Colorful space galaxy cloud nebula. Stary night cosmos. Universe science astronomy. Supernova background wallpaper
| | |

Is space an ecosystem?

The theory

I have been building a theory of gravity for a long time now, and this article reflects some of the research I have been doing.

There are many reasons why I am doing this, and mainly, it is because we know so much about existing forces, such as electromagnetism, that it does not seem right that we know so little about gravity.

This article reflects many on the rest of this site as a piece of research in action. I am enjoying learning as I go and unearthing information that often changes my mind given the evidence. The post is over a decade old but is only just being published. Mainly because I can see that I won’t be anywhere near ready to provide a first draft for a long time, though I like to have a record out there of findings so far.

I return to this article regularly to see how far the research has progressed and compare with what is currently known in wider contexts and the disparity is fascinating. The evidence to how the universe actually works is not as widely known as we think and there is so much contradictory theory and evidence.

Yet this subject is the foundation on which humans get their life, making it a critical topic to understand. I don’t have time to fully explore my theory of gravity given this research. I have it in my head and it is truly exciting. It feels as though our research tools are limited and thus our capacity for evidence and proof is limited.

We can replicate gravity by changing our momentum and velocity, implying gravity could be an emergent force when all known forces are combined. That is essentially the theory I am investigating here.

The main question is whether it is possible that gravity could be a measure of the pressures on a given place and time that emerge as the universe exists and time passes. The standard model, for example, has many holes, including a complete explanation of gravity. While our predictions work, that only means we have predictable maths, which does not prove or require a new force. Maths alone cannot explain everything that is there, so there must be data and facts we do not know, but that does not have to be a force called gravity.

Through this research, I have confirmed that there are limits to the size of particles that we can detect, so we only have proof of particles within these sizes. It is very unlikely, therefore, that we have detected all particles and all matter that exist. If technology discovers how to detect smaller and larger particles (essentially wavelengths, I believe), then we will have new data to build on to fill the gaps.

I am not sure yet whether Neutrinos are an example of known particles that are too small to measure directly.

One aim is to demonstrate this theory of gravity in various ways, both in thought experiments and digitally.

The spinning of the earth may create gravity. The centrifugal and other forces then make matter and ions organise, therefore what we experience as gravity may be momentum. This is why G forces can be replicated by spinning people on a wheel and why SpaceX is proposing to spin their spacecraft to produce gravity. 

This theory implies that gravity is not a force it is a unit of measurement. It could also be the result of the links between particles we cannot detect. Those links create tiny forces on matter that have an effect when seen on a large scale.

Therefore, the bonds between particles at the molecular level could be creating the structures of the planet that we see and also don’t see. The air and ions we don’t see but they still exert pressure through bonds and humans are stuck inside this ocean without knowing about it. 

I could model this in physics and see where it leads and ask for help from physics nerds. 

Also, the initial spin of the system will cause electrostatic charges, which may contribute to the molecules binding together. 

Research

Anton is talking about space appearing out of nothing. 

Everything I see and read confirms my thoughts so I can have a draft article that explore this and puts ideas together. 

The shaky foundations of cosmology | Bjørn Ekeberg

This video logically discusses the limitations of the field of cosmology and puts into words mant of the concerns I have with the field and the flaws I have seen and want to discuss in this article.

Further references

Space travel

The Crazy Mass-Giving Mechanism of the Higgs Field Simplified

How this tiny 1% mass contribution turns out to be responsible for 100% of the universe

Similar Posts

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.