Truth-Why all atoms fall at the same rate in vacuum-johnreed

Discussion in 'Undergraduate Math' started by johnreed, Sep 15, 2011.

  1. johnreed

    johnreed Guest

    Robert Allan> What is truth? I think that it's fair to say that truth
    is what can be proved and the rest is just...conjecture?

    johnreed> In brief: It appears that if we can envisage it as the truth
    and the closer we come to believing it is the truth; the greater is
    the likelihood that we are wrong. This is not an iron clad rule, but
    consider: We think we have proved that a universal force that we call
    gravity exists as a property of inanimate matter. We believe it exists
    because we feel our weight. We believe it acts on us because we feel
    our weight. We define it in units of what we feel, our weight; as the
    product of mass and acceleration [mg]. We postulate that inertial
    mass [ma] and so called gravitational mass [mg] are equivalent with
    respect to the celestial universe because they are equivalent with
    respect to what we feel as, our weight [mg] and force [ma].

    So developing logic through the lens provided by our senses allows us
    to define the least action consistent universe after our own least
    action consistent image. Our weight [mg] and a force that we feel
    [ma]. Both [g] and [a] represent acceleration[1].

    Where we place a balance scale is immaterial to the balance scale.
    Wherever we place it the magnitude of [g] will be the same on each pan
    regardless of the mass magnitudes placed on the pans (this is true
    except in theoretical cases where extreme magnitudes that exist in
    mathematical fantasies are projected to vary greatly in very short
    distances). So when we define an object in units of [mg] the only
    quantity we are comparing is the quantity of mass [m], on the balance
    scale. [g] is a consequence of location. That's pretty simple isn't
    it? So you might wonder why I bother to point it out.

    If [g] was not a consequence of location then mass [m] and [g]
    acceleration could not be separated into the components of weight
    [mg]. In such a case the balance scale would only give us weight as
    [w]. In fact we used the balance scale to give us weight for 6000
    years and for 6000 years we believed that heavy objects fell faster
    than lighter objects. So when Galileo showed that all objects fall at
    the same rate we were amazed and we have remained amazed for 450

    This is because our normal use for the balance scale is to compare
    weight [mg]. Weight is specific to location and specific to what we
    feel at that location. Weight, [mg], and what we feel varies according
    to a location in space. Given any mass [m] all three, weight, [mg] and
    what we feel, depend on the magnitude of [g]. We can change locations
    and our mass [m] remains unchanged but our weight, [mg] and what we
    feel varies according to a location in space. Again its pretty simple
    stuff. High school physics. So why do I discuss it? Because we have
    defined the universe in terms of what we feel.

    We say that a force we feel as weight [mg] is universally generated by
    inanimate and animate matter as an inate property of matter itself. I
    say this is false. The force we feel is generated by us (our effort)
    and we apply it to inanimate matter and/or feel it through physically
    interacting with inanimate and animate matter. The force we feel does
    not act at a distance. The force we feel does depend on our location
    in space. So "something" acts at a distance.

    We think that it is proportional everywhere in the universe (in terms
    of mass, distance and time), to the magnitudes we feel and measure on
    the surface of planets and moons. Where mass is conserved independent
    of the action of planets, stars and moons.

    All atoms fall at the same rate in a vacuum. Therefore I conclude that
    the planet attractor acts uniformly on each atom (Einstein proposed a
    uniform gravitational field). This is the "level" playing field we are
    born in and the field that contains the atoms from which we are built.
    Given the level playing field that acts on all atoms 'uniformly'; we
    feel the cumulative 'non'-uniform resistance of those atoms when we
    'work' against the direction the field of atoms is uniformly pulled.
    When we 'travel' in the direction the field uniformly pulls on our
    atoms, we experience free fall, or no resistance other than air
    resistance. The 'universal 'attractive action is uniform on the non-
    uniform atoms that make up animate and inanimate matter. This is why
    all atoms fall at the same rate in vacuum. The pull on each is
    uniform. This uniform pull allows us to feel variance in the
    resistance of the non-uniform atoms we work against. An object we lift
    offers its weight as resistance to our effort. It offers no resistance
    to the pull of the planet, relative to us.

    Gravitational force is a legacy concept based solely on what we feel;
    our weight, and the quantitative least action consistent mathematical
    convenience of its definition [mg]. Nothing pulls on us. The pull is
    uniform on our atoms which we would not feel during freefall in a
    vacuum. We feel our total weight when we are in contact with the
    planet; or when we accelerate away from the planet. We feel the
    resistance of our non-uniform atoms when we work in opposition to the
    direction the planet uniformly pulls on our non-uniform atoms. We feel
    the resistance of our non-uniform atoms when we act in opposition to a
    state of rest or in opposition to a state of constant motion. In all
    cases of inertial mass [ma] and gravitational mass [mg] the force we
    feel is the resistance of non-uniform atoms in response to our effort.
    We act on this non-uniform resistance and we feel an equal and
    opposite force because our effort is equal and opposite to the
    resistance we act on. We have defined it that way. [F=mg] and [F=ma].

    The force we apply when we lift an object at any location, will
    always be equal to the weight of the object's atoms that resist the
    force we apply at that location. We generate the force. Matter
    provides the resistance we must counter. We feel and generate the
    force. It begins and ends in our body and effort. We lift objects.
    Objects can strike us. [F=mg] and/or [F=ma]. This does not even imply
    that mass generates a universal gravitational force, much less at a

    We have heretofore attributed this phenomenon to Newton's 3rd law. The
    "equal and opposite" law because the force we generate is equal and
    opposite to the resistance we work against. Again we have defined the
    universe through the lens of our own image.

    There is nothing universal about the force we feel [mg] except the
    resistance [m] and the location in space [g] that causes it. Our
    effort cannot be generalized to the effort of the planet. Inanimate
    objects exert no effort. Nonetheless we assign the force we feel to
    all inanimate objects based solely on their objective resistance. The
    planet attractor acts on atoms. All atoms fall at the same rate. We
    lift or work against the cumulative sum of the non-uniform resistance
    of the atoms in an object. The planet attractor pulls uniformly on the
    object's non-uniform atoms and on our non-uniform atoms as we lift the
    object. To assign the force we feel and generate, to inanimate object
    resistance is error.

    If you are perplexed and think that this is not what you were taught
    in school, you are correct. This is what I have learned and what I am
    attempting to explain. I am redefining gravitational force as a force
    we feel as living objects in response to resistance. We act on
    resistance and we feel the force we generate. The cause of that
    resistance is undoubtably universal, it just is not the force we call
    gravity. It is the planet attractor's uniform action on non-uniform
    atoms. The uniform action on non-uniform atoms by the planet attractor
    is why all atoms fall at the same rate. The atoms have no resistance
    falling in a vacuum. We feel the resistance we call force and weight
    when we interact with matter. We can quantify this resistance in units
    as a product of mass and acceleration [ma] and/or [mg]. I will further
    explain why this works when I continue.
    johnreed, Saturday, 10 September, 2011

    Related notes:
    [1] The simplest case of acceleration can be expressed as a change of
    speed over time. Take the most familiar US definition for speed as
    miles per hour or [m/h]. This is [distance/time] or [d/t]. [Speed]
    over [time] then becomes [d/t]/[t] which is [d/t^2].
    [1] Where mass is the conserved cumulative resistance of non-uniform
    planet and moon surface atoms and is conserved independent of the
    celestial least action motion:  Recall that we have spin angular
    momentum and linear momentum from Newton’s first law. We don’t have
    orbital angular momentum from that law. We acquire orbital angular
    momentum from Newton’s mathematical derivation for centripetal force
    where he used a perfect circle and perfect motion to argue for
    centripetal acceleration. 
    The spinning perfect circle angular velocity is an artifact of
    the uniformly spinning circle itself. The angular velocity of a
    spinning disk, sphere, or solid object, is an artifact of the
    uniformly spinning disk, sphere, or solid. So we have least action
    consistent single object spin angular momentum as an artifact of the
    spinning perfect circle angular velocity. 
    Newton then used the least action consistent angular velocity
    of Kepler’s empirical time controlled law of areas for 2 body
    planet orbital motion, to mathematically carry his perfectly circular
    2 body uniform motion, spin angular momentum analog, to the planet’s
    non-uniform 2 body orbital motion. 
    It’s based solely on time-space parameters where the
    emergent conserved cumulative resistance of non-uniform planet and
    moon surface atoms is either designated as the cause of the least
    action consistent celestial motion (Newton’s gravity), or as the
    consequence of the least action consistent motion, as space-time
    curvature (Albert Einstein and peers).  

    I have made it easier to reference my supporting work by creating a
    Google Science and Technology Group titled: "The Least Action
    Consistent Universe and the Mathematics". Currently it contains
    Sections 1 through 9 for reference. The many sub-sections and work
    prior to 2007 has not been included. I will develop it further as I
    have the time and gain familiarity with the venue. Meanwhile my more
    recent work is available for public review to all, and open to
    criticism and discussion by any person who joins the group. The
    latter is a condition established by Google and newsgroups in general.
    I provide information. I seek no recruits. However, there are no
    restrictions or requirements to join.

    Current web address:

    If you respond to this post from a newsgroup other than the above,
    please send a copy to , if you want a timely
    response. Thanks.
    johnreed Wednesday, 14 September, 2011
    johnreed, Sep 15, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.