Gravity is an Illusion?

Interdisciplinary science discussions. Also, if you are not sure where to place your thread, please post it here.

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

NoShips » June 22nd, 2017, 1:29 pm wrote:"Not at all. We're tracking the same killer. We're making progress", the spokesman replied with an unscrupulous expression, no visible embarrassment on his face.

Hmm, first of all, I think that expression ought to be "inscrutable". Duh!

Erm, I don't understand your post, but you're always worth listening to. Can you clarify, please?

The question I've been posing is: Based on what criteria do we determine whether a name has a referent?

E.g. How do we determine whether Pegasus is real? Put another way, how do we determine whether the name "Pegasus" has a referent?

One answer (the descriptivist answer) is: If the description associated with the name is uniquely satisfied, you've found your referent. So, if the description is "a flying horse", and (as far as we can tell) there is no flying horse (nothing uniquely satisfies the description), then we conclude the name "Pegasus" does not refer. In other words, Pegasus does not exist.

Same applies to globality and Newtonian gravity, assuming the same descriptivist criteria, and their respective associated descriptions, i.e., "a mysterious force that is causing us to be pulled together, a strange effect of the Earth" in the former case, and "an attractive force that acts instantaneously over any distance, etc." in the latter. In both cases we are forced to conclude globality and Newtonian gravity are not real; the names "globality" and "gravity", as used by Newtonians at least, do not refer. Nothing in nature, as far we can tell, satisfies the description.

In short, both are theories about nothing. This is a lot more radical than you might at first think. On this account, it's not that Newton was saying false things about a real entity, which wouldn't be so bad (cf. "Donald Trump is Chinese"). Donald Trump is at least real, even if not Chinese. Newtonian gravity is not even real on the descriptivist account.

This is not the kind of result the Scienceville constabulary and the scientific realist (BiV) are likely to smile upon. They want to say, "Newton and Einstein are talking about the same thing/person, even if Newton got a few things wrong".

You cannot say anything true about a non-existent entity, except perhaps that it does not exist.

How does this relate to your comments on gravity, God, and entropy? Thanks!

NoShips
Banned User

Posts: 1852
Joined: 07 Oct 2016
Location: Taiwan

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

In my thoughtful opinion, I believe gravity is a part of Quantum entanglement, I do not really think gravity exists as an entity, I think it exists from process and is dependent to the process rather than an independent force.
Banned User

Posts: 151
Joined: 07 Apr 2017

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

OK. As someone who has no idea what that entire thread was all about (I blame NoShips mostly), and also as someone whose acquaintance with the concept of gravity extends to little more than observing that things do down more than they go up, generally speaking, I'd like to ask a question. One that I am sure will not have a simple answer as I've found with so many things I get to wondering about.

When people talk of spacetime, and the curvature thereof, what exactly are they talking about? And Dave_Oblad said above, "How can Space have a density gradient if it is made of Nothing? The obvious answer is that Space is not made of nothing. In my book, it's the only real (sort of) solid that exists."

Hmmm... when I think of space, I think only of separation. I can't actually imagine a physical quantity called space. That is, whilst the objects that I can see exist separated one from the other, I can think of no physical thing that I can point to and say, there is space.

Is this going to hurt, finding out what you all mean by words like spacetime and space being solid?
Graeme M
Member

Posts: 152
Joined: 04 Nov 2015

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

yes. :-)

Maybe start here?

http://www.dummies.com/education/scienc ... -geometry/

You seem to be on the right track with the idea that space is not just emptiness, but has a substantial quality in the way it separates things and responds to massive things.

TheVat

Posts: 6948
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Hi All,

My perception of Reality is most approximated by the Model of a Neural Network, with switched logic operators at the Planck Scales. Matter and Energy propagate through this Network solely as Information.. not unlike how information moves and is steered through your Brain.

It is not hard to imagine that if one removed a chunk of your Brain, leaving a vacant gap, that no ideas or information could pass through that empty Gap. A switched nerve system is require for information to move from place to place within the Mind.

Now imagine if one could somehow make a Hole in Space-Time. Nothing could pass through such a gap.. not Matter.. Energy.. Light.. etc. It would be removing a chunk of Material that gives continuity to all things we consider Physical.

Matter is not made of any actual substance. It is purely information supported within a Medium called the Fabric of Space or Space-Time or Aether.. if one prefers. Matter is organized as a Geometry in the Patterns of this Information. These patterns have discrete Names based on their behavior (Photons, Quarks etc.) and said patterns interact with other patterns following specific rules.

Gravity is not an Illusion.. But Solid Matter is an Illusion. Matter is a Geometry of Information that follows rules enforced by the Gated Network (Vacuum) that supports everything we call Physical.

Perhaps another Analogy might help:

Imagine if the Universe was a solid ball of Water as a Medium. That Matter and Energy was nothing more than pressure waves propagated in said body of Water. So which is the actual true solid? The Water.. or the interacting Pressure Waves in said Water?

This is why I support the idea that a Hard Vacuum is the only true solid and all other Physical attributes such as Matter and Energy are nothing more than interactive Pressure Waves in said Solid Vacuum.

The Model of Reality that we create in our Minds, derived from our senses, is almost totally wrong on almost every front. Just don't get me started on "Time".. lol.

Does that help?

Regards,
Dave :^)

Resident Member

Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Dave_Oblad » 27 Jul 2017, 18:56 wrote:The Model of Reality that we create in our Minds, derived from our senses, is almost totally wrong on almost every front.

And I assume that this is also true for: "a Hard Vacuum is the only true solid and all other Physical attributes such as Matter and Energy are nothing more than interactive Pressure Waves in said Solid Vacuum." :^)

BurtJordaan
Forum Moderator

Posts: 2592
Joined: 17 Oct 2009
Location: South Africa
Blog: View Blog (9)

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Hi Jorrie,

I started with my Model, but it is a bit too exotic and requires a rather specialized understanding of Logic and Virtual Realities. So I ended with a more prevalent Model that appears in a lot of pop Science.

What is Matter?
Matter is Energy.

What is Energy?
Energy is Heat.

What is Heat?
Heat is a Vibration.

What is a Vibration?
Vibration is a Wave effect.

What is a Wave?
A Wave is a compression differential that propagates through a Medium.

What is a Medium?
A Medium is a person that talks with ghosts ;P

Actually, that's what all the fuss is about. What is this "Medium" Einstein called a Fabric?
How can Information move faster than Light (Einstein hated Entanglement)?

Obviously, there is more to Einstein's Medium or Fabric than meets the eye.. lol.
Enter Quantum Mechanics.. a study of.. Waves and Energy Packets.

To be continued.. (after Science figures it all out)

Best wishes,
Dave :^)

Resident Member

Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Hi all,

One more example that demonstrates this Medium.

Imagine if you took the skull cap off a living person and used a stethoscope to listen to the Brain. Would you hear thoughts? No, of course not.. you would hear the heart beating. Thoughts are basically electrical moving through a Switched Network of connected Cells.

Or, if you applied the stethoscope to a computer chip inside your computer.. would you hear the program running? Again.. no.. you would hear the Computer Fan Vibrating the chips.

In both cases.. the stethoscope is detecting a vibration in the Medium itself and not the information being conducted and switched within the Medium itself (Nerves or Transistors).

So now we have a new tool called LIGO:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIGO

Unlike radios and telescopes, that pickup the information processed through a Medium Fabric, this tool measures the Medium Fabric itself.. a bit like that stethoscope picking up Vibrations of the Fabric itself.

See.. the Fabric of Space-Time, the structure that makes up a Hard Vacuum, can be Twisted, Curved, Compressed and Stretched. Obviously, you can't do such tricks if a Hard Vacuum is an Empty Nothing. So.. LIGO can Measure such changes as Length-Width Ripples in this Fabric. These Ripples are called Gravity Waves.

So.. I am trying to draw a distinction between the Fabric itself and the Information processed by said Fabric.

Like the difference between Brain Fabric and the Thoughts of that Brain. Or the difference between a Computer Chip and the Information that flows through the Chip. Or the difference between the Fabric of Space-Time and Light.

Still uncertain if I've been clear enough, but I have to get back to work now. Later...

Best Wishes,
Dave :^)

Resident Member

Posts: 3230
Joined: 08 Sep 2010
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Blog: View Blog (2)

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Dave, I think the problem for many people trying to grapple with the "reality" of spacetime and gravity is the puzzlement at what sort of "fabric" this stretchable twistable compressible Spandex of spacetime really is. As McLuhan said, the medium is the message. The nature of the forces propagating through spacetime is intimately connected to the medium through which they propagate. We know this more clearly when we see ripples in a pond. Slapping names on it, or just pointing to geometry, is not really satisfying to the curious mind. Maybe we will never know.

TheVat

Posts: 6948
Joined: 21 Jan 2014
Location: Black Hills

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

I've always had trouble with "space time". Blending dimensions together to explain how physical, observable things interact is suspicious to me. I like the science that got us to the moon and helped us work with atoms. I like "forces" because I can observe them. I like the actual measurable science of stuff. I dislike the concept of "time" because it doesn't exist any more than the spacial dimensions. They are just concepts. Anyway, I am doing my best to accept "space time" into my vocabulary because at the moment there isn't anything better to help us predict the motion of things in this area of the Big Bang universe.
However, the moment we can observe fully formed star systems beyond the limit of the Observable Universe that is currently all the rage (46 billion light years), then, bingo, I will believe the Universe is infinite in size and we don't need "space time" theories anymore. Then I will go back to my old friend Newton. Him I understand.
nicolle38
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 17
Joined: 06 Aug 2015

Re: Gravity is an Illusion?

Hi Dave, thanks for that fantastic explanation. You would make a great teacher!
ClintCor
Forum Neophyte

Posts: 1
Joined: 04 Aug 2017

Previous