Friday, December 18, 2009

Is gravity really a generic force? I don't think so! (here's proof?)

(Just another re-post from Witchy Living--this one is a synapse-melter.)

It's raining today. I work outside--painting; so I have the day off. 11am and I am already bored. So naturally I did what any self-respecting Thing 1" (and yes, I actually have a red Cat in the Hat "Thing 1" tee shirt, which I adore) troublemaker would do when they found themselves bored on a rainy day:

I went over to the NASA website and pestered there astrophysicists with the following question:

Is gravity REALLY a "generic" force?

Gravity is thought to be a generic force.

But is it?

I am having serious doubts about this. If so, why do clusters of stars not simply collapse under their combined gravitational pull? What if elements in various states create a variable? Example: instead of Gg (generic gravity) the formula was more like Gaa, Gab, Gca; where (the composition/state) of elements times density times mass created shades almost undetectable by previous measurements, but while refusing to combine to create one giant wavelength of gravity, instead created a narrow-band spectrum of gravitational pull? I apologize for not having better terminology to explain my thoughts on this. But in this way stars would collectively tug on each other, but not massively gang up and slam into each other. Thanks for reading.

So I sent them that question--and that makes me happy. Stoopid lousy eggheads. What do they know after all, anyway?

No comments:

Post a Comment