*Jess♥ Posted January 27, 2010 Share Posted January 27, 2010 ah ok, well i have not read the old testament, only the first part of genesis. I was advised to start at the gospel of john. I'm getting towards the end of that slowly, as i am working with a study partner. looking at what you wrote though, I think maybe i will read it soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I decided to post this in here because the ideas seem somewhat related. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWjvp7bm7NM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*YoungGuyver Posted April 5, 2013 Author Share Posted April 5, 2013 What you have just described is called the space-time matrix. It is a visualization of 3d space in a 2d model (sort of). If space were a 2d rubber sheet, and objects were put on it, little dimples would appear on the rubber sheet. The more massive the object, the bigger the dimple. These distortions in space represent the gravitational fields. We calculate the dimples by calculating the gravitational force for every object within it. So when you say that it is the space that is moving (when refering to the space-time matrix) you are basically describing the model the currently exists, but it is the flow and intensity of gravitions and gravitinos. And yes, accelleration and gravity share much of the same math. And if you want to prove whether or not the Earth is expanding into the people that rest upon it, look up the falling speeds from various times of day. The speed would change based on your relation to the Earth's path around Sol. And since it's been a few hundred years since Newton first released his equations for gravity, scientists have been conduction thousands if not millions of experiments and observations. Chances are, those falling speeds are listed somewhere if you want to put some research into your idea. In other words there is a way to test your idea that you yourself can do. Just remember to take into account the speed of the Earth around Sol. And as someone that has completed a visual arts program, you should be able to drop your images directly into the timeline of your video editor in order to make a much better presentation. Your skills are far superior to this. And damn, your voice sounds so young. I'm jealous. bastard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted April 5, 2013 Share Posted April 5, 2013 adobe premier is slow and eats memory and means i have to restart my computer. so sue me...[emote=monkey]nyaa[/emote] So when you say that it is the space that is moving (when refering to the space-time matrix) you are basically describing the model the currently exists, but it is the flow and intensity of gravitions and gravitinos. I feel like you're misinterpreting what I said. a rubber mat model is static. the rubber mat stays stretched in the same places. I'm talking about the surface of space being actually moved and stretched over time. not become stretched and stay the same. being stretched. verb, present continuous. in hte model that is generally presented to lay people the surface of the rubber mat was stretched by the objects upon it. first of all, the concept requires an extra dimensional gravity source, so it is paradoxical. you can't explain gravity with 'gravity plus one'. what I am explaining is a mechanism. if you want to explain a rubber mat, fine, but instead imagine the following. you stretch the rubber mat onto four pegs so it is fixed. stick a fork in it. twist the fork. keep twisting. that is my concept. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*YoungGuyver Posted April 6, 2013 Author Share Posted April 6, 2013 In the space time matrix, it is the mass of the object that is causing the gravitational force, meaning the gravitational force is calculatable and measurable in association with the mass. We have observed this and predict it readily. If it is not the mass, then what is causing the twisting upon the rubber in your hyposthesis? And according to string theory, all particles are strings (on the truly most elementary level), and their mass is actually a vibrational frequency of the string. A graviton has a vibration frequency of zero. The point is that all regular particles, in order to have the regular properties they do, are required to vibrate into a total of 11 dimensions. It's the way the math worked out. If ALL regular particles require this, then why so surprising for gravity? A problem I find with your hypothesis is that, if the end points of the rubber are fixed, and you are continuosly stretching/tightening it in order to provide a gravitational effect, how tight could your fork tighten it before it finally snaps? Any material has tensile limits... a limit of energy. To suggest that the rubber could continuously be tightened eternally for a gravity effect would suggest an infinity in the equation. I am curious as to how you respond to this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted April 6, 2013 Share Posted April 6, 2013 hey, I never said the mass doesn't somehow cause the twisting as we have already seen, there is a relationship between mass and acceleration. that's kinda what got me thinking in this area.quick note... I don't completely subscribe to the current ideas and theories, string theory etc. there are contenders, and they are too wishy washy for my liking. also, I did spot something recently on the news that suggested the universe is older than the scientists thought!!! Shock horror!! .... not. I wasn't the least bit surprised. I already refuted their conclusions.don't get me wrong, these are some great ideas by some very intelligent people. I just don't put quite nearly so much stock in them as it seems other people do. anyway, you asked a good question and I have already thought of this before now.see, we could ask the question about the earth's crust. how does the earth's crust keep getting pulled along by the faults and why doesn't it snap?well it is not a simple surface. it has folds and wrinkles and it also has areas where more of it is produced.I see no reason to believe that the fabric of space is something that cannot be reproduced from somewhere. after all, if mass can draw it inwards, then there could easily be something else that pumps it out. there are already hypothetical things like dark matter etc. what about anti matter? if mass causes gravity, then perhaps anti-mass causes anti-gravity? who knows? I guess in this manner, I'm taking the rubber mat analogy and replacing it with the surface of water. which... is surprisingly apt... interestingly enough, and maybe unrelated... I always assocaited 'ether' with water. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*YoungGuyver Posted May 12, 2013 Author Share Posted May 12, 2013 I've put this off of for a little while. It kinda seems like you are coming more inline with the mainstream theory by developing your own. Round about, but oh well. Though we do have math that describes the flowing of water quite well, and we may be able to apply that to mass, and gravitational pull. I am thinking of water that flows out from a tank, and the pressure from the top of the tank, to the water at the bottom. It would depend on how it is modeled. What gets me though is how to determine the 'fissure' points where more 'water' enters the system to act as gravity. It is interesting. Either way, I am disappointed in you. You have an ambition to do video games. You need to remake this video of your, because EVERYTHING you release publicly is your resume. Spice it up, and make it look great. You have no choice. If this is a private video for friends, then it's fine. But you have a public reputation to maintain. You are capable of better, I've seen it. Wow me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted May 12, 2013 Share Posted May 12, 2013 it's a question of what is appropriate. The point of the video is to communicate an idea. not to wow people. If I was to go back and do an elaborate animation, It would betray the whole point of the video. and it would betray my character. you should know by now that I am straightforward and to-the-point. I do what is necessary for the task at hand. no more, no less. I'd like to investigate more about what you were saying about the math and flow of water etc... just don't have it in me at the moment though. house moves and all that. but I'll put this out there... when water runs out of the 'tank'... it joins another part of the water cycle. let us forget about a tank momentarily and instead consider a whirlpool in a river. how does the water return to that whirlpool? it goes to the ocean , evaporates and precipitates higher up the mountain. who knows if there is or isn't a similar system at play with regards to the surface of space time. interestingly enough, I watched a video the other day that described the gluon field. and what does the gluon field look like? a rippling ocean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*YoungGuyver Posted May 25, 2013 Author Share Posted May 25, 2013 I believe this video explains it way better than what I could. That, and your video can get a bit confusing in the way you are explaining. Also, everything you ever release in your name is on your resume for video games. This is what your reputation will be. it's a question of what is appropriate. The point of the video is to communicate an idea. not to wow people. If I was to go back and do an elaborate animation, It would betray the whole point of the video. and it would betray my character. you should know by now that I am straightforward and to-the-point. I do what is necessary for the task at hand. no more, no less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted May 25, 2013 Share Posted May 25, 2013 yes. my reputation will be for not wasting time on extra unnecessary things when simply trying to explain an idea. producers initially use storyboards and rough sketches to convey ideas. I honestly just wish you would respect my decision here. If I feel the idea merit's being brought to a wider audience, then I will increase the production values accordingly. As it happens, I am not currently interested in gaining a lot of attention. I only made it to get feedback from those who know me well enough and respect me enough to watch it without judging the quality of the presentation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*YoungGuyver Posted July 27, 2013 Author Share Posted July 27, 2013 This is actually a good series: Makes me want to read that book in particular. It sounds interesting Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Jess♥ Posted October 25, 2015 Share Posted October 25, 2015 I decided to post this in here because the ideas seem somewhat related. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWjvp7bm7NM So, it seems that my theory had some credence after all... It seems I was walking in einsteins footsteps without realising it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.