Hey, ok so Im aware there are probably a few topics on the current Earthquake and Tsunami disaster in the pacific..
But, Id really like to here your opinions on exactly why this happened.
Could it be the earth is unhappy because of global warming and pollution, or could it be the return of Nibiru... or what other scientic reasons.. your thoughts.
Thanks
Full Version: The Great Wave
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Metaphysics, Psychology & Psychic Phenomena
A major tectonic plates shift?
Yes, that is the scientific action that caused the wave, but what caused thats scientific action?
Convection currents of magma.
Caused by the heating from the Earth's core.
Caused by the pressure and radioactivity within itself.
Caused by the mass of Earth in combination with the elemental properties of its make-up.
Beyond that, we go into how the planets were created in the first place.
Caused by the heating from the Earth's core.
Caused by the pressure and radioactivity within itself.
Caused by the mass of Earth in combination with the elemental properties of its make-up.
Beyond that, we go into how the planets were created in the first place.
QUOTE(Polarflow @ Dec 30 2004, 05:47 AM)
Yes, that is the scientific action that caused the wave, but what caused thats scientific action?
[right][snapback]429165[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]429165[/snapback][/right]
Hmmm... good question.
.....and an even better answer, don't you think?
* - By the way, Polarflow, please respond to my IM to you as soon as possible, thank you for your cooperation.
* - By the way, Polarflow, please respond to my IM to you as soon as possible, thank you for your cooperation.
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 30 2004, 02:22 PM)
Convection currents of magma.
Caused by the heating from the Earth's core.
Caused by the pressure and radioactivity within itself.
Caused by the mass of Earth in combination with the elemental properties of its make-up.
Beyond that, we go into how the planets were created in the first place.
[right][snapback]429289[/snapback][/right]
Caused by the heating from the Earth's core.
Caused by the pressure and radioactivity within itself.
Caused by the mass of Earth in combination with the elemental properties of its make-up.
Beyond that, we go into how the planets were created in the first place.
[right][snapback]429289[/snapback][/right]
Good so far but you forgot about the magnetic pole reversal now in progress and the position of our solar system in the plieades constellation currently traversing the rings of alcyone. All this happens every 25,677 years and that is why the Mayans predicted the end of the 4th sun at 12/21/2012
I sure would like to know how they knew that we are in the fourth sun. Did they have a memory of the last three??
Let me assure you the Earth is completely in favour of Global Warming.
QUOTE(Magikman @ Dec 30 2004, 08:20 PM)
.....and an even better answer, don't you think?
* - By the way, Polarflow, please respond to my IM to you as soon as possible, thank you for your cooperation.
[right][snapback]430245[/snapback][/right]
* - By the way, Polarflow, please respond to my IM to you as soon as possible, thank you for your cooperation.
[right][snapback]430245[/snapback][/right]
I know this is off topic, but nice to see your back and posting and laying down the law.
QUOTE(jjtss @ Dec 31 2004, 05:10 AM)
Good so far but you forgot about the magnetic pole reversal now in progress and the position of our solar system in the plieades constellation currently traversing the rings of alcyone. All this happens every 25,677 years and that is why the Mayans predicted the end of the 4th sun at 12/21/2012
I sure would like to know how they knew that we are in the fourth sun. Did they have a memory of the last three??
[right][snapback]430312[/snapback][/right]
I sure would like to know how they knew that we are in the fourth sun. Did they have a memory of the last three??
[right][snapback]430312[/snapback][/right]
I always find it amusing that people start talking about the gravitational effects of other planets and galaxies, not taking into consideration that the gravitational force of the person standing next to you is several thousands times highers than that of the moon on your body. People really don't have a concept of the absolutely ridiculous amount of space between celestial bodies.
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 31 2004, 07:06 PM)
I always find it amusing that people start talking about the gravitational effects of other planets and galaxies, not taking into consideration that the gravitational force of the person standing next to you is several thousands times highers than that of the moon on your body. People really don't have a concept of the absolutely ridiculous amount of space between celestial bodies.
[right][snapback]430937[/snapback][/right]
[right][snapback]430937[/snapback][/right]
But if you think about it, the planet bodies are lying in vaccuum. So if to the right of some planet there is a system lightyears away it gives a very small amount of gravity pulling on the planet. But on the left side of the planet there is nothing at all for millions of light years. The planet would be affected by that little bit instead of nothingness on the other side.
A person will wobble just the slightest bit if a gnat lands on one side and not the other, but it is hardly worth considering a significant for of any kind.
Regardless, distance is the greatest enemy of gravitational force. As I mentioned before, a 180lb person standing next to you exerts more gravitational force on your body than the moon way up in its orbit. Planets further away in orbit, to say nothing of lightyears away, have no effect whatsoever.
Regardless, distance is the greatest enemy of gravitational force. As I mentioned before, a 180lb person standing next to you exerts more gravitational force on your body than the moon way up in its orbit. Planets further away in orbit, to say nothing of lightyears away, have no effect whatsoever.
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Dec 31 2004, 11:40 PM)
A person will wobble just the slightest bit if a gnat lands on one side and not the other, but it is hardly worth considering a significant for of any kind.
Regardless, distance is the greatest enemy of gravitational force. As I mentioned before, a 180lb person standing next to you exerts more gravitational force on your body than the moon way up in its orbit. Planets further away in orbit, to say nothing of lightyears away, have no effect whatsoever.
[right][snapback]431212[/snapback][/right]
Regardless, distance is the greatest enemy of gravitational force. As I mentioned before, a 180lb person standing next to you exerts more gravitational force on your body than the moon way up in its orbit. Planets further away in orbit, to say nothing of lightyears away, have no effect whatsoever.
[right][snapback]431212[/snapback][/right]
But to say this, you should give a distance where gravity will no longer affect an object X lightyears away, more precise X miles away. If light can be seen from one object to another, why couldn't gravity also be influenced? Expecially if gravity travels about the same speed as light, which I heard mentioned in another thread around here.
QUOTE
But to say this, you should give a distance where gravity will no longer affect an object X lightyears away, more precise X miles away.
Two bodies of matter attract each other proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of distance between them. If the mass of one body is designated as M, the mass of the other as m, and the distance between them is r, then the force of attraction between the two bodies is:
F = G ((Mm)/r^2)
where G is the universal gravitational constant G = 6.67 x 10-11 N(m2/kg2) (Newton-meter squared per kilogram squared).
Since force = mass times acceleration, the universal gravity equation implies that as objects are attracted and get closer together, the force increases and the acceleration between them also increases.
Feel free to plug in the numbers that you want. Once you get this result, all you need to do is figure out the force required to move a given body X (you can find both this equation and the gravitational one all over the internet. It's physics 101). Once you have the amount of force required to move X, all you need to do is compare it to the amount of gravitational force available. If it takes more energy to move X than there is available from gravitational force, then X is going nowhere.
QUOTE
If light can be seen from one object to another, why couldn't gravity also be influenced? Expecially if gravity travels about the same speed as light, which I heard mentioned in another thread around here.
Light is a projected energy, whereas gravity is a property of mass. Once light leaves the source, it remains a specific unit and form of energy, even if the light source disappears. Gravity exists only as the product of another object. If that object disappears, the force of its gravity does as well.
QUOTE(aquatus1 @ Jan 2 2005, 05:00 PM)
Two bodies of matter attract each other proportional to their masses and inversely proportional to the square of distance between them. If the mass of one body is designated as M, the mass of the other as m, and the distance between them is r, then the force of attraction between the two bodies is:
F = G ((Mm)/r^2)
where G is the universal gravitational constant G = 6.67 x 10-11 N(m2/kg2) (Newton-meter squared per kilogram squared).
Since force = mass times acceleration, the universal gravity equation implies that as objects are attracted and get closer together, the force increases and the acceleration between them also increases.
Feel free to plug in the numbers that you want. Once you get this result, all you need to do is figure out the force required to move a given body X (you can find both this equation and the gravitational one all over the internet. It's physics 101). Once you have the amount of force required to move X, all you need to do is compare it to the amount of gravitational force available. If it takes more energy to move X than there is available from gravitational force, then X is going nowhere.
Light is a projected energy, whereas gravity is a property of mass. Once light leaves the source, it remains a specific unit and form of energy, even if the light source disappears. Gravity exists only as the product of another object. If that object disappears, the force of its gravity does as well.
[right][snapback]433122[/snapback][/right]
F = G ((Mm)/r^2)
where G is the universal gravitational constant G = 6.67 x 10-11 N(m2/kg2) (Newton-meter squared per kilogram squared).
Since force = mass times acceleration, the universal gravity equation implies that as objects are attracted and get closer together, the force increases and the acceleration between them also increases.
Feel free to plug in the numbers that you want. Once you get this result, all you need to do is figure out the force required to move a given body X (you can find both this equation and the gravitational one all over the internet. It's physics 101). Once you have the amount of force required to move X, all you need to do is compare it to the amount of gravitational force available. If it takes more energy to move X than there is available from gravitational force, then X is going nowhere.
Light is a projected energy, whereas gravity is a property of mass. Once light leaves the source, it remains a specific unit and form of energy, even if the light source disappears. Gravity exists only as the product of another object. If that object disappears, the force of its gravity does as well.
[right][snapback]433122[/snapback][/right]
I'm understanding most of this now. (Still in highschool, never took physics 101). So does the influence of gravity have a speed as well? There is another thread which talks about this topic, I forgot what it is called. Because you say
"If that object disappears, the force of its gravity does as well."
People in the other thread were debating on if the sun were to vanish in a flash, would the earth still rotate around the spot the sun was, or would earth start to drift instantly. To me it seems like it would be instantly, which sounds wierd to me at the same time because it would be faster than light.
QUOTE
People in the other thread were debating on if the sun were to vanish in a flash, would the earth still rotate around the spot the sun was, or would earth start to drift instantly. To me it seems like it would be instantly, which sounds wierd to me at the same time because it would be faster than light. blink.gif
Heh, yeah, that one pops up in most physics class sooner or later
Gravity is a property of mass, which makes it an integral part of the planet, not an extension of it. Light, on the other hand, is something that is generated in one way or another, therefore making it a unit in and of itself. It might be easier if you think of the human body as an analogy. Gravity, an inherent property, is like an arm holding on to something. If the body disappears, the object is no longer affect and falls. Light, a generated energy, is like body heat generated by the muscles. If the body disappears, there remains some residual heat in the air (for a little while, anyways).
Generally speaking, people try to throw in Einstein's "faster than light" theory in there, but as you can see, it doesn't really apply. With gravity, we are not dealing with a force moving through space, but rather with a static field that affects everything within its reach.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.