New Gravity Understanding: Free Energy and A Step to Grand Theory?

[vizulfun]

yet another vid i had to stop from the start cos of that insane choice of voice-over

[OddFacade]

It's already been stated that the sky is blue (during the day) because of the frequency at which the light hits our atmosphere. Morning and evening are orange because we're directly perpendicular, noon (straight) is blue, and shades vary between. Not magnetism or gravity.

[AJRelic]

One big problem I have with this video is that it seems like you're describing matter as something that can both push space (as when earth populates the universe) and pull space(As seen between the interactions of the sun and earth.) Which one is it? Or is if its both, then why does this happen?

[clarenceho01]

if what this video says is true, there would NOT be any space inside mass, only around it.

i think my (half baked) theory is far more likely: time-space(knot) is more dense in dense matter and matter is attracted towards a more dense time-space(knot).

i must admit that i have more theory's, but i won't share them at current

[clarenceho01]

@clarenceho01 well, it's at least part of my theory about space time...

oh and the words i chose might not describe what i tried to describe...

[davmus12]

You're an idiot!

[clarenceho01]

@davmus12 totally

[jzeerod]

Sycophants and Yesmen will continue to tow the line with the standard model.

[themixedarts]

Free energy already exists.

[ijociou]

This was almost slightly decent... until the moron said that a black hole goes boom to make a supernova.  What..... the fuck.... Charlie? fail.

[reset999]

it fascinates me that nowadays so many people do not understand basic physics. it's good to question established principles but to try and replace them with nonsensical crap that can easily be disproved is frightening. i mean just because you're stupid does not mean that the physical models are no longer valid :( please try to read more and understand them. countless people before you have proved them and noone has managed to disprove them.

[picdragon99]

I fell like my IQ just dropped 40 pts from watching this. And I'm still smarter than the person who posted this.

[MyNameIsBob212]

The supernova thing is pretty dumb, the rest makes sense though.

[fattigbonddrang]

ave you ever read about gravity, spacetime, blackholes, supernovas and the magnetic"shelding" that sheilds te earth from solaractivitys? this film was totaly elogicol....

[81Szczery]

sexy speaker

[jannikmt]

this is bull the box example is flawed in fact the entire thing is flawed

[CaptJay12]

Why make a video that is utter nonsense? There isn't a single scientific fact in the whole video. The whole video is just rubbish. The boxes are described by Newton's Laws, "compressed space" is made up, If (and this is a big if, as it wouldn't) the sun turned into a black hole, the earth would not get swallowed up, you showed the correct equation at the start, we would continue to orbit. E=mc^2 has nothing to do with anything you're talking about, you just threw it in to sound clever. Rubbish!

[TCupUK]

Is this not ignoring the lack of gravity in space?

Last I heard we float in space as does the Earth, Sun and Moon.

Has got me thinking so thumbs up for that.

[babyface2k]

That's why people should not believe physicists' stories until you see proof. Yes. Physicists create stories, besides releasing theories and equations. So know things well before getting serious about it. Because you can be wrong. If you're not so sure about it, do not comment, calling someone stupid or his proposition is wrong etc.. Because what the science field ends up believing, they want us to believe as well. But know if it's a story or theory first.

[babyface2k]

@Jammieg001 What he's explaining was if there were no mass in space and everything moves at the speed of light, and compression in space exists, everything has the same speed guided by the rings (with equal measure) of compression of space (what he calls gravity). But as soon as a mass exists (e.g. earth) the thickness of rings of compression of space decides how fast or slow a falling mass will have.

[jannikmt]

@babyface2k it would be like fluids and the pressure of the "lines"would be split up the same among all lines

[babyface2k]

There should be time in space regardless if everything is in the speed of light. Because a beam of light can die. To maintain something that is made out of radiation/electricity/magnet, it should require energy. And an energy load can weaken, putting a matter to a halt. If things move in the speed of light, it needs to carry loads of energy. But did you know that they theorized a particle that moves faster than the speed of light? They say it existed when the big bang was very young.

[knossis1]

@babyface2k light, matter and everything else with in our universe is energy and energy can't be destroyed only converted into something else. The Universe is just a huge recycling plant, once people understand the basic concept of energy and that all matter is energy they will realize that death like time is an illusion.The strong force is the binding force that holds matter together and the weak force begins the decaying or converting process of said matter into something different.

[Jammieg001]

The first part of the video is interesting I don't understand why the two boxes have equal energy on impact which then begs the question where does gravity create the energy to do that? I would like to know more about that, the details of reasoning that out and such because I came to a similar conclusion that gravity must be doing work and creating energy...the rest seems like a different way of looking at gravity but kinda vague to me.

[listen2meokidoki]

Coorection: The sky appears blue because of complicated spacetime? Shielding the Earth? Ok. I'll accept that because I'm despirate to KNOW. Now I feel at Peace. Now I'm affraid to watch another U-Tube video theory about gravity. It might upset my apple cart. That's where all fallen apples go to die.

[listen2meokidoki]

The sky appear blue because of complicated spacetime. Shielding the Earth? Ok. I'll accept that because I'm despirate to KNOW. Now I feel at Peace. Now I'm affraid to what another U-Tube video theory about gravity. It might upset the apple cart. That's where all fallen apples go to die.

[xhingon]

good way to present ur idea nd i kinda of understand wer u expect to get da energy but u got a few things bout space u might wanna fix be4 u start going into real depth of gravitational mechanism

[zypergod]

if your having a problem with the math google kahn academy you can learn math physic chem formulas + lessons in how to do them

[zypergod]

" i have watched it i can not unwatch it "

dude i realy appreciate your idea about the universe but its wrong so wrong you have no idea about space-time and black holes i would recomend you watching the standford universitys lessons about

classical physics

special realativity

general realativity

Cosmology | Lecture 1

[TheSelfishAltruist]

THe voiceover ruins this video.

[theNo1atheist]

both cubes having the same energy LOL

[Dreadnought942]

@afootintheuniverse Right, whatever.

As long as i stop getting messages.

you can't say a thing these days without someone comepletely unrelated, getting butthurt and starting a pointless yet hilarious argument.

[Dreadnought942]

@afootintheuniverse and btw. how is thou connected to my concersation with the uploader.

honestly if you want to be a smartasses.

theres lots of forums for nerds like you.

go and tell everyone how much you love shakespear etc.

and again.

fuck off and have a nice day.

Bitch :)

[Dreadnought942]

@afootintheuniverse it is your small words that you fail to understand you warthog faced bafoon.

im easy? really i have you in my little pocket bitch.

Im not mad.

your just my bitch :)

Get a life and fuck off :D

[Dreadnought942]

@afootintheuniverse if you speak english, maybe i would actually undertand what you want from me....

and im not mad.

[Dreadnought942]

wtf? where did you learn this shit?... blak hole creating a supernova? dude....you got the basics wrong. this whole video is bullshit..... Gravity affects everything. no compressed space time.. a black hole has an event horizon where its pull is infinite. furthamore There is a supernova. THEN theres a chance of a black hole. your retarted!!!! When stars Run out of Fuison fuel, gravity wins. followed by a compression of the core. (implosion) then explosion If its Too massive then, black hole

[eonfluxs7]

@Dreadnought942

This is my speculation. Only in this way, I can understand about chemical reaction, magnetic field, black hole and everything.

[Dreadnought942]

@eonfluxs7 i understand.

and i respect your speculation since gravity.

is only a theory :)

BUT it is a fact that stars explode after they run out of fuel.

thats what they use to oppose gravity.

if the star is too massive its core colapsses and you have a very dense ball of...well pure gravity.

A supernova can't occur after that.

the black hole can vaporize (if hawking radiation is real) but it won't explode into a second supernova

[acr08807]

@eonfluxs7 Have you considered trying to understand these things by studying theories that are supported by experimental evidence? There are plenty of textbooks that explain these things without relying on untested speculation.

[slugfly]

@eonfluxs7 He's right u got nova/blk hole backwards, but the idea gravity's a press force, not pull, is cool.

Pt 1 We don't know why things have mass (hoping for Higgs-Boson discovery). Grvty's tied to mass, so we don't know why things have gravity.

Pt 2 Space expands and we guess why with no evidence.

Pt 3 Dark matter is thought to fill all "voids."

sum -could dark matter be the higgs, and gravity caused by the higgs need to expand to space taken by reg. matter? Sounds plausible.

[gnarlydewd]

There is no such thing as gravity u must unlearn what you have learned... its all magnetic even the spacetime EVERYTHING is explained with magnetic theory including the bending of spacetime aka "gravity"

[Dreadnought942]

@gnarlydewd you must understand what "magnetism" is before you imply i need to "unlearn" gravity.

if our theories were false we wouldn't have satelites and space stations with precise orbits.

electromagnetism with space bodies is a whole different subject.

ergo: mars doesnt have a magnetic field.

because its Iron core is dead

If don't understand why.

then don't even start an argument with me.

[robertbodine1]

@Dreadnought942 Black holes have a chance of being created by a Hyper nova. The explosion of any star with more than 100x the mass of ours. Super novas are created by stars with 10x the mass of our sun exploding. That's a huge difference.But essentially the rest of what you said is correct. if by fusion fuel, you meant hydrogen. On a basic nuclear level. But it is all a theory. You can not disprove any of what he or I say. You can only have an open mind and find reasons not to follow the theory

[webhotelvideos]

well how do you explain gravity in a vaccume? Compressed space with no matter? So you are saying that space is made up of matter that we have yet to discover? and that this matter can go through all other matter, yet affect it?. Space time does not affect the universe. It just affects our perception of it though the traveling of light and our way of observation is through eyes but the universe is made up a lot more than light. A black hole has absence of light but not matter. Relative(ity)

[eonfluxs7]

@webhotelvideos

Yes, space-time is made from something. This something is in the state between energy and matter. Therefore,it can go through the matter. It does not affect the universe, it just follow the phenomenon of matter in the universe. The light shows how space-time follows the phenomenon.

And yes, black hole has matter,incomplete matter of death star that create different geometric configuration of space-time.

[webhotelvideos]

@eonfluxs7

Well energy is matter isn't it? I feel your explanation is inexplicable in that gravity is an energy which effects matter (like all other energy forms) So you are saying it goes through matter but pushes it at the same time? because gravity pushes matter doesn't it? Even magnetic forces can go through things but affect other things but you are suggesting that gravity can go through things and move them at the same time. I'm not saying that is wrong but theoretically dosnt make sense

[webhotelvideos]

Space time i think is a ridiculous concept. Considering time is a result of a mass moving from one point to another, of course you will get different times showing in different gravity areas however, to assume an actual period of time changes is very naive. Time is a man made invention really. For example say i have a steel rod the length of our universe that reaches a nearby star. I push that steel rod onto a switch attached to a timed clock. That will occur in less than a second.

[eonfluxs7]

@webhotelvideos

Yes, I agree that time (second, minute, hour, day, week, month etc) is man made invention. I also agree that there is no actual period of time changes. Time is just the effect of the action-reaction between mass and space. If this universe doesn't have mass, all are at the state of absolute (in the form of energy)

[webhotelvideos]

@eonfluxs7 No, that's not what i am saying.Time is a period it takes for mass/energy to change. What i am saying is that there is no actual relationship with space and time or the effect of matter/energy on time other than,. It's just a point of reference for the observer. Matter and energy remain the same and cannot be moved or effected by time. I'm talking pure time but because time is made into matter via clocks, it becomes matter hense the experiments made by NASA

[eonfluxs7]

@webhotelvideos

Like water and sponge, water can goes through the sponge and also moves the sponge. Like the sponge, matter has "space hole", it is between protons and electrons of the matter.

[webhotelvideos]

@eonfluxs7 OK. but there are no protons and electrons in a vacume. So you have not explained it.

[webhotelvideos]

@eonfluxs7 There is no relationship between energy/matter and time other than you need matter in order to observe time (make a clock) Time is an interval in which matter/energy changes. It has absolutly no affect on time or vise versa unless the time piece is made out of matter. Matter and energy cannot change because of time but rather change with it. In order to understand this you have to observe without being an observer because the senses are from a fixed point of view.

[cjcara036a]

There are some answers in the stretching of space time, such as the cosmological constant and dark matter.The star in GRB 110328A did fall into the black hole. but the GRB happened when the tidal forces of the galactic core triggered the star to undergo on what is predicted by the "collapsar" model.

also, this tidal forces were enough to rip the star.

[eonfluxs7]

@cjcara036a

Thank you, I've never learn about tidal force. I have to learn it to compare with compressed space-time speculation

[cjcara036a]

@eonfluxs7

another possible explanation to the phenomena of GRB's is the Penrose process.

[eonfluxs7]

@cjcara036a

Thank you, I am downloading about Collapsar model right now, I'll learn about Penrose later.

[lookatmepleasesir]

when energy or mass warps the fabric of space time how does it relate to the conservation of energy?

[eonfluxs7]

@lookatmepleasesir

the energy from the compression (wraps) of space-time around the mass is equal with the existence of the mass. I still find difficulties to do the math. I am not a mathematician, I am a mechanical engineer. I'm sorry ....

[lookatmepleasesir]

@eonfluxs7 so the energy of the warps and compressions of space-time is part of the mass? or equal to the amount of mass?

[eonfluxs7]

@lookatmepleasesir

The energy of wrap is belong to the space-time and equal with the property (amount, velocity) of mass (moving mass has higher energy than still state).

[eonfluxs7]

@eonfluxs7

and when the mass moves at the speed of light, the energy of space-time will turn the mass into energy. That is why mass cannot travel faster than the speed of light.

[lookatmepleasesir]

@eonfluxs7 is this compatible or conflicting with the concept of virtual particles in particle field physics? how do they relate?

[eonfluxs7]

@lookatmepleasesir

Trully. I'm not sure that I understand the virtual particle. As far as I know, it is only different perspective. The idea of virtual particle comes from "material oriented mind", meanwhile I see it as the function of space-time wrap. Both are talking about same phenomenon ...

[nonbonon]

hmmm not so convincing

[eonfluxs7]

@nonbonon

Thank you for watching and your criticize, I'll learn more ...

[cjcara036a]

I believe your notion about energy in a gravity well is somehow confusing...

If i i'm not mistaken, through your "red-white box" example... no matter how much you have fallen toward the center of a gravity well, the kinetic energy of the two boxes if stopped at an equal height will be the same??....

Also, this video tells us that a supernova will form after the formation of a black hole.black holes do not form supernovae by nature. they just pull everything and emit hawking radiation.

[eonfluxs7]

@cjcara036a

It is the simplification of kinetic and potential energy law. When two same masses falling at the same length, no matter where they fall from, they'll have same kinetic energy.

Hawking radiation is the energy that release by stretched space-time. It called radiation because it has life time. When the life time is over, the black hole is exploded.

[cjcara036a]

@eonfluxs7

Black holes do not explode. Instead, they evaporate gradually during its lifetime as a black hole. This evaporation is mainly caused by Hawking radiation. These are "virtual" particles that are boosted to become "real" particles because of the gravitational energy of the black hole, no stretching of space-time is involved in the process of producing this radiation.

[eonfluxs7]

@cjcara036a

The space explosion was detected on March 28th 2011, when an instrument on NASA's Swift satellite detected an X-ray eruption, the first in a series of powerful blasts. The fact that the explosion occurred in the center of a galaxy tells us it is most likely associated with a massive black hole," said Neil Gehrels, the lead scientist for Swift at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, in a statement.

[eonfluxs7]

The black hole explosion will explain the mysterious space expansion ....

[cjcara036a]

@eonfluxs7

GRB 110328A is a gamma-ray burst produced because a star interacts w/ our galactic core. But in ur video, this is not d cause of ur explosion. According to d video, the supernova is produce as a reaction of the "stretching" process which is very different to what happened to GRB 110328A.

[eonfluxs7]

@cjcara036a

The stretched space-time does exist. It can occur when a material moves at the speed of light. The space-time behind the material will be stretched and no longer balance with the mass. The stretched space-time will rip or deteriorate material into energy. That is why mass unable to moves at the speed of light.

The stretched space-time also can occur if the material does not complete or only contain of single particle like proton. ....

[eonfluxs7]

The complete material causes the compression of space-time (gravity) while incomplete material causes stretched space-time that does not allow electron to fall to proton. (Read the review in my blog, I think I had written about the different space-time structure of complete material and incomplete material in 2009)

Black hole is incomplete material of death star or other source....

[eonfluxs7]

If a small star falls to the black hole, the compression of space-time around the black hole cannot balance the existence of the star. Then the star is deteriorated into energy. This energy will flow to the center of black hole, just like the flow of the stretched space-time. Not all energy of the star can be joined with incomplete material of black hole. Therefore, the energy will find the way out after reaches the black hole.

[eonfluxs7]

Since the weakest area of the space-time around the spinning object is located at the polar region, then the energy will flow through the polar region. We call it Gamma Ray Burst (GRB). (Watch my video about orbital system to know why polar region is the weakest region)

If the star is so massive, the stretched space-time is unable to rip the star apart directly. It will be ripped gradually just like GRB 110328A. If the black hole keeps sucking energy, ...

[eonfluxs7]

the material of black hole will become unbalance. Some part had been stabilized, while the other part still in unbalance state. In this situation, black hole can explode.

Yeah, like other theory of space-time, this is just a speculation, my speculation precisely.

Well, it is nice to discuss with you, but I don’t have enough time to access the internet. I am sorry if I can reply your comments quickly.

[cjcara036a]

@eonfluxs7

Yes, i know that space-time stretching is possible, since it is their property. But GRB 110328A, which you point out as an evidence of your theory, did not involve this mechanism.I would like to also note that objects with mass cannot move at light speed is not caused by stretching of space-time. It is cause by the phenomena that as an object moves faster, its mass becomes heavier compared to its rest mass.At light speed, the mass becomes infinite,which you cannot accelerate any more

[qwerty2711323]

very impressed and very creative but according to this you cannot explai quantum loop gravity and quntum fluctuations but still i am very impressed.

[eonfluxs7]

@qwerty2711323

Thank you, But I know nothing about quantum loop gravity and quantum fluctuations. I'll learn about it.

[alatheir]

the energy from falling objects is not from gravity but from the potential energy that was "stored" in it when sombody put it that high.

if you drop a ball from an airplane you need to first left it into the air and grant it potential energy by doing that.

[eonfluxs7]

@alatheir

Thanks for your comment. But I am sorry, this is not about simple practical.

[ceebo100]

Their is somthing i dont understand. If the earth forced the gravitational lines or what not out.. then why if the universe is endless did they not just move along?. For them to get squeezed in like they did, that would to me say that the earth and the universe around it is in some form of box or sphere, othersise, like the ocean.. the lines would just kinde ripple away.

[qwerty2711323]

first of all you should understand hawking's theory of cuved but endless theory and you will get your awnser automatically hope i have helped you in cleraring your doubt.

[eonfluxs7]

@qwerty2711323

Thnaks. I'll read more from Hawking

[eonfluxs7]

@ceebo100

I think, universe isn't endless ... Planck Satellite has took the image of red line radiation at the edge of universe. There is another dimension at the outside of our universe. And the space of our universe is like a compressible liquid, it can flow like a ripple of the ocean but we cannot see it, we can only see the mass is falling due to the ripple ...

[UnderManiac]

First, the computer voice is horrible. The idea if the sun were to disappear the space would pull the earth towards it's unoccupied space is wrong and backward. The space around the sun is not compressed, but stretched. It's like putting a bowling ball on a rubber sheet. Take the bowling ball away and the sheet will return to it's original flat state.

[eonfluxs7]

@UnderManiac

As far as I know, Einstein never made description in four dimension. The rubber sheet is the best explanation before the four dimensional animation age. .. and I'm sorry for the voice

[killer2611]

god damn second robot voice video in a row. Holy shit.

[eonfluxs7]

@killer2611

I'm sorry ...

[jstock2317]

Doesn't potential energy perfectly explain this?

And just as another opinion, Einstein believed that if the Sun were to disappear, the earth would simply follow a straight trajectory after 8 minutes when the reduced gravity would reach the earth.

[eonfluxs7]

@jstock2317

Let my rewrite my reply to @3rdeye7thdimension: If we put the ball on the ground without velocity, the energy of space-time is equal with the existence of ground and ball. If we drop the ball, there will be an extra kinetic energy between the space-time, ground and the ball. The extra energy is converted into bouncing.

No on has a point of view like this ... isn't it?

[dlstb]

your first box assumption is wrong. An object falling through an atmosphere has a maximun speed at which further acceleration due to a constant gravitational force is impossible because of the resistance of the atmosphere. This "lost" energy is converted to heat ,or is used to "push" the atmosphere out of the way. If you do this same experiment using the sun as the gravitational source you would get better results with more difference in energies transfered.

[eonfluxs7]

@dlstb

The falling mass cannot reach the speed of light (or has a limit) not only because of the atmosphere, but also the energy of space-time.Those boxes not to describe about the limit of the speed, but the amount of energy after traveling the same distance.

[3rdeye7thdimension]

I'm no physics expert, but I believe the force exerted from two like objects dropped at relatively different heights is only the same when they achieve terminal velocity. Gravity is still measured as acceleration, not a constant speed (until you achieve terminal velocity.) This can be witnessed in the dropping of any bouncy ball from different positions (without Term. Vel.) as with the force they exert upon the ground, will be exerted back on them, the higher dropped one will bounce higher.

[eonfluxs7]

@3rdeye7thdimension

I'm sorry, I don't know about terminal velocity, I'm not a native English speaker.

If we put the ball on the ground without velocity, the energy of space-time is equal with the existence of ground and ball. If we drop the ball, there will be an extra kinetic energy between the space-time, ground and the ball. The extra energy is converted into bouncing.

[TheGingerStep]

Thank you for getting back to me. Also, thanks for the explaination you gave me, I learned something new.

[xxskaterboixx06]

correct me if i'm wrong. (i'm not trying to prove the video wrong, I am simply inquiring). Isn't our sun to small to create a super nova? I thought this only takes place with stars much larger than ours.

Thanks.

[eonfluxs7]

@xxskaterboixx06

You are right, I may make improper example about the sun and supernova.

Sun can cause supernova if the energy of the sun equal with energy of supernova. But I don't think the energy of sun is equal with energy of supernova.

I am sorry for that, and thank you for your correction.

[eonfluxs7]

@slackerii

Yes, space time has energy. The energy of space time prevents mass from moving at the speed of light.

The energy of space around both bodies is higher than energy between both bodies. The energy around bodies causes both bodies seems like pull each other.

[TheGingerStep]

@eonfluxs7 p.s. you were formerly speaking to me under the SN xxskaterboixx06.

[slackeriii]

-If it mater can displace spacetime, then that means energy can displace spacetime (since mater is energy), which means spacetime would have to be energy too in order to interact with mater that way (exerts and opposite and equal force on the mater that's replacing it), right?

-So the closer it is to said body, the more dense it will be because there will be more space time "behind" it, exerting more force on it, and on the body, indirectly. (cont.)

[slackeriii]

@slackeriii -And if another body is nearby, the spacetime around one body will tend to migrate toward the other body and vice versa (but the heaviest object will attract more spacetime) >>> How can that be possible? According to the first hypothesis, wouldn't two (or more) bodies relatively close to each other have an opposite effect? Say one body displaces the st around it, then another object forms near it (I'm assuming this scenario to rule out prior movement of the second object) (cont.)

[slackeriii]

... wouldn't the two bodies then repel and not attract each other, each exerting a force against the st around them?

-Also, why would mater accelerate faster toward the more concentrated field of st around a mass?

Finally, why would a body be pulled all the way into the black whole? Wouldn't there be a point when the st formally displaced by the b.whole manages to take back the lost ground and stabilize - which should happen before the said body would be anywhere near the center of the event?

[slackeriii]

@slackeriii ..Oh wait, sorry about that last one (black whole thing) - I guess that, when the spacetime fills the gap left by the fading body, it wouldn't just stabilize right away, but rather create a sort of vortex because of the Coriolis effect, and the object in the vicinity would begin to spin around it until it stops in the center, so .... ok.

[marcusmajestic12]

why such a pathetic endeavour to explain noble understanding?

[eonfluxs7]

@marcusmajestic12

Today, we are laughing at irrational thinking of our ancestors. In the short future, our next generation will laugh at our todays rational scientific method. Newton's theory of gravity will be as funny as Aristotle's theory of generatio spontanea …..

[racastilho]

could be interesting, but the voice prevented me from watching the whole movie... too bad.

[eonfluxs7]

@racastilho

Ups, sorry