Gravity is no more than a wrong interpretation of a combination of phenomena. It does not exist.

What science calls gravity is a question of a difference in the density of bodies. To explain; the smoke of your cigar is heavier than the surrounding air. Yet, it rises as the result of warmth. That is to say the difference in density is compensated for by the temperature of the smoke. Therefore, two factors are at work which can influence this phenomenon; density and temperature.

We can see that a balloon full of hydrogen gas rises, according to the volume of the gas. The same thing happens with helium. That is to say, bodies of lesser density always tend to rise, in the same way that water and oil separate, due to density: Gravity does not prevent bodies of lesser density from rising. Whereas in air, which is of low density, heavy objects fall rapidly, in water-more dense than air-they fall more slowly. The third factor influencing gravity is the mass of atmosphere and ether surrounding a planet; this can, however, be included in the factor of density.

It is wrong to attribute greater or lesser gravity to a planet without knowing the extent of its gaseous mass and the density of its atmosphere. On Saturn, for example, owing to the absence of atmosphere, gravity is considered zero. On Jupiter, which has a very rarefied atmosphere, it is quite different.

A falling body has a high initial acceleration and then it collides with the low density of the planet. On Mercury, however, where the etheric covering extends more than 6oo,ooo km., atmospheric pressure is high and gravity is tremendous.

The fourth factor influencing gravity is the vertical component of magnetism. However, the attraction it exerts on a body is, with small variations, the same as that on any other body. Thus it is that the speed of fall in a vacuum is constant. However, this attraction is not due to mass, it is caused by the magnetism with which the whole body is endowed.

For the sake of argument, let us suppose that gravity exists. But if all bodies in a vacuum fall with equal velocity, it ceases to be true that matter attracts matter in direct proportion to their respective mass, at least not if this matter is in a vacuum.

If this premise is demolished, it is easy to see that if a vacuum exists between the celestial bodies, solar gravitation-if it exists-should attract all bodies equally, independently of their mass. But all terrestrial astronomy is based on the mass of bodies and their distance from one another.

Therefore your conception of the cosmos is wrong. Besides, when Newton supposed a gravitational force to exist, he had to imagine the existence of an ether. He could not conceive of this force without there being a vehicle for it. And it is strange that, later, relativity denies the ether and yet approves of gravity. it admits what the discoverer of gravity himself could not admit.

Source: alleged extraterrestrial

What is density a measure of?

___

I would love the link to this site you got this from also.

http://members.yournet.com/jobrien/Flying_Saucers.html

i can prove gravity does not exist. here, stand under this 10,000 lb. weight. at the count of three i will release the weight over your head but it will actually rise into outer space not harming you in the slightest.

1....2......3..

Matter attracts matter, this is really old news.

I try the whole socratic method of asking questions, but it fails when no one even tries to answer them.

Long story short gravity is a phenomena, it exists becuase we witness it, how it works is another story. The mechanics are well understood. Any theory that would try to displace GR would need to answer as many questions and more.

The morale of the story . . . this website is very wrong, and will be a source of much entertainment for my creations of youtube videos in the future.

damn!!!


four years of calculus and physics for nothing

Bluto: Christ. Seven years of college down the drain. Might as well join the fvcking Peace Corps.

With how much I have been gaining lately, I wish Gravity didn't exist....

Imagine the weight of a nagging suspicion that what held your world together, a constant and consistent presence you had come to understand and rely on, wasn't what it seemed. That's how scientists feel when they ponder gravity these days.

For more than three centuries, the basics of gravity were pretty well understood.

Newton described the force as depending on an object's mass. Though it extends infinitely, gravity weakens with distance (specifically, by the inverse square of the distance). Einstein built on these givens in developing his theory of relativity.

Then more than a decade ago a researcher noticed something funny about two Pioneer spacecraft that were streaming toward the edge of the solar system. They weren't where they should have been.

Something was holding the probes back, according to calculations of their paths, speed and how the gravity of all the objects in the solar system — and even a tiny push provided by sunlight — ought to act on them.

Now scientists have proposed a new mission to figure out what's up with gravity.

Staggering possibilities
Pioneer 10 and 11 launched in 1972 and 1973. Today each is several billion miles away, heading in opposite directions out of the solar system.

The discrepancy caused by the anomaly amounts to about 248,500 miles (400,000 kilometers), or roughly the distance between Earth and the moon. That's how much farther the probes should have traveled in their 34 years, if our understanding of gravity is correct. (The distance figure is an oversimplification of the actual measurements, but more on that in a moment.)

Scientists are quick to suggest the Pioneer anomaly, as they call it, is probably caused by the space probes themselves, perhaps emitting heat or gas. But the possibilities have been tested and modeled and penciled out, and so far they don't add up.

Which leaves open staggering possibilities that would force wholesale reprinting of all physics books:

* Invisible dark matter is tugging at the probes
* Other dimensions create small forces we don't understand
* Gravity works differently than we think

Devoted to the problem
Slava Turyshev at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory is one of a handful of scientists who wrestle mentally with the Pioneer anomaly every day. He is not paid to work specifically on the problem, so he has to juggle the disturbing thought with his regular research, which involves other aspects of gravity and, significantly, whether theories that explain the glue of the whole universe might one day match neatly with those describing the invisible, subatomic world.

"I have been working on [the Pioneer anomaly] for more than 11 years now, and was never funded to do this job," Turyshev tells Space.com. "I guess this says a lot about my devotion to solve this mystery."

Data from the Galileo and Ulysses spacecraft suggest the anomaly may have affected them, too. But neither has been far enough from the sun — the dominant source of gravity in the solar system — to firmly distinguish any possible discrepancy from noise in the data, Turyshev says. Galileo was crashed into Jupiter last year, and Ulysses will never go farther than it has.

That leaves two data points — one from each Pioneer craft. Turyshev pointedly considers the pair as one data point, so as not to inflate the case for strange new physics.

NASA engineers have made their last communications with the Pioneer probes, so the two table-sized robots are carrying the unsolved mystery silently to the stars.

New mission proposed
The Pioneer anomaly was discovered by John Anderson, also of JPL, in the 1980s. For years he didn't publish what he'd noticed. Then he discussed it with physicist Michael Martin Nieto at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Nieto says he "almost fell off my chair."

Nieto jumped into the investigation, and the two were later joined by Turyshev. They dug deeper into the data, even tracking down retired NASA scientists for some of it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6273955/

I am currently studying astronomy at the college. Gravity plays a major role in that. You should google and study something fascinating called the "Great Attractor".

JB is kinda like the woman Dr.Who of Mingle

I posted the information gleaned from this page for discussion of the information, not to judge the messenger. Just saying that it is wrong does not explain anything about the post above.

Sure, we witness something that we call 'gravity.' It appears that matter 'attracts' matter. But why? Why do you think that matter attracts matter? (I don't think it does.)

Do you know the answer to that question?

there really isn't any gravity, actually it is a big vacuum cleaner sucking the earth dry...

The thing about 'gravity' is that we just don't understand it.

Billy,
Do you really think that because an object is large that it attracts other objects? Or does all matter attract all other matter? How so?

If that were true, if you drove your car down the street another car passed by, the two cars would run into each other from shear force of gravity wouldn't they?

Or: Two fat people would be sucked together in the supermarket as they tried to pass each other in the isle.

Or: we would all be stuck together.

The idea that matter attracts matter does not make any sense.

And what does electricity have to do with gravitational forces? Why does electricity increase the power of a magnet? Could electromagnetism have something to do with gravity? Could vacuums and the ether have something to do with it? Could the electromagnetic fields have something to do with it?

If matter attracts matter, then why does the moon not fall to the earth? Why does it revolve around the earth only facing one direction where we can't see the other side?

I don't know, I'm just wondering these things.

I agree that the web page has got a lot of information that I don't agree with on it but I think science has a lot to learn about this thing they call 'gravity.'

If matter attracts matter why does the moon not smash into the earth?

If it is because of centrifugal force how does that work without a string?

Okay, lets take a globe to represent the earth and a smaller globe to represent the moon and put them in a space chamber with no gravity to effect these two objects and see if the smaller globe will revolve around the larger globe.

Think that will work? I doubt it.

If the small globe does not revolve around the larger one or is not attracted to the larger one, then where is the theory of gravity there?

the moon is always falling towards the earth.

but it is moving fast enough that it always misses

The thing is jb, that all observations give us something called empirical facts, a theory is supposed to gather those facts into a model which is consistent with ALL of the facts.

Ive read no other theories that do that . . . .

I feel compelled to mention that, however I do not feel compelled to spend any real time going over this, its . . . well to follow moms advice I will not say what it is.
No offense.

In other words, you tend to believe what you see. Seeing is believing? Is that it?

You drop an apple from a tree and suddenly you know what gravity is? Matter attracts matter? Okeeee dokeee.

Is this supposed to be a forum for a high school dropouts?

Because, the author of the posted excerpt, apparently didn't go to high school. His explanations fail in so many ways to accurately describe the well known, that I am afraid it requires similar qualification to follow his train of thought.