A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass

[onthecuttingedge2010]

Since the tides rise as the moon becomes over head would indicate that gravity is a pulling force. also why satellites fall back to earth when their fuel runs out in orbit. the actual gravitational force is rather weak when you exclude all other forces working with it like E.M and atmospheric pressure, static charges and the lot.

gravity is a tensor force and is a 'carrier' of kinetic energy and mass.

[gravityblock]

Since the tides rise as the moon becomes over head would indicate that gravity is a pulling force. also why satellites fall back to earth when their fuel runs out in orbit. the actual gravitational force is rather weak when you exclude all other forces working with it like E.M and atmospheric pressure, static charges and the lot.

gravity is a tensor force and is a 'carrier' of kinetic energy and mass.

It is wrong to suppose that tides are caused by the attraction of the Moon. What happens is the exact opposite. This can be proved by observation. Sunlight reflected from the Moon exerts a pressure on the liquid mass of the ocean. Being compressed at one point, this liquid is raised up at another. This is the explanation of the retardation of tides caused by the Moon. Astronomers would run up against the same difficulty in explaining the orbits of the planets as they did when explaining the lunar orbit, because if, in reality, the Sun did attract them, they could not conceivably have elliptical orbits. But the movement of the Sun around the magnetic center of the system makes its repulsive force stronger at times, in which case the planet moves away from it, and other times the magnetic center is closer to the planet and the planet moves towards it. The difference in the eccentricity of the orbits of the various planets is due to the volume and density of each of them. So that it is more rational to calculate the density of celestial bodies by observing their diameter and their distance at aphelion and perihelion.

GB

[gravityblock]

brian334

For gravity to have mass. Wouldn't this say that gravity is a pushing force and not a pulling force?
Alan

Yes, and the link to the pico-graviton experiment suggests gravity is a pushing force.  The pico-graviton experiment supported brian334 idea of gravity having mass, and he says it's total bullshit. LOL

GB

[gravityblock]

total bullshit.

Total bullshit = brian334^{total bullshit}  (Infinite bullshit loop)

GB

[gravityblock]

@ GB

i usually respect your point of view on the subject of gravity,
but the pico-graviton experiment, may not actually demonstrate what the author is implying there....

There is an obvious alternative solution, in that the "gap" between the masses varies the attractive force of gravity eminating from the larger masses, therefore subjecting the barbell to the more-effective attractive forces of the smaller masses.

This can be demonstrated by pushing the larger masses together, removing the "gap", and the barbell will always attract towards the larger mass.

I don't subscribe to his theories, I have my own explanation, but I do find the experiment interesting, because it may suggest gravity is a pushing force, which is in-line with one of my theories on gravity.  I'll take note of your argument that the "gap" between the masses may vary the attractive force of gravity emanating from the larger mass.  That is a valid argument.  But if we removed the "gap", then the barbell may still be pushed towards the larger mass instead of being attracted or pulled by it.  Without the gap, we have no way of knowing if it's a push or pull.  With the gap, then we need rule out/in your concerns that the gap may be varying the attractive forces between the masses, before we can say it is a push or pull force.  There should be a way to devise a clever experiment which takes these issues into account, in order for us to know if it is a pull or push force.

GB