Science Vs Science Fiction

I'll reread what Sekundes and Eslim said.

Welp all hope is lost then.

you simply cant grasp the gravity of the situation.

a simple explanation wont simply fall into your lap.

This "falling" makes perfect sense to me. Watching water circle down the drain by gravity like the way our solar system revolves moving around the sun. Yet it doesnt make any sense cuz.... I know nothing is technically actually falling. Alrdy said it but nothing of Mass in Space should effect other objects other than by currents, like waves, or magnetism. Since nothing is falling therefore Mass shouldnt effect anything. Right? Like if putting our Solar System in water nothing revolves unless the center, sun, is a hole being drained creating Gravitational pressure inward. There should be no pressure pulling toward the Sun by Mass whatsoever being in Space where the pressure of Mass should not even exist. Otherwise it's as if space is 2D like me sitting on the couch and curving it inward pulls someone next to me closer to me.

I apologize. I am SO confused... Everything does & does not make sense at the same exact time ><

That's pretty much the example I earlier used for you. Imagine that 2d like a section of what really happens, but it's a good visual image to understand.

You even replied "I hear ya", I guess you didn't lol.

So the Sun is the fattest *** on the couch then <_< there's a hole in my head supermassive like the ones in space

How does Space bend? I mean water makes sense. I can bend the volume levels in my tub by sitting in it. Im not even sure if saying correctly but water will rise. I cannot bend oxygen which is more like space than not correct?
I dont understand this.
It sounds like currents and not bending nor gravity. Like an ocean current having a whale swim past you or even air itself as a car drives past. Why they make this so damn confusing >< but this tells me the Earth pulls you in from Space spinning which is yet unconfirmed I think? The 1st point sounded more like an incomplete thought to me.

Dark Matter. We're still trying to understand it.

Just realize that we often use analogies like water circling down a drain and planets on a trampoline to be able to visualize a concept but at certain points the analogy breaks. Water doesn't circle because of gravity alone. The circling is actually caused by the the Coriolis Effect from the earth spinning.

You can see more information on that here:
http://www.smartereveryday.com/toiletswirl/

As far as the trampoline analogy goes, note that this is just a visual example of gravity wells so you can "see" kinda how they work and how mass distorts spacetime. The problem with it is that in reality there is no trampoline and no external force pulling objects with mass "downward". The only real force involved is gravity itself interacting with the objects. Again, analogies are simply ways to think about concepts so you can get a first level grasp on how they work but don't try to think too deeply about the analogy.

The gravity of mass ALWAYS affects everything. Even if you are sitting in your chair gravity is affecting you. That is why you feel like you are pulled down and why it takes effort to stand or jump and why when you jump you come right back down. In orbit, if the gravity stopped because "nothing was falling" all the planets would go flying off in various directions as the vsauce video I linked earlier explained.

The couch analogy you use fails to really represent what happens in space. In space everything is moving very fast and the gravity from massive objects simply distorts the path they take and if it distorts it enough(by having a large enough mass) it may not be able to get away from it and become trapped in the gravity well and continue to circle around. Again, if they were not moving, they would start falling toward the sun and eventually in to it.

The "pressure" or I think a better word would be "pull" of gravity is always there. I'll keep trying to explain as I see how you respond to those and my responses to your other posts.

It's a distortion. The paths taken by other massive objects will be "bent" by the gravity distortion but explaining how that works is not going to be easy. Gravity distortion also affects time but again, these concepts are going to be very hard to explain without a solid background in the more basic sciences.

Volume and displacement of water is not a concept that will help here. Just ignore that entirely, you aren't bending water or air or anything like you would bend a garden hose.

I'll see if I can find a video or demo which will help here.

So "Zero Gravity" doesnt even exist at all whatsoever even in the deepest parts of space? I googled such and they say, No. Yet wouldnt you still be floating then furthest away from planets? It would stand to reason that atleast the effects itself of weightlessness would exist everywhere beyond planet's atmospheres, right?

I dont understand how an object suspended in space being held up by nothing could build pressure in space itself pulling toward a planet other than Axis rotation. Within the planet's atmosphere makes sense, cuz that's obviously real enough, but meh w/e the whole topic is so much easier just trusting what scientists claim...
Yeah makes sense

Well, as far as gravity is concerned, the formula for gravitational force never lets the number be zero. You might be so far out that the mathematical magnitude of force between you and any given object has a million decimal places of zeroes and then a one, but in theory you will never achieve "zero gravity". It's the same problem with achieving "absolute zero" temperature. The best we could ever do is get a temperature so low that we can no longer detect it, but that's about it.

For a good read which hinges on planetary rotational speed, centrifugal force, gravity, life, the universe and everything, 42, I STRONGLY recommend "Mission of Gravity" by Hal Clement.

Not only does it explain a LOT of stuff, its fun.

My only argument with it is Hal Clement's aliens are always WAY too human in their motivations.

I read. I see Theories. Even on wiki. I accept the odds are heavily stacked against other possibilities. I just cant accept Space or objects in Space are forever falling to the largest Mass due to Gravity. As dumb as it sounds. I think there must be something more to it than just that alone. I cannot prove nor test and am skeptical based on the lack thereof in Space theories.

In attempting to make explanations easier to digest, the word "falling" is usually used but that just seems to have lead to more confusion. Its not falling as much as its mutual attraction. The more mass and the closer the object is directly increases the attraction effect. The reason why its not noticeable on distant objects is because of the speed/direction the object is traveling and it because it breaks the escape velocity of the nearest object. There are also God Particles and Dark Matter to consider which we are still trying to understand. From our current observations it seems like it will lead to a "Big Rip" of the universe since Dark Matter is pushing everything away.

Magnetic attraction involves polarity and like was said before its effect dissipates a lot faster than the effect of gravity. If you change polarity you start to push away from the other object. There is no changing the attractive force of gravity however (that we know of), objects will never push away from each other.

This might explain why orbits form and why objects seem to take a preferred direction when orbiting. However, I would like to add that seeing things "visually" doesn't give you the picture you would get "mathematically".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravity
Ex.1* **
Ex.2
What % of Gravity itself is not Electromagnetic?


· Gravity =/= Magnetic(Edit) It does...
· ELECTROMAGNETIC >= GRAVITY

That's my Theory which sounds as about as "Fact" as anyone else's Theory. Scientists are supposed to prove Facts vs Fiction & Vice Versa. That's not my job...

There is more than one form of gravity, you're starting to delve into Classical Physics vs Quantum Physics territory and there isn't going to be a simple way of explaining any of that without going into math equations. The form of gravity that's weakest would be the one Einstein has in his theory of relativity. There's also Quantum Gravity, Singularity Gravity, Supergravity, etc.

Also no % of gravity is magnetic, the are relative to each other.

"Gravity is due to a warp in the fabric of space time. This is a documented fact of Einstein's theory of relativity. This warp is what pulls things in. The greater the mass, the greater the warp and greater the gravity. And in turn, the greater the mass, the greater the magnetism. They are not the same but they work together."

You might want to start asking these sort of questions here. I'm sure the users there will be more than willing to give you answers to the kinds of questions you are asking.


Depends on mass and distance between both objects, once again relative variables.

I dont have any further questions. I reached my own verdict. Thx tho

Some of the things I said make no sense even to me looking back... though I still cant say I agree w/ everything. Other things Im just misreading as well as misunderstanding from the very start. While forcing things that alrdy existed to begin w/ into the whole equation... trying to put more emphasis on one over the other which Phaded pointed out doesnt help nor reading contradictive information... from different links.
Yes I learned read Wiki til it's more clear ignoring other links until I understand
thx all ><

Im trying my hardest to wrap my head around all of this. I realize Im Dumb & Dumber here. Slow learner. But....
How do hydrogen atoms exist in a space vacuum when matter attracts matter. They shouldnt be there, right? Hydrogen atoms should gravitate towards the closest planet ceasing to exist. Unless they are being recreated constantly in space?

In a perfect vacuum hydrogen atoms would not exist. Proving I guess Zero Gravity does not exist but what is there to begin w/ creating such or am I misunderstanding once again...
One search stated Stars create atoms while another claims they cannot be created. If atoms are being created. Which I believe they are since matter attracts matter. Then hydrogen atoms existing in space doesnt prove Zero Gravity doesnt exist but rather they are being constantly recreated.

http://www.space.com/31495-space-time-warps-and-black-holes.html
This is all so fascinating even to a dumbass who never studied such before.

The problem Im having is that I dont believe Gravity exists in Space but rather there is Zero Gravity and everything taking place, ie. Holding our Sun, Planet & Moons together is not Gravitational Pull but rather a current like in the ocean. The Earth's spin & rotation can pull you in from Space. The Sun's spin forms the downward spiral of the Planets moving in toward it. The Planets cannot stop spinning due to being caught in the "whirpool" of space that the Sun is creating. Unless locked by Magnetics like Earth and the Moon which would explain why the Moon is being pulled away from us. It's lock is fighting against the current itself in Space. The only way for our Solar System to break apart is if the Sun itself stopped spinning ending the "whirlpool" effect

I could be WAY the *** off on this one.... yet this concept & idea makes perfect sense to me ><
Ima *** idiot so plz dont take me too seriously. Im just trying to explain this to myself w/o following anyone else's Theories. I want to know... am I wrong? Maybe Im just repeating the same concepts over due to not fully understanding.

Yes, you are wrong and here is why. We actually know a few things about the universe which makes disproving your theory an easy task. Even if you do not believe in gravity, I assume that you believe what you can see. So let us look at one of these phenomena we currently claim gravity to be responsible for.

Einstein Cross (more generally: Gravitational lens)
Simply speaking:
Between us and a far away visible object is a third object, blocking our direct line of sight. We wouldn't be able to see it with your spin-theory. But we actually can see it and it looks good.

What happened: The Gravitation of the high-mass object bends the light so it reaches earth. Why do we know these are not different objects but the same one? light spectrum.

Even if you still not believe in gravity and attribute this phenomenon to a different cause, it cannot be explained with what you claimed previously.

EDIT: For those knowledgeable, of course I know that there are 'Spins', but it has nothing to do with what Akson described.

I dont understand your proof. I dont understand anything really so no surprise.

How can Gravity bend light?

Gravity does not effect Light.
I shine a light at the Sky...
...it will not fall

I must be misunderstanding you.

Im saying that the flow of what they call "spacetime" must be bending the light and that gravity existing in space is still a myth. Extremely confident w/ what I say yet I know Im no Einstein all the same but I still claim his Theory as total *** regardless

Unless Im misunderstanding you