and I owe a lot to those instructors who critiqued my manuscript mercilessly!
Tyler: Do you see Alex as a recurring character in future novels?
Matt: I am currently writing a sequel, "Ontario Lacus," which is set about three years from the end of "Specific Gravity." Alex and Bonnie unwittingly uncover a pro sports steroid scandal that turns out to be something far, far worse-one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all time has been perverted into a government bio-genetic experimentation project. Bonnie must risk everything to save the friend who did so much to help her twenty years ago.
As far as a long-term recurring character, I don't know about Alex. Part of his motivation in "Specific Gravity" is conquering his personal demons, which he accomplishes for the most part. He's appreciably more mellow in "Ontario Lacus," which is more Bonnie's and Wendy's story than his. We'll see.
Tyler: Thank you for joining me today, Matt. Before we go, would you tell us your website address and what further information our readers may find there about "Specific Gravity"?
Internet Marketing Education Vs College Education
Congratulations! in just a few minutes you will become a college graduate. The four years of hard work and discipline finally paid off because today is your day. I know when you look back at the many late nights studying or the topics that you had to research for term papers that you absolutely abhorred was worth it. Don't forget there were sacrifices as well, I don't think you can count on both hands the many parties that you passed up or the summers you spent at an internship while your friends sat in the sun by the beach.
Today you make your parents proud because today you have proved to the world that you are entitled to success. You hear your name called out and you walk up on stage to receive your diploma it's one of the proudest days in your life. Every second you can feel the S on your chest get bigger and the red cape get larger. You are officially a college graduate ready for the world and fully prepared to defy gravity. Like the R & B singer R Kelly once sang you believe you can fly.
Fast forward one year later. You walk through the revolving doors of the faceless building quickly being swept up by the lunch hour traffic. Once again disappointed at your job search. You can't seem to get on your feet and every time you turn on the TV or open a magazine you see and hear about the job market getting smaller and smaller. What happened your life wasn't supposed to be this way. What happened was the same thing that is happening to countless other new college graduates. They are leaving school to find out they have been learning old out dated principles that don't apply to the current job market but even worse the job market doesn't even exist. The only thing they do have is a mountain of debt created from consumer expense and college loans. Naturally you feel bitter frustrated and even a little depressed. You graduated from college your entitled to more right... WRONG
Sorry to say that the only thing your entitled to is a opportunity to try something different that will present a different outcome. For college students especially those who are seeking careers in business their is unlimited potential for success as a internet marketer. first and foremost their is no recession on the internet, the internet is a constantly growing and changing algorithm that corporations in the fortune 500 listing to mom & pop brick and mortar business need someone to successfully promote, brand, and attract high quality customers to their business. The only possible way a internet marketing professional will be considered non valuable is unless the internet disappears.
The major appeal to becoming a internet marketing professional is the ability to make a substantial residual income while your learning. Unlike major colleges and universities in America you don't have to graduate before you have the chance to sell yourself. The college of internet marketing teaches you to define your self value so the business opportunity comes to you and you can state the terms. The curriculum is all online so you can work around whatever personal schedule that you currently have and the cost to begin this business education is far less then it would be to get your degree in any major college or university. Apply the same discipline and study habits to this education like you woud for your undergrad or graduate level courses and success is inevitable.
America's Stonehenge - A New Theory
The America's Stonehenge archaeological site is located on the summit of Mystery Hill in North Salem, NH. It consists of enigmatic stone chambers, standing stones, niches, drains, and astronomical alignments. Who built these stone structures and for what purpose?
The professional archaeological community has long argued that the site was built by an eccentric farmer who built his house on the hill between 1825 and 1850. Other researchers have proposed that the site was built by Irish Monks. Both of these theories, although quite popular, have been disproven by the archaeological evidence. Stone tools used to quarry the bedrock and shape stones for the some of the earliest structures were C-14 dated to 3000 years ago. This means the site began construction well before Irish Monk starting building religious communities, and certainly predates any 19th century farmers by over three thousand years. Who else could have built this site?
Archaeology has discovered two groups of artifacts and other evidence at the site. The first group of artifacts dates from the 1800's though the early 1900's. All this evidence is associated with the Pattee homestead on the site (circa 1825-1850) and later picnickers from the early 1900's. The second group of artifacts and other evidence spans from 3000 years ago through the 1600's. All of this evidence is associated with Native American activity on the site. It consists of various stone tools used for quarrying, shards of Native American pottery made and used on the site, petroglyphs (rock carvings), pecked & abraded grooved drains, and other Native American artifacts. The evidence overwhelmingly points in one direction - the site was built by Native Americans.
What was the purpose of these stone structures? Like all cultures worldwide, the Native Americans had their own religious traditions. These religious beliefs involved holding ceremonies with various spirits. They created astronomical alignments to mark the date that a ceremony was to be held and also as a means to call the Sun Spirit into their ceremonies. They carved drains in the bedrock to pour sacred water into during ceremonies. They built stone chambers to hold other important ceremonies.
The theory that America's Stonehenge was built by Native Americans is based upon an exhaustive four year study of the site. This study is carefully documented in the book America's Stonehenge Deciphered.
Not sure what theory to believe? Then take a tour of the site and see for yourself. America's Stonehenge is open year round to visitors (admission fee is charged). For an in depth self-guided tour of the site based upon this new research checkout A Guide to America's Stonehenge pamphlet ($4.95) before your trip. Can't travel to the site in person? Take a tour of the site with a 40 minute documentary film, America's Stonehenge: The History of a Sacred Place
The professional archaeological community has long argued that the site was built by an eccentric farmer who built his house on the hill between 1825 and 1850. Other researchers have proposed that the site was built by Irish Monks. Both of these theories, although quite popular, have been disproven by the archaeological evidence. Stone tools used to quarry the bedrock and shape stones for the some of the earliest structures were C-14 dated to 3000 years ago. This means the site began construction well before Irish Monk starting building religious communities, and certainly predates any 19th century farmers by over three thousand years. Who else could have built this site?
Archaeology has discovered two groups of artifacts and other evidence at the site. The first group of artifacts dates from the 1800's though the early 1900's. All this evidence is associated with the Pattee homestead on the site (circa 1825-1850) and later picnickers from the early 1900's. The second group of artifacts and other evidence spans from 3000 years ago through the 1600's. All of this evidence is associated with Native American activity on the site. It consists of various stone tools used for quarrying, shards of Native American pottery made and used on the site, petroglyphs (rock carvings), pecked & abraded grooved drains, and other Native American artifacts. The evidence overwhelmingly points in one direction - the site was built by Native Americans.
What was the purpose of these stone structures? Like all cultures worldwide, the Native Americans had their own religious traditions. These religious beliefs involved holding ceremonies with various spirits. They created astronomical alignments to mark the date that a ceremony was to be held and also as a means to call the Sun Spirit into their ceremonies. They carved drains in the bedrock to pour sacred water into during ceremonies. They built stone chambers to hold other important ceremonies.
The theory that America's Stonehenge was built by Native Americans is based upon an exhaustive four year study of the site. This study is carefully documented in the book America's Stonehenge Deciphered.
Not sure what theory to believe? Then take a tour of the site and see for yourself. America's Stonehenge is open year round to visitors (admission fee is charged). For an in depth self-guided tour of the site based upon this new research checkout A Guide to America's Stonehenge pamphlet ($4.95) before your trip. Can't travel to the site in person? Take a tour of the site with a 40 minute documentary film, America's Stonehenge: The History of a Sacred Place
Mary Gage and James Gage (mother & son research team) are co-authors of several books on stone quarrying, historic carved stones, America's Stonehenge, and Native American stone structures in Northeastern United States.
Body Weight Training Gravity Provides All The Resistance You Need
Gravity provides us with all the resistance we need for getting just about all the "training" we need. I continuously shock folks when they train with me because they find out just how exerting body weight training can be. The physical challenge and benefits of being able to "control" your own resistance through a variety of movements and varying planes of motion will yield you results that you probably never thought would be possible. Keep on reading if I have your attention.
You see the key to being able to do this effectively, as well as, with dynamic free weight training is crucial to your body's performance. No muscle works independently in manufacturing the art of motion. You see by mastering the ability to do this you will drastically improve your ability to do it with an external load, or free weight as well. When you engage your body in the act of some particular movement or activity such as a push up for instance your muscles are working together throughout your body like links in a chain.
In the push up example you can picture in your mind maintaining a rigid tight body that is supported by the tense muscles or links throughout the drill. This can only be accomplished by you having the right "feel" and "control" over your body by learning to train your body to support itself under stress. This is crucial in order for you to obtain a strong fit body that can be capable of performing at any time for any reason.
This is something that requires consistent practice and discipline. The beauty of body weight training is that you don't have to purchase equipment, space, or even need a lot of time in order to make it happen. This is not only a great way to train, but in terms of time it is hugely efficient as well! You have got to be able to "control" your own body resistance if you expect to progress at any level within your own strength and fitness routine. This is true whether or not you are a serious fitness junkie or an elite athlete. Gravity is nature's weight room and there is not better way to get stronger than by utilizing it for your advantage. Take the time to learn more about body weight training and other powerful strength and conditioning tactics by accessing more of my articles on the subject.
Mass Weight and Acceleration Due to Gravity
In technical terms, mass and weight can easily be confused, and in fact, many people might not even know - or have forgotten - the difference. With our physical world being governed by such laws as gravity, momentum, and energy-conservation, the principle of mass and weight, and the distinction between them, are extremely vital to understanding more complex physics.
So what IS the Difference between Mass and Weight?
Well, first of all, mass and weight can be used interchangeably when technical definitions are not required. For example, a person can "weigh" 75 kilograms and also have a "mass" of 75 kilograms. The difference lies in the Earth's gravitational force, which is equal to an acceleration of roughly 9.8 meters per second per second, or 9.8 m/s2.
What this means exactly, is that the mass of an object can be thought of as the amount of "matter", whereas the weight of an object is equal to the force the object exerts due to the gravitational force acting on it. Mass is measured in kilograms, whereas weight, being a force, is measured in newtons. Let's take the example of an average 75 kilogram man.
If this 75 kilogram man were standing on the surface of the Earth, he would exert a weight-force on whatever he was standing on, equal to his mass multiplied by the acceleration due to gravity, or FW = mg, with FW being the weight-force, m equal to mass, and g equal to the gravitational acceleration on the surface of the Earth. - About 735 newtons.
Now what would happen if this same man were standing on the surface of the Moon? His mass would remain the same, at 75 kilograms, but his weight would most certainly change. The acceleration due to gravity on the surface of the Moon is roughly one-sixth that of the Earth's, at about 1.6 meters per second per second. This would make the man's weight-force about 120 newtons.
So comparing the two weight-forces from the Earth and the Moon, we come to the conclusion that while the mass remains constant, the weight changes depending on the force of gravity acting on the object. The concept of differentiating mass from weight is important when performing calculations involving statics and weight-forces acting on given structural elements.
An easy way to tell the two apart is to remember that mass is measured in kilograms, and equals the weight most people are more familiar with, as in, "how much do you weigh?", and weight in the technical sense - contrary to the logic that weight equals kilograms - is a unit of force and therefore measured in newtons.
As I mentioned above, weight is equal to mass times gravitational acceleration, FW = mg. If you can remember this basic formula, you should have no problem differentiating the two, as it relates them both clearly. The simpler version of this formula is F = ma, which is the standard equation for force - which equals the object's mass times its acceleration.
Choosing the Right Gravity Conveyor System
Choosing the right gravity conveyor system set-up requires doing some homework and lots of planning. There are several factors that affect efficiency and performance. Those thinking about replacing or adding gravity conveyors to a warehouse, factory or distribution center should take the time to consider how it will be used, under what conditions, how fast or durable the gravity conveyor system needs to be and how frequently it will be used.
Weight
Determine the actual weight of the load. When there are different items or combinations of several types of products that will be moved on the system, try to determine a minimum and maximum width, height, depth and weight of the package. This will affect the suitability of the type of material the gravity system is made of, as well as how fast or slow it will move on straight or inclined surfaces. Some orders placed on gravity conveyors could have an unlimited maximum weight unless one is established by the users. Consult the system's manufacturer regarding suggested load weights if this is the case.
Determine the actual weight of the load. When there are different items or combinations of several types of products that will be moved on the system, try to determine a minimum and maximum width, height, depth and weight of the package. This will affect the suitability of the type of material the gravity system is made of, as well as how fast or slow it will move on straight or inclined surfaces. Some orders placed on gravity conveyors could have an unlimited maximum weight unless one is established by the users. Consult the system's manufacturer regarding suggested load weights if this is the case.
Length
Some cartons and packages need to move long distances within the facility; from one end of a room to the other, or even to another part of the building. A gravity conveyor track can achieve this when the tilt angle and load weight are appropriate for the conveyor system. Some gravity systems may need to transport products only several feet before the task is complete. This could involve order picking on a level push line, for example.
Some cartons and packages need to move long distances within the facility; from one end of a room to the other, or even to another part of the building. A gravity conveyor track can achieve this when the tilt angle and load weight are appropriate for the conveyor system. Some gravity systems may need to transport products only several feet before the task is complete. This could involve order picking on a level push line, for example.
Type
Gravity conveyors are operated by different methods, most commonly wheels or rollers. The wheels are mounted in a series on an axle. Rollers consist of metal tubes with bearings inside either end. The rollers are also mounted upon axles. The axles are spring-loaded for easy replacement. The springs also hold the roller in place. Both wheels and rollers are set in a supporting channel frame. The rows and columns of both types are placed in a grid-like fashion, which affects how efficiently the product or carton moves. The farther apart the wheels or rollers are, the larger the package or product must be to span the gap. Both systems require a flat, smooth-bottomed package surface for the load to move efficiently upon contact. Cartons or packages with divots or protrusions may be hung up and not move through the conveyors. If a surface is curved, the next roller or wheel may not pick it up and it, too, will stall.
Gravity conveyors are operated by different methods, most commonly wheels or rollers. The wheels are mounted in a series on an axle. Rollers consist of metal tubes with bearings inside either end. The rollers are also mounted upon axles. The axles are spring-loaded for easy replacement. The springs also hold the roller in place. Both wheels and rollers are set in a supporting channel frame. The rows and columns of both types are placed in a grid-like fashion, which affects how efficiently the product or carton moves. The farther apart the wheels or rollers are, the larger the package or product must be to span the gap. Both systems require a flat, smooth-bottomed package surface for the load to move efficiently upon contact. Cartons or packages with divots or protrusions may be hung up and not move through the conveyors. If a surface is curved, the next roller or wheel may not pick it up and it, too, will stall.
Cost
When considering a budget and cost to replace or install a gravity conveyor system, factor in the durability of parts and efficiency of the system itself. When time is saved by order pickers who do not have to backtrack or deviate from an area, the new system will increase the speed of production times for filling orders. As a result, money and time will be saved.
When considering a budget and cost to replace or install a gravity conveyor system, factor in the durability of parts and efficiency of the system itself. When time is saved by order pickers who do not have to backtrack or deviate from an area, the new system will increase the speed of production times for filling orders. As a result, money and time will be saved.
Einstein and His Famous Equation News
When most people hear the name Einstein, the next thought is usually his famous equation, E=mc2. Believe it or not, Einstein's Nobel Prize was not awarded for this revolutionary discovery, but for his lesser known paper on the Photo-Electric Effect also published in the same year. A good deal of the confusion about Relativity Theory is that most folks think it is one theory. It is actually three different ideas submitted in three different papers. The equation showing the relationship of energy to mass can be found in an addendum he submitted three months after publishing the Special Theory of Relativity in 1905. He began work on the General Theory of Relativity in 1907 and finished it in 1915. With it, he added the effects of gravity to his original equations and revolutionized how we view the makeup of the universe. And then there's the confusion about that light speed squared business. What's that all about?
Einstein's first paper was titled "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies." This eventually became known as the Theory of Special Relativity. It dealt primarily with how space and time were related, showing that they were actually two descriptions of the same phenomenon known as 4D spacetime. It also explained the time dilation between objects that were moving near the speed of light and those that were moving very slow compared to the speed of light.
The paper showed time to be relative to its frame of reference. For example, if you and a buddy are standing in the aisle of a moving jet and tossing a ball back and forth, the two of you seem to be still and the ball seems to be moving at a normal, slow rate of speed. But, to an observer on the ground, the ball, you, your friend, and the jet are all moving at 200 mph. The plane provides you with a different frame of reference than the one the observer on the ground has. Both Galileo and Newton understood this concept and called it an "inertial frame." Einstein enlarged the inertial frame by stating that everything including you, the jet and the observer on the ground were all moving at speeds far below that of light. When one of the objects in the scenario gets ramped up to light speed, everything changes.
Because of this, no one observer had a privileged frame of reference. In other words, if an event happened and was observed in two different spatial locations, the event might appear to have happened simultaneously to one observer and as two separate events to another observer. The different perspectives were due to each observer's motion in relation to the event. Therefore, both observations would be correct to each observer respectively. It would be impossible for either observer to claim they saw the event the "right" way.
Just as Einstein's first paper showed that space and time were two descriptions of one phenomenon, similarly, the addendum to this paper showed that energy and mass were also two descriptions of one phenomenon. Energy and mass are not equal, as is often misquoted. They are intra-convertible. A very small amount of mass can be exchanged for a very large amount of energy, as demonstrated by experiments in atomic and nuclear physics. It's considered one of the most elegant formulas in all of physics because a few characters demonstrate the complex concepts found in the original equation. which is big enough to fill a blackboard.
Einstein applied this equation to whether or not an object of mass, any mass, could be accelerated to the speed of light. That's also were the c2 part of the equation comes into play. The whole thing is about speed, not light. Let's roll a rock to see how that works. It's a rather large rock, so it takes a good deal of energy to get it rolling. The energy from that initial push is now stored in the rock as kinetic energy, which it dissipates as it rolls. Any additional pushes just store more kinetic energy than the rock can dissipate and now it has velocity. So, when we want to stop the rock from rolling, we have to absorb the extra energy it contains. The kinetic energy is proportional to the speed squared. So, if you give the rock twice the energy it can disperse, it will take four times as much energy to stop it from rolling (twice the energy squared is four times the energy). In Einstein's equation, c represents the speed of light, emphasis placed on the word "speed." His famous equation then, is the ratio of the energy required to move a mass proportional to the speed of light squared.
Zero Gravity Air Hogs Micro RC Cars Will Drive You Up the Wall
What will they come up with next? Now, there are little cars called Zero Gravity Air Hogs Micro Cars that can drive up walls and upside-down! They will only work on a flat surface, but what other toy can go across the ceiling?
I know what you are thinking. How can a remote control car drive on the ceiling? The answer is simple. The car uses suction. It has a little vacuum-like device and a fan in it to hold it on the wall. Any flat surface is fair game for a race now!
The little hog has two settings. One is called floor mode, and the other is called suction mode. Obviously, floor mode is for use on the floor or any other right-side up surface. Suction mode is more powerful. Use suction mode when you want to drive the car vertically or upside-down.
The car has a little rechargeable battery in it. The headlights of the car start out bright, and they get dimmer and dimmer as the battery loses power. It is time to recharge the car when the lights get really dim.
Charging the Zero Gravity Air Hogs Micro is a snap. The remote control doubles as a charger. The remote control takes six AA batteries. Buy a decent set of rechargeable batteries, and you will be set forever. The remote control has a little compartment in it with a charging cord. You simply use that cord to plug the car into the charger. The car charges in about a half hour.
Gravity in Relation to Dark Matter A Brief Discussion
In recent times there has been discussion about the amount of matter in the universe not being consistent with the previous notions of matter and moreover that there is an abundance of a "dark" energy that is pushing the bodies of the universe apart.
The physical cause of gravity, if there is one, has always been a conundrum to physics. As are other observations such as inertia and the effect of gravity on light. General relativity explained much of the problem away and has in many instances proved both predictive and accurate.
However, a discovery in 1998, based around a Type1A supernovae, has thrown this into disarray. Now we have to come up with an explanation as to how the universe can be expanding at an increasing rate.
Sometimes it is useful to look back over our collective notes and see where we may have gone wrong. Gravity is described as a Force or Law of Attraction between two bodies. As suggested by many authors, it is reasonable to define it in terms of its effects. It acts at a distance without intervening media, it acts on all bodies that have mass and it conforms to an inverse square law, meaning that its effect decreases with the square of the distance between the bodies.
It is without question the very essence that binds us together and holds our feet to the Earth as it spins through space. However, its effect is not just on matter but in terms of General Relativity, gravity, or perhaps the interaction of gravity with mass, bends space and time and this effect is visible in the bending of light around a planetary object.
However, the effect that gravity acts at a distance and without any intervening media, though generally accepted in physics has always been troubling. Even Newton in his letters to Bently, confessed a lack of faith in such an idea stating that it was absurd.
It lead to the later abandoned concept of a universal "aether", through which gravity and light acted. Several famous experiments such as the Michelson-Morley experiment and many subsequent experiments, disproved the existence of such an "aether" unless for some reason the aether was always stationary relative to Earth.
For the purpose of this discussion, I again would like to go back to some principles used by the great minds of previous centuries.
For any theory to be valid it must:
1) be simple in conception
2) be in agreement with experience, observation and experiment and,
3) satisfactorily account for and explain all phenomenon sought to be explained.
1) be simple in conception
2) be in agreement with experience, observation and experiment and,
3) satisfactorily account for and explain all phenomenon sought to be explained.
I believe the latter two are self-explanatory but the idea of simplicity of conception is not always adhered to in physics especially as you delve deeper into ideas like string theory or quantum mechanics. An example of this concept of simplicity as given by others is that it is simpler to believe that the earth rotates on its axis every 24 hours to give us night and day than to believe that the sun orbits around the Earth at tremendous speeds.
That is not to say that sometimes matters are not complex and the correct explanation is not the simple one but even then a larger concept can usually be broken down into simpler ones. Creating an embryo is complex but the individual steps of cell division and differentiation are understandable.
The second point is the one of interest here. New observations by the Hubble telescope create opportunity for new theories if the existing ones do not fit all the observable facts.
If, for discussion, we abandon the idea of gravity as an "attraction" between two bodies it might allow for other ideas to be explored. If we consider the idea of a force acting without communication at a distance may not be the explanation of gravity, then what could it be?
Let us assume for discussions sake that dark energy/dark matter is made of a finite number of particles evenly dispersed throughout the universe. For argument let us assume that these particles are at least subatomic and possess the following properties:
1) That these particles possess both mass and charge. The mass maybe minute and the charge not necessarily a magnitude that we see in existing atomic or subatomic particles,
2) That these particles can move frictionlessly through the universe including the space between atoms and subatomic particles and are continuously in motion,
3) That the speed at which they can move is, or is limited to, the speed of light,
4) That these particles exert a repulsive force on each other acting elastically and keeping themselves evenly dispersed in general but able to be compressed closer to each other transiently,
5) That they can interact with normal (baryonic) matter, (matter as we know it), at some subatomic level, this interaction being in the form of elastic collision or electrostatic repulsion and lastly,
6) That normal (baryonic) matter cannot push on itself but can reflect or interfere with these particles. The degree to which it can interfere with these particles is in direct proportion to what we would call the mass.
These may seem to be a great many assumptions but they do permit the development of a physical explanation for gravity that does not require an unknown attractive effect at a distance without medium of communication.
That dark matter has mass is in keeping with the astronomic observations. The concept of charge is reasonable to postulate as a mechanism for mutual repulsion but is not necessarily something that can be measured easily. It is conceivable that the charge could be the baseline of the universe and all charges we measure are relative to that baseline level. Designing an experiment that could measure such a charge is difficult to imagine but for the moment let us assume that the dark matter carries a charge.
The concept that the particles would move frictionlessly is reasonable and that they are moving continuously and at very high speed (for example, the speed of light) is necessary to explain some of the perceived effects. It may be argued that this would fly in the face or relativity as no particle containing mass could approach the speed of light. So for discussion and without invoking concepts of negative mass lets say that the particles move at speeds relatively close to the speed of light.
Based on the ideas of charge repulsion or elastic collisions, the particles would be forced to disperse as evenly as possible throughout the universe but in the dynamic environment they may be moving and colliding elastically with each other and expanding outward though out the universe.
The interaction with matter could be by elastic collision or conceivably through some electrostatic action. However, the important component of this discussion is that the effect is not transmitted or at least not instantly, through the baryonic matter to the dark matter/energy particles on the opposing side.
So with these assumptions in mind it is possible to postulate that the observed attraction of gravity may be due to repulsion of the surrounding particles and the interaction with matter.
If the dark energy particles are evenly dispersed and acting on each other, then a highly energetic but stable field would be created. At the edges of such a field the dark matter may continue to expand outward. The particles are bouncing back and forth elastically interacting with each other.
If a mass is placed in the center of this field it would be acted on from all sides evenly there would be no net effect. The interaction of the particles extending evenly all the way out to the edge of the universe and back again.
If the mass was placed eccentrically, then it would be moved outward from the center by the unbalanced number of particles on each side, more toward the center and the edge of the universe in that direction than there are on the other side of the mass toward the edge of the universe away from the center.
The number of particles between the mass and the center side (the side it is moving away from) would continue to grow. The particles move and rearrange continuously at the speed of light and as the mass moved from the center of the universe, the imbalance of forces would become greater and the mass would accelerate faster as it moved outward. This imbalance being due to the number of particles bouncing back on forth and interacting with the mass on one side as compared to the number of particles doing the same on the other.
Such an imbalance could explain the observed increasing expansion of the universe.
Now consider the idea of a second body put into the field at some separation from the first then some of the influence of the dark energy particles will be lessened. Imagine the two masses were now side by side. The dark energy particles continuously pressing all around but no such particles between the objects would mean they would be forced together. It would look to an observer, unable to see the dark matter particles as if the objects were attracted to each other. As they are pulled apart, requiring some work to be performed, then particles would begin to intercede between them and the force of "attraction" would appear less.
A similar effect can be seen with two boats on a continuously moving ocean. The waves are reflected away from the boat, more on the outside than between the boats, forcing them together.
This effect is greater the closer the boats become. The same is true with these objects placed in the field of rapidly vibrating particles. The increasing number of these "frantically vibrating and colliding particles" between the bodies, balancing off the effect of similar "frantically vibrating and colliding particles" outside the two bodies, would mean the effect of the apparent attraction would drop away very rapidly with distance and eventually become minute.
Another way to think about it is to imagine the particles are tiny bright lights even dispersed and the bodies of mass are like black spheres blocking light emanating from every particle. The light from the particles on the far side of the second body would be blocked so that the first body would be in a shadow. Conversely the particles on the side of the first body distant from the second body would also be blocked and the second body in a similar shadow. If the light created a "pressure" or push when it hit the spheres, the net effect would be that the spheres would be pushed together.
The effect on each of the masses would be unbalanced; the side facing the other mass having less force acting on it than the side facing away. This effect would become greater as the masses approached each other. Eventually the masses would be brought together and held together by the forces acting outside. It would appear to an observer who could not see any of the dark matter particles that the masses were attracted to each other and this effect became less the further apart the masses moved.
This effect would be negligible at a distance just like gravity but would be increasingly powerful as the bodies moved closer just like gravity. If the "blocking or shadowing" effect is proportional to the mass then the effect would be greater with heavier masses, just as with gravity.
In fact the effect would be directly related to mass but dissipate (due to the geometry) with the inverse square law as seen with gravity. What defines mass is discussed in a separate article.
How electromagnetic radiation could be propagated within this particle field by the movement of these particles, if they possessed a static charge, is discussed in a separate paper. For purposes of illustration of another property, let us assume for the moment that light in the form of a changing electromagnetic field could be propagated by the vibration of the particles described.
Then in a manner somewhat akin to the early descriptions of the ether but not requiring its existence, light is propagated along the field of particles. How then could gravity's effect on light be accounted for?
The observation simply enough is that mass distorts time and space and this can be seen by observing light from a distant star curving around a planetary body on its way to Earth; so called "gravitational lensing".
It would be reasonable to assume that if light were propagated by the particles vibrating in sequence then compression of the particle field may cause the light path to bend in exactly the same way refraction occurs in a lens.
If a mass were placed into the evenly dispersed field then it might displace the particles that would otherwise have to exist in the same time and space. As already suggested the particles will readjust at the speed of light but the ongoing presence of the mass would cause an area of increased density radiating out and decreasing as it went. The amount of increase in density would be in proportion to the mass itself and inversely proportional to the square of the distance from the mass.
If this increase in density could effect the propagation of the EM radiation, as changes in destiny would do to light passing through a transparent medium, then an observer would see the same effect as gravitational lensing.
Discussed elsewhere is the quantum nature of this effect and how diffraction would occur.
Now if these particles were to move freely then a body moving at constant speed would be surrounded by particles in just the same way as a body at rest until the speed of the body started to approach the speed of light at which point the particles could no longer traverse around the object in time to keep the proportions of dark energy particles uniformly distributed around the mass.
A bit like a group of cars moving together on a freeway, their spacing would remain constant while the speed was constant and if one took a snap shot it would not be possible to tell without some outside reference that the cars were moving or still.
Now when a body accelerates there is a period, proportional to the rate of acceleration and the mass, where the particles in the direction of travel are transiently compressed and the particles on the tailing side are transiently decompressed relative to the leading side. The particles rapidly redistribute themselves around the mass at the speed of light but for the period of acceleration the mass experiences a force pushing back against the acceleration which we would consider to be inertia.
The basic Newtonian laws of motion can be explained this way and until the speed approaches a significant proportion of the speed of light it would be accurate. Once relativistic speeds are approached it could be surmised that the particles no longer can move around the mass in relatively short time frame compared to the speed of the mass itself. So the traditional relationships between force, mass and acceleration would no longer apply.
So based on the tenants described above a relatively simple explanation could describe the relationship between mass and the dark particle/energy in the universe and this in turn could explain the observed effects we call gravity and inertia. It can explain all of the observations related to these effects described herein.
Subsequent papers will discuss the relationship between dark energy and light (EM radiation) and the combination of particle and wave like properties seen. The interaction of light with matter in the form of light pressure and the properties of refraction and diffraction are discussed.
Anti Gravity Technology - We Can Reap the Benefits Today
When you hear the term "anti gravity technology," many people conjure up images of Buck Rogers and the Jetsons flying around the sky.
Or perhaps you think of NASA and the space program, with the astronauts learning how to deal with zero gravity on the moon?
Anti gravity technology is not a science of the future, however. It's something that we can benefit from right now.
Anti Gravity Technology Provides Help to Deal With Today's Busy Lives
"Anti gravity" means against, or opposite to gravity.
What that means for us is that there exists technology today that can help us to deal with aches, pains, and the rigors of daily life that are aggravated by gravity.
For example, do your feet hurt when you get home in the evening because you've been on them all day? Does your back ache from repetitive movements or stress? Do you feel pain from muscle stress and tension?
This state-of-the-art technology allows us to take advantage of innovations in modern science. We can use the technology to reduce wear and stress on muscles and joints as we go about our daily activities.
Anti Gravity Technology Shoes
One of the major benefits of this technology is anti gravity shoes. These shoes are not NASA-type equipment that makes you weightless, but they are footwear designed to reduce wear and stress on feet, muscles and joints.
Those who suffer from plantar fasciitis have found particular benefits from this new technology footwear.
Many shoes that use this technology actually have springs built into the heel, which reduces the impact on the heel as you take a step.
Picture a trampoline. When you jump on the trampoline, the tramp absorbs the downward-impact force when you come down. Then the tramp provides an upward-motion force to propel you up. This same technology is the basis for anti gravity shoes.
These shoes are designed to lessen the impact of each downward step, so that the spring absorbs - and lessens - the impact of your heel hitting the ground. Then the spring provides an upward motion propelling force, literally "pushing" your heel off the ground.
Many who have dealt with heel pain from plantar fasciitis have found relief with shoes using this technology.
Anti gravity technology shoes are available for both men and women, although women's shoes are more easily found. Prices for this type of footwear varies from $40 to as much as $200.
Anti Gravity Technology Inversion Tables and Boots
Another technology innovation is inversion tables and boots.
These items allow you to hang upside down, or at least at an inverted angle, providing relief from back and joint pain and reducing stress on muscles.
As we age gravity works against us, pulling at our spines and stressing muscles, joints and vertebrae.
This is the reason Grandma is now much shorter than she was as a girl, because gravity has literally pulled her spine down, compressing discs and vertebrae.
Anti gravity technology inversion tables and boots allow you to hang with your feet up, relieving stress on compressed discs and vertebrae, and allowing the spine to stretch.
It won't completely reverse the effects of aging, but if you suffer from chronic back pain, you may want to consider an inversion table. My husband has one and finds that it really helps him deal with his back pain. He has a bulging disc, and hanging from the inversion table allows the disc to work its way back into place between the vertebrae.
Many people swear by their inversion tables for back pain relief.
An inversion table can be purchased for as little as $100 (Kmart and Walmart both have a simple table at this price), or you can spend as much as several hundred dollars if you choose.
Treadmills and Chairs
Current technology includes chairs and treadmills that also help with the stress of daily life.
The chairs look like modern recliners and allow the user to lean back, lifting his feet above his heart. This type of recliner reduces stress on the spine, improves circulation, and relieves muscles tension.
Some anti gravity chairs also provide stimulating massage.
Prices for this type of stress-free recliner range from $300 to $500.
Anti gravity treadmills have been designed to help with running and jogging activities. The treadmill actually lifts the runner up from his hips, much like sitting in a baby's swing with your legs hanging below. The treadmill allows the jogger to run, but holds most of his weight up off his legs.
These type of treadmills are extremely expensive, and prices can be in the $50,000 to $75,000 range. Professional athletes are typically who will use this treadmill because it reduces stress on legs and joints.
As you can see, we don't have to wait for the future to reap the benefits of anti gravity technology!
Olivia enjoys home and family, and has been writing about her experiences for more than 25 years. Feel free to see more of her material at Anti Gravity Shoes.
Or perhaps you think of NASA and the space program, with the astronauts learning how to deal with zero gravity on the moon?
Anti gravity technology is not a science of the future, however. It's something that we can benefit from right now.
Anti Gravity Technology Provides Help to Deal With Today's Busy Lives
"Anti gravity" means against, or opposite to gravity.
What that means for us is that there exists technology today that can help us to deal with aches, pains, and the rigors of daily life that are aggravated by gravity.
For example, do your feet hurt when you get home in the evening because you've been on them all day? Does your back ache from repetitive movements or stress? Do you feel pain from muscle stress and tension?
This state-of-the-art technology allows us to take advantage of innovations in modern science. We can use the technology to reduce wear and stress on muscles and joints as we go about our daily activities.
Anti Gravity Technology Shoes
One of the major benefits of this technology is anti gravity shoes. These shoes are not NASA-type equipment that makes you weightless, but they are footwear designed to reduce wear and stress on feet, muscles and joints.
Those who suffer from plantar fasciitis have found particular benefits from this new technology footwear.
Many shoes that use this technology actually have springs built into the heel, which reduces the impact on the heel as you take a step.
Picture a trampoline. When you jump on the trampoline, the tramp absorbs the downward-impact force when you come down. Then the tramp provides an upward-motion force to propel you up. This same technology is the basis for anti gravity shoes.
These shoes are designed to lessen the impact of each downward step, so that the spring absorbs - and lessens - the impact of your heel hitting the ground. Then the spring provides an upward motion propelling force, literally "pushing" your heel off the ground.
Many who have dealt with heel pain from plantar fasciitis have found relief with shoes using this technology.
Anti gravity technology shoes are available for both men and women, although women's shoes are more easily found. Prices for this type of footwear varies from $40 to as much as $200.
Anti Gravity Technology Inversion Tables and Boots
Another technology innovation is inversion tables and boots.
These items allow you to hang upside down, or at least at an inverted angle, providing relief from back and joint pain and reducing stress on muscles.
As we age gravity works against us, pulling at our spines and stressing muscles, joints and vertebrae.
This is the reason Grandma is now much shorter than she was as a girl, because gravity has literally pulled her spine down, compressing discs and vertebrae.
Anti gravity technology inversion tables and boots allow you to hang with your feet up, relieving stress on compressed discs and vertebrae, and allowing the spine to stretch.
It won't completely reverse the effects of aging, but if you suffer from chronic back pain, you may want to consider an inversion table. My husband has one and finds that it really helps him deal with his back pain. He has a bulging disc, and hanging from the inversion table allows the disc to work its way back into place between the vertebrae.
Many people swear by their inversion tables for back pain relief.
An inversion table can be purchased for as little as $100 (Kmart and Walmart both have a simple table at this price), or you can spend as much as several hundred dollars if you choose.
Treadmills and Chairs
Current technology includes chairs and treadmills that also help with the stress of daily life.
The chairs look like modern recliners and allow the user to lean back, lifting his feet above his heart. This type of recliner reduces stress on the spine, improves circulation, and relieves muscles tension.
Some anti gravity chairs also provide stimulating massage.
Prices for this type of stress-free recliner range from $300 to $500.
Anti gravity treadmills have been designed to help with running and jogging activities. The treadmill actually lifts the runner up from his hips, much like sitting in a baby's swing with your legs hanging below. The treadmill allows the jogger to run, but holds most of his weight up off his legs.
These type of treadmills are extremely expensive, and prices can be in the $50,000 to $75,000 range. Professional athletes are typically who will use this treadmill because it reduces stress on legs and joints.
As you can see, we don't have to wait for the future to reap the benefits of anti gravity technology!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)