Pushing gravity mechanics

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[mechanic]: Two objects with same mass, one solid and the other a heated liquid. Both are hit by graviton along their way down. As a matter of fact, motion is initiated by graviton hitting those bodies. I postulate that some of the momentum exchange from the gravitons should go into raising the temperature of the liquid. There is nothing to prevent that...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

If you want to talk about your own graviton model, that is one thing. If you are speaking of the one in <i>Pushing Grsvity</i>, then there is no significant change in temperature of the liquid. You need to look at the actual numbers and mathematical relationships. The formula for the universal gravitational constant in terms of graviton flux, mass, and speed shows a proportionality to speed squared. The formula for heat shows a proportionality to speed to the first power. Because that speed is <i>so</i> high (more than 20 billion c) compared to molecule speeds, G can be large without making heat large.

According to the model details, heat comes primarily from absorbed gravitons, whereas G comes primarily from scattered gravitons. The numerical estimates show that the latter outnumber the former by roughly 30 orders of magnitude. So graviton heating for small bodies is utterly negligible. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>your explanations make much sense but what makes these graviton
particles? You would think that eventually, the universe would run out of these graviton particles as they keep being absorbed by matter.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Gravitons are part of what we call "the Meta Cycle", in which the number of gravitons and their momentum is always conserved. Gravitons absorbed eventually heat quantum particles until they explode. We observe these explosions as radioactive decay or as spontaneous "photon" (light wave) emission. Such events return absorbed gravitons to the main medium. The emitted photons experience friction with the medium and redshift as they travel, providing a mechanism for cosmological redshift and returning momentum to the graviton medium.

All this is explained in detail in an MRB article and in <i>Pushing Gravity</i>. -|Tom|-


<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Thx for the answer, I'll look for it. Well, "pushing gravity" seems
to be a much simpler mechanism then gravity that pulls. Seems like a gravity that pulls would require some quantum-sized ropes.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Tom: And so each cylinder is struck just as often and just as hard by the net downward graviton wind. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Let take instead of two cylinders, two spheres of the same mass. One is empty and have a thin wall, and the other is full.
In the first one every atoms will be strucked equally by the graviton wind. But in the second one the atoms in the middle of the sphere will be less struck because of the shading caused by the outer layer of the sphere. The difference must be very very small but it will still have a difference.
If small body doesn't produce any shading then planets would not be able to form by acretion of dust of the primordial dust disk of the solar system.
Do you have an explaination? Is my reasonning correct?
Thank you

From 123...0

Thx for the answer, I'll look for it. Well, "pushing gravity" seems
to be a much simpler mechanism then gravity that pulls. Seems like a gravity that pulls would require some quantum-sized ropes.

---

I take quantum-sized ropes (LQG or Loop Quantum Gravity) anytime over billions or trillions of energetic particles hitting earth, my body and yours each fantosecond. lol

But I'am open to it pending experimental verification or falsification.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
From 123...0

Thx for the answer, I'll look for it. Well, "pushing gravity" seems
to be a much simpler mechanism then gravity that pulls. Seems like a gravity that pulls would require some quantum-sized ropes.

---

I take quantum-sized ropes (LQG or Loop Quantum Gravity) anytime over billions or trillions of energetic particles hitting earth, my body and yours each fantosecond. lol

But I'am open to it pending experimental verification or falsification.


<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

LQG, what is that? When I think of pulling gravity, I think of fishing. It's like mass throws out fishing lines, hooks each other and reels each other in. Once they've hooked each other, it becomes a tug of war and results in the motion we attribute to gravity. There
would be no need for speed faster than light in that case I guess but the mechanism for pulling seems pretty complicated when compared to pushing, which can be explained simply as the transfer of momentum.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[jacques]: Let take instead of two cylinders, two spheres of the same mass. One is empty and have a thin wall, and the other is full.
In the first one every atoms will be strucked equally by the graviton wind. But in the second one the atoms in the middle of the sphere will be less struck because of the shading caused by the outer layer of the sphere. The difference must be very very small but it will still have a difference.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

The difference is so small that it has yet to be detected, because every atom of the Earth is almost equally accessible to a graviton impact with every other atom. Most gravitons hit nothing. The small percentage that do hit something are just as likely to hit a center or a surface atom.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>If small body doesn't produce any shading then planets would not be able to form by acretion of dust of the primordial dust disk of the solar system. Do you have an explaination? Is my reasonning correct?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Small bodies have the full, normal Newtonian attraction. Where did the idea that gravitons miss small bodies come from?

BTW, although irrelevant here, the primordial solar nebula hypothesis is another highly doubtful model. -|Tom|-