We have actually discussed this elsewhere, but you seem to have problems with it. The difference between acceleration and gravity is none, they can not be told apart if a person is subjected to either in a sealed room with no view of outside the room. It is the fundamental assumption that created a lot of Einstein's concepts, and it has withstood the test of time and experiments. The mathematical units to describe either is identical. This is not a coincidence.

If you read the above Bill...you will see that...let's say our bodies were made of Iron. It would take an ever increasing amount of applied Elecromagnet Force to accelerate an Iron object.

Now if Gravity increased like a force in order to accelerate us...as we stood on Earth we would grow HEAVIER AND HEAVIER AND HEAVIER.

We do not.

Split Infinity

 

...when I drop something...THE OBJECTS IS NOT ACTUALLY MOVING...as unlike an object that a FORCE is being applied to...where there is a Kinetic Energy Transfer occurring due to Quantum Field Interaction...say I hit a baseball with a bat...the bat is in motion and the ball is struck by the bat causing the Potential Kinetic Energy in the ball moving toward me as well as the Potential Kinetic Energy in the swinging bat to transfer between each other as the Quantum Fields...ie...Electron Orbital Fields surrounding the Atoms comprising the bat and ball repel each other and transfer the kinetic energy as this becomes applied force.

So unlike this example when I drop the ball out of my hand and it starts moving...there is NO KINETIC ENERGY TRANSFER...NO APPLIED FORCE.

Split Infinity

Unfortunately, there is a change in energy. You can calculate the difference in potential energy between holding a ball in your hand and one that is on the ground. Also, you can record the force of impact of the ball hitting the ground. How did the ball obtain this kinetic energy if there is no energy transfer?

Would you like a meteor to land on your head? It shouldn't hurt since it has no kinetic energy (so you say).

 

Unfortunately, there is a change in energy. You can calculate the difference in potential energy between holding a ball in your hand and one that is on the ground. Also, you can record the force of impact of the ball hitting the ground. How did the ball obtain this kinetic energy if there is no energy transfer?

Would you like a meteor to land on your head? It shouldn't hurt since it has no kinetic energy (so you say).

Believe me I have thought about this aspect as well as what I came out of it with is this...Although there is no Kinetic Transfer to place the ball in motion...and as I have stated I think the Ball is not actually moving but in a Transformational State of Existence as depending upon the passage of linear time we can observe the position of the ball along all infinite points of position perpendicular to the plane of the Earths Surface.

Now how is it the ball obtains Potential Kinetic Force?

The Transformational State of Existence dependent upon time is very similar to an object placed into motion. When I force and object into motion by throwing it...basically the ball as it moves is very much in a similar state...that being the ball exists upon infinite points of position as it is moving and this is both dependent and observed upon linear time.

So I would propose that even though the ball can exist at all these infinite positions upon it's line of travel whether this is due to being Forced into Motion or because it is being Effected by Gravity...it's state of existence be it one or the other will have the same effect upon any Matter or Energy it encounters along it's path of travel.

Split Infinity

 

Now how is it the ball obtains Potential Kinetic Force?

I imagine you mean energy.
Because someone lifted it up.
Actually the balls relativistic mass changed when it was lifted up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E=mc²
If you had two electrons close together, you would admit that there was a force between them, but haven't asked how they got close together.

 

This is NOT TRUE for Models of Gravity. Certain aspects of Gravity and certain behavior of result of Gravitic Effect...cannot be described in any Model. Any Model where a FORCE...say a model that describes and represents all aspects of Electromagnetic Force...such a model can describe any and all states, conditions, results, aspects...etc...of EM-Force being applied.

Split Infinity

You will have to do better than that on the gravity 'FORCE/EFFECT' case.

Models don't need perfection to be useful and correct in most cases. Classical EM theory like Newtonian gravity works very well in general but there are things that Maxwell's equations of the EM force don't explain either (photon interactions like the photo-electric effect) . It's incomplete, not wrong as we now have QED due to Richard Feynman and others that is completely compatible with Classical EM and explains photon interactions also. QED also has limits in it's power to explain all EM interactions with matter but it would be foolish to say that the EM force is now an effect of another unknown force because of this.

 

If you read the above Bill...you will see that...let's say our bodies were made of Iron. It would take an ever increasing amount of applied Elecromagnet Force to accelerate an Iron object.

Now if Gravity increased like a force in order to accelerate us...as we stood on Earth we would grow HEAVIER AND HEAVIER AND HEAVIER.

We do not.

Split Infinity

Actually you are so far off base on this one I don't know where to begin.

Gravity follows the inverse square law, but it's reach is much further than any other force. Just because we can not detect the change on a scale of several feet does not mean it is not there. As you get further away from Earth it does weaken. Why would you think it does not?

As has been mentioned, potential energy levels do change depending on height, just like with magnetism or the electric force changes with distance. It is pretty much the same thing, the scales are different, that is all.

It does not seem to follow the quantum rules of the very small, but that is because it is in the realm of the very large. You can not impose your personal view of how the rules work on nature, this is something people have tried since we could talk. It does not work. Instead, look at the reality. It has much to teach.

As density increases for a set mass, gravity does indeed increase. If the Earth were the size of a marble the G force on the surface would be many hundreds or thousands of G's. This situation actually exists in nature, it is what forms black holes and neutron stars. If you could compress Earth small enough, say less than the size of an atom, a black hole would be formed.

Gravity is indeed a force. One we do not understand clearly, but then, I don't think humans understand nature nearly as well as we think. It is a form of arrogance to think we do.

I am feeling you are arguing here just to argue. Not a good thing.

 

Actually you are so far off base on this one I don't know where to begin.

Gravity follows the inverse square law, but it's reach is much further than any other force. Just because we can not detect the change on a scale of several feet does not mean it is not there. As you get further away from Earth it does weaken. Why would you think it does not?

As has been mentioned, potential energy levels do change depending on height, just like with magnetism or the electric force changes with distance. It is pretty much the same thing, the scales are different, that is all.

It does not seem to follow the quantum rules of the very small, but that is because it is in the realm of the very large. You can not impose your personal view of how the rules work on nature, this is something people have tried since we could talk. It does not work. Instead, look at the reality. It has much to teach.

As density increases for a set mass, gravity does indeed increase. If the Earth were the size of a marble the G force on the surface would be many hundreds or thousands of G's. This situation actually exists in nature, it is what forms black holes and neutron stars. If you could compress Earth small enough, say less than the size of an atom, a black hole would be formed.

Gravity is indeed a force. One we do not understand clearly, but then, I don't think humans understand nature nearly as well as we think. It is a form of arrogance to think we do.

I am feeling you are arguing here just to argue. Not a good thing.

I can see why you think I am arguing the point that Gravity does not increase in it's effect the closer one gets to the Earth...I am not arguing that.

What I AM saying is that an object falls towards the Earth at least from within a relative distance in our atmosphere to the Earth...at 32 feet per second squared.

Now if we were to do this with an EM-Force and for ha ha's let's say Gravity did not exist...in order for say an Iron object to move and accelerate at 32 feet per second squared...and let's say there is no atmosphere...that EM-Force would have to continually increase for the object to accelerate. Now when this Iron Object came to rest upon the ground...and this EM-Force was being applied to greater and greater extent...the Iron Object would seem to get heavier and heavier until it would be impossible to even move the object.

With Gravity...it does not matter how great the mass of an object is...they will all accelerate at the same rate regardless of the amount of mass....with an applied EM-Force...different masses would accelerate at different rates.

Split Infinity

 

You will have to do better than that on the gravity 'FORCE/EFFECT' case.

Models don't need perfection to be useful and correct in most cases. Classical EM theory like Newtonian gravity works very well in general but there are things that Maxwell's equations of the EM force don't explain either (photon interactions like the photo-electric effect) . It's incomplete, not wrong as we now have QED due to Richard Feynman and others that is completely compatible with Classical EM and explains photon interactions also. QED also has limits in it's power to explain all EM interactions with matter but it would be foolish to say that the EM force is now an effect of another unknown force because of this.

I never said that an EM-Force is an effect of another unknown force. I never said anything even remotely close to that.

Split Infinity

 

I never said that an EM-Force is an effect of another unknown force. I never said anything even remotely close to that.

Split Infinity

We both know that, so don't pretend like you don't get my point about how foolish and useless your reasoning about gravity is.

EOL

 

Now if we were to do this with an EM-Force and for ha ha's let's say Gravity did not exist...in order for say an Iron object to move and accelerate at 32 feet per second squared...and let's say there is no atmosphere...that EM-Force would have to continually increase for the object to accelerate. Now when this Iron Object came to rest upon the ground...and this EM-Force was being applied to greater and greater extent...the Iron Object would seem to get heavier and heavier until it would be impossible to even move the object.

Split Infinity

No, that is incorrect. As long as the object is in the EM field, it will accelerate. How do you think the atom smashers accelerate the particles. The particles just go around and around a ring in the EM field of the same strength. Of course there is another stream of particles going around in the opposite direction so the EM field needs to be reversed frequently. There is no way that an ever increasing EM field is generated to move these particles.

One of the earlier particle accelerators is a cyclotron.

 

We both know that, so don't pretend like you don't get my point about how foolish and useless your reasoning about gravity is.

EOL

Whoa!

So if I am being foolish and useless in my reasoning...perhaps you can explain how if Gravity is a Force...it does not act like one as why is it that a 1 kg ball with a diameter of 10 inches falls at the same rate as a 10 kg ball with a diameter of 10 inches?

Any known force would require 10 times the amount of applied force to move the ball with 10 times the mass.

As well...since the balls are accelerating...a force would not only have to be applied 10 times the amount for the 10 kg ball...but such a force would have to be applied to a greater and greater extent to create acceleration.

So...explain that.

Split Infinity

 

No, that is incorrect. As long as the object is in the EM field, it will accelerate. How do you think the atom smashers accelerate the particles. The particles just go around and around a ring in the EM field of the same strength. Of course there is another stream of particles going around in the opposite direction so the EM field needs to be reversed frequently. There is no way that an ever increasing EM field is generated to move these particles.

One of the earlier particle accelerators is a cyclotron.

The reason the particles are accelerating...and we are talking about Protons and Neutrons not Quanta...the applied force is of such strength that it will accelerate the particles UP TO A MAXIMUM POSSIBLE VELOCITY that such a force can accelerate such particles as at some point the Protons and Neutrons WILL STOP ACCELERATING and stay at a constant velocity.

Split Infinity

 

No, that is incorrect. As long as the object is in the EM field, it will accelerate. How do you think the atom smashers accelerate the particles. The particles just go around and around a ring in the EM field of the same strength. Of course there is another stream of particles going around in the opposite direction so the EM field needs to be reversed frequently. There is no way that an ever increasing EM field is generated to move these particles.

One of the earlier particle accelerators is a cyclotron.

Also...if you use the cyclotron example...if there existed a particle of mass that will represent the 10 kg object...thus this particle will have a mass 10 times the particle that will represent the 1 kg object...with a mass of 1...the 10 Mass particle would accelerate 10 times slower than the 1 Mass Particle.

This is just a representation and 10 mass particles do not exist...but still...this shows the issues of the differences between the effects of known Force to the effects of Gravity.

Split Infinity

 

The reason the particles are accelerating...and we are talking about Protons and Neutrons not Quanta...the applied force is of such strength that it will accelerate the particles UP TO A MAXIMUM POSSIBLE VELOCITY that such a force can accelerate such particles as at some point the Protons and Neutrons WILL STOP ACCELERATING and stay at a constant velocity.

Split Infinity

The maximum possible velocity for electrons and protons happen to occur after their masses start to increase due to their relativistic speeds. That is why the synchrocyclotrons were developed. To get the particles to move even faster.

BTW, neutrons, having no charge, cannot be accelerated by an EM field.

 

The maximum possible velocity for electrons and protons happen to occur after their masses start to increase due to their relativistic speeds. That is why the synchrocyclotrons were developed. To get the particles to move even faster.

BTW, neutrons, having no charge, cannot be accelerated by an EM field.

You are talking about Quanta not Particles of Mass.

My bad on the Neutron thing.

Split Infinity

 

You are talking about Quanta not Particles of Mass.

My bad on the Neutron thing.

Split Infinity

A proton is a charge hydrogen atom; it is not a quanta. A quanta is a quantity of energy and does not have a mass. An electron, although much lighter than a proton, is classified the same as a proton since it has a mass. If you smash an electron into a proton, you may get a neutron and a substantial amount of energy. An electron near a proton makes a neutral hydrogen atom. When an electron moves towards a proton, the electron moves into an energy well and quanta of energy (usually as photons) is given off.

In case you don't know: photons don't have a charge.

 

A proton is a charge hydrogen atom; it is not a quanta. A quanta is a quantity of energy and does not have a mass. An electron, although much lighter than a proton, is classified the same as a proton since it has a mass. If you smash an electron into a proton, you may get a neutron and a substantial amount of energy. An electron near a proton makes a neutral hydrogen atom. When an electron moves towards a proton, the electron moves into an energy well and quanta of energy (usually as photons) is given off.

In case you don't know: photons don't have a charge.

I am well aware what a Proton is.

And I am well aware what a Photon is and what a Quantum Particle/Wave Form is.

The fact remains that the amount of an EM based force applied to set an object of Mass into motion to a specific velocity must be increased as many times as another object of even greater mass is to the first.

1 kg needs x amount of force to obtain a specific velocity.
10 kg needs 10x amount of force to obtain that same velocity.

This is not the case with Gravity.

Split Infinity

 

I can see why you think I am arguing the point that Gravity does not increase in it's effect the closer one gets to the Earth...I am not arguing that.

What I AM saying is that an object falls towards the Earth at least from within a relative distance in our atmosphere to the Earth...at 32 feet per second squared.

Now if we were to do this with an EM-Force and for ha ha's let's say Gravity did not exist...in order for say an Iron object to move and accelerate at 32 feet per second squared...and let's say there is no atmosphere...that EM-Force would have to continually increase for the object to accelerate. Now when this Iron Object came to rest upon the ground...and this EM-Force was being applied to greater and greater extent...the Iron Object would seem to get heavier and heavier until it would be impossible to even move the object.

With Gravity...it does not matter how great the mass of an object is...they will all accelerate at the same rate regardless of the amount of mass....with an applied EM-Force...different masses would accelerate at different rates.

Split Infinity

Again, you are talking scale. Move far enough out and the G force is not one G anymore, and it steadily gets weaker over distance. Our atmosphere makes a lousy gauge as to the depth of Earths (or any celesteral body's) gravitational field, so you arguement breaks down badly.

You keep talking absolutes on things that are variables. There is math involved here, and it too argues against your statements.

So are you arguing for the sake of arguement? I don't remember you ever conceeding a point at all, even when you are caught just being wrong.

 

Again, you are talking scale. Move far enough out and the G force is not one G anymore, and it steadily gets weaker over distance. Our atmosphere makes a lousy gauge as to the depth of Earths (or any celesteral body's) gravitational field, so you arguement breaks down badly.

You keep talking absolutes on things that are variables. There is math involved here, and it too argues against your statements.

So are you arguing for the sake of arguement? I don't remember you ever conceeding a point at all, even when you are caught just being wrong.

Bill...I am not arguing what you have posted above as it is true. I fully understand that Gravitic Effect decreases the further one goes out and away from the Center of Gravity as the Curvature or Warping of Space/Time increases the closer one gets to the Center of Gravity or the Gravity Well...and decreases the further one goes away from it.

This is also true as far as Electromagnetic Attraction as the closer an object that can be effected in this matter depending upon the material it is made of....the greater the Magnetic Attractive Force...the Father away...the lessor.

But there is a BIG DIFFERENCE between how Gravity effects ANYTHING and how any object of ANY material falls as well as how Quanta such as Photons must travel along the effected curvature of Space/Time and how an EM based FORCE places objects into motion.

As I stated...1 kg iron ball...and 10 kg metal ball both falling at the same rate in a vacuum tube say 50 meters high upon the earth's surface. They both fall at the same rate and both hit the ground at the same time.

Their weight is a micro amount different at their drop point 50 meters above the earth....This is specific to your point above.

Now the same sized balls in intergalactic space...Ball 1 Mass and Ball 10 Mass.

Each are placed 50 meters away from their own Electromagnet.

There is a catch device when the balls touch the magnet pad.

The magnets are turned on with X Attractive Force. X= Amount of Force to accelerate the 1 Mass Iron Ball to 32 feet per second squared.

Now in order to have the 10 Mass Iron Ball also move at 32 feet per second 10X Force or 10 times the amount of EM-Force must be used.

So Bill...your point as far as Gravity decreasing the further away from the Earth one would get is a FACT...but it has NO BEARING upon the REALITY that ANY KNOWN FORCE that is EM or KINETIC TRANSFER...anything but what is the EFFECT of Gravity...must use a Greater amount of Force specific to the amount of Mass of an object and in this case an object with 10 times the mass requires 10 Times the FORCE to have it accelerate at the same rate as an object with 1/10th the Mass.

Also...AND HERE IS WHERE I PROVE YOU WRONG....

....when my 1 Mass and 10 Mass Iron Balls hit the ground and come to a rest they weigh 1 kg and 10 kg respectively. The Curvature of Space/Time relative to the Center of Gravity or the Center of Earth's Gravity Well....IS AT A CONSTANT STATE OF EFFECT at Earth's surface....thus a single Proton or Neutron from within any nucleus of an atom from any object weighs the same proton to proton and neutron to neutron.

In the case of the 2 balls magnetically attached to the magnets....upon the Magnetic Plate the EM-Force is attracting the 1 and 10 kg balls using X EM-Force and 10X EM-Force.

Now each of these applied EM-Forces were sufficient enough to move 1 Mass and 10 Mass Iron Balls at 32 feet per second squared...the thing is...that each applied EM-Force continues to attract both objects once they are upon the plate and each object will achieve a greater state of attraction to the plates than each ball would have as to weight upon the Earth.

Thus the 1 Mass and 1 kg upon Earth ball will have an attractive force applied to it for it to weigh upon a built in scale upon the magnetic plate several times more than 1 kg.

The same with the 10 Mass and 10 kg upon Earth ball...it will weigh much more than just 10 kg's upon that metal plate.

Gotcha Bill. LOL!

Split Infinity

 

For those of you following this topic...it is my described statement above starting 13 lines up from my signed name...that shows us aspects of Gravitic Effect that cannot be considered in the same category as the tenets of what is a FORCE.

The word FORCE is by the way it is defined...A THING...an actual tangible thing...thus as a thing we can look at the very smallest component of what a THING can be...as whether a THING is Matter of Energy...both the particles of Energy and Mass that comprise an Atom are at their smallest component...Quantum Particle/Wave Forms.

A FORCE be it EM based or Kinetic Transfer...a force can be defined as the Interaction of Quantum Fields. This is true of everything that is am EM Force as well as this is true of everything that is a Kinetic Force as with both be it Electron Orbits being filled or seeking electrons to fill them....or it be two objects impacting each other....thus the Electron Orbital Fields surrounding the Atomic Nucleus' of the Atoms comprising the material of the impacting bodies...as those Electron Orbital Fields repel each other...thus Quantum Field Interaction....this is what Force really is.

GRAVITY and Gravitic Effect are nothing like this.

Gravity will effect an object into motion or perhaps effect it into a state of Transformational Existence Dependent upon Linear Time Passage.

It matters not the amount of Mass an Object might have....in vacuum...they fall at the same rate...and they accelerate at a constant.

For a FORCE to do this...more mass means more force applied...to accelerate such mass...the existing force must either be applied to a greater amount in a ratio to accelerate the object at a constant or must be pre-existing at such a high level of applied force that when the object stops or impacts and comes to rest upon that electromagnet that is generating that force...the object will increase it's level of attachment to the electromagnet greater than the Gravitic based attachment or weight created upon an object that holds it to the Earth.

So as detailed the Iron Balls one 1 kg and one 10 kg as they will weigh upon Earth's surface will weigh...or have the level of their attraction to the metal plate of the magnet at a far greater strength or weight than 1 and 10 kg's.

And there certainly is not any FORCE that can warp Space/Time so that actual 3-D distances are changed thus effecting Light to move along the curvature of such Space/Time.

So I postulate Gravity is NOT A FORCE but rather an EFFECT created by any amount of Mass warping Space/Time Geometry.

Split Infinity