Why do two balls with the same size but different masses falling from the same height have the same acceleration (in the absence of air resistance)?

We experienced that these two balls (one heavier than the other) arrived to the ground at the same time as they would have the same weight. How does this happen? What is the reason behind this mysterious phenomenon?

Professor Viktoria Nyamadi, while participating in the search for an answer to my question: "How does Gravity read weight?" came up with the above question.

I hope someone out there already has a physically sound answer.

Note to FQXi

Call to reason (analogous to "call to arms")

Information is not something out there, existing in the universe. Information is something you form in your mind.

Therefore, no information could leak out of a black hole. Only some physical fact could leak out, but I don't know if that happens (that is up to you to determine).

Complexity is the same thing. The only complexity exists in our minds (because we are so stooopet - which is how one of my daughters spelled it some years ago).

So what I want you to realize is that there is no such thing as information (or complexity). We will never achieve AI. There is no such thing as entanglement (you will have to figure out something else to explain the correlations).

And for our ontologists, I have this to say. Existence has no attributes. You cannot say that because of this and this something exists. We perceive attributes of things, but we do not perceive their "existence." I am only writing this for the best and the brightest of you. We perceive the characteristics of things, but never their existence.

Our sun will not expire for some time yet, and we can stumble to our greater understanding.

I could tell you more, but for now it might be enough.

En

Oh, I forgot something,

You cannot have reverse-time causality, nor the universe splitting into many. Just forget about those things.

Are we so daft?

You can figure it out. Just go back to where we went off with QM. We went off the rails. I cannot do it, but you can.

I should not say this (and my wife would advise me against this), but I cannot share certain things with you because you cannot handle them.

En

  • [deleted]

Gravity does not read weight! Weight is mass acted upon by gravity causing a measurable output on a weighing device that can be thought of as the force acting on the body due to gravity.

There is an Einsteinian and a Newtonian explanation of gravity -take your pick.

Einsteinian: Gravity is not recognizing the objects, treating them differently or actively doing anything, the objects are just obeying Newton's first Law as best they can. The Objects are in free fall, just following the curvature of space-time, (I would like to call that space imagined over time to be consistent with my own explanatory framework).

From the reference frame of the falling object and an accelerometer of same mass falling with it it has no (proper)acceleration BUT that is an apparent acceleration when not viewed from the reference frame of the falling object itself. Gravity is, using Eisenstein's reasoning, a pseudo force.

However if you wish to consider it a force, thinking like Newton, it acts with 1G on each mass giving enough force for both to accelerate so that they fall at the same rate. Assuming both have even mass distribution and same shape,as these factors could affect the outcome. F=MG but a small mass will accelerate more easily than a larger mass so it doesn't matter that the force is smaller for the small mass and larger for the large mass.Once again Gravity is not recognizing the objects or treating them differently.

Both explanations are well known to mainstream physics. Sometimes the first explanation will be most useful for the problem being tackled and sometimes the second.It isn't that one is right and the other wrong but they are different ways of considering the phenomenon. The first does not regard gravity as a force and there is no proper acceleration in the second it is regarded as a force causing the (perceived) acceleration.

25 days later

HOW GRAVITY READS MATTER'S DENSITY

AND CREATES WEIGHT

Here's my answer to the question:

"How does gravity read weight? How does it recognize that a steel ball is heavier than an aluminum ball with the same size?"

http://www.einsteinerrs.com/creating-weight.html

or see the attachment.

DieuAttachment #1: HOW_GRAVITY_READS_-FV1.doc

I added the following paragraphs to my essay:

"PHYSICS AND NOTHING BUT PHYSICS

In summary, the process of creating weight is simple: A moving Earth presses on objects that, in turn, press on Dark Matter, meeting DM's resistance. That resistant force, applying individually on objects, creates the objects' weights.

An aluminum ball, for example, with its low mass's density, allows a great number of DM's units go through its body, meeting a WEAK resistant force, say, a two-pound pushing force.

A steel ball, with its mass's higher density, has a stronger blocking power - many DM's units are being partially or totally blocked, or have to slow down while going through the ball's body - and will meet a much more forceful DM's resistance, say, a ten-pound pushing force.

The aluminum ball should weigh two pounds. The steel one's is ten.

An object's weight is exactly the resistant force that DM pushed back against it.

That's why we need an equal or greater force to lift it up."

Please review the revised version at:

http://www.einsteinerrs.com/creating-weight.html

4 months later

Greetings,

I was able to defend or add answers to my new gravitational theory on a debate against creditable astrophysicists on Cosmoquest.org in the following areas without the use of dark matter or dark energy:

- the perihelion precession disparity

- the gravitational light bending

- the galactic rotation curve using the mass distribution of the galaxy

- part of the Pioneer 10 anomaly

- the GPS time dilations cancellation altitude

- the expansion of the universe

- the black holes

- the time dilation of speeds < 40% c

- solving the mass of the visible universe based on the value of kappa

- the FEL experiment (derivation is unknown but should be easy to solve)

The code of my new simulator can be downloaded and run on your Linux (Ubuntu preferably) with:

$ svn co https://github.com/philippeb8/finite-theory

Please make sure Qt5 is installed on your system and then you can simply type:

$ cd finite-theory/trunk

$ qmake

$ make

$ ./ft

Sincerely yours,

Phil Bouchard

www.UnifiedFieldTheoryFinite.com

21 days later
a month later

God particles, without Nobel Prize. / by Socratus/

==..

To discover so-called God - particle ( Nobel Prize in 2013)

was needed two conditions : deep vacuum and high energy.

But if the vacuum were deeper and energy were higher then

it would be possible to discover some kind of a new God - particles.

Question: what is the deepest vacuum in the Universe?

My answer:

the deepest vacuum in the Universe is the cosmic zero vacuum T=0K.

Question: what can be the highest energy?

My answer:

the cosmic zero vacuum T=0K continuum is itself some kind

of infinite energy continuum.

Using these parameters, I say that the cosmic zero vacuum T=0K

can create primary God - particles and their names are

"potential molar -masses (k) particles."

==..

Question:

Why potential molar - masses (k) particles are primary God particles?

Because:

a)

Heat is result of some kind of chaotic movements of particles.

In thermodynamics the heat is explained by the formula: E=kT (logW)

It means that chaotic movements of molar-mass (k) particles create heat.

b)

In 1905 Einstein wrote "quantum of action" as: h=kb

It means that molar-mass (k) particles know some kind of another

movement which can create "quantum of action" with energy E=(kb)*f.

My conclusion.

Without heat the Universe is an Absolute Cold Kingdom.

Without "quantum of action" the Universe is dead continuum.

The molar-mass (k) particles can take part in these two phenomenons:

E=kT (logW) and E= (kb)*f. And therefore the molar-mass (k)

particles are primary elements from the First Instant (T=0K) of the

Universe's creation. Not " the famous Higgs Boson" (with the low

energy and prestige Prize) but the old and modest well-known

molar-mass k-particles are real "God particles"

#

k-particles have two forms of modifications: as a heat E=kT (logW)

and as an energy E=(kb)*f . The interaction between energy and heat

created everything in the Universe but . . . . but until today nobody

explained the interaction between E= (kb)*f and E=kT (logW).

=====....

Best wishes.

Israel Sadovnik Socratus.

========....

5 months later

Please excuse my sophomoric question but I am very, very curious and passionate about the subject of .

The Framework

For a moment, let us assume that the framework of context always controls output content, i.e. function precedes form. Let us assume that it is the "Contextual Dimension of Singularity" ... that sets and controls the unfolding Precursor Principles of Superposition ... within Duality ... that in turn . . . "Manifest the Time-Space-Energy Content" of quantum wave coherence and particle quantum entanglements .

The Question

With this simplistic Meta cause-effect assumption, what might researchers discover if they were to assume that the Meta Contextual Framework of Singularity is the core essence of Consciousness ... that gives birth to the Duality of time-space-conscious-energy states of inter and intra-relationships that in turn gives rise to the Superposition Principles of both quantum wave coherence and particle quantum entanglements.

If all energy is in fact conscious - which would be mirrored by the fact that all states of consciousness are energetic- then perhaps we should now be attempting to uncover the metrics of ... the very "Synergistic Attributes" of consciousness.

I Need Help

Will someone please contact me as I am now looking for a research institution to empirically test my hypothesis "On Understanding the Ontology of the Conscious Operating System of the Universe?

    Lawrence C II,

    What do you mean with Singularity? While I don't hope for helping you, I distinguish between the not capitalized mathematical term, its unwarranted use in physics, and the even more deviating meaning in AI.

    ++++

    Dear FQXi,Mr Aguirre, Mr Tegmark,Ms Merali and friends,

    I am sorry for my past paranoid comportments.I am going to delete all my bizare posts.I was too much parano and stupid simply.I am better now.Best Regards and long life to FQXi :)

    2 months later

    Time is the property of existence. Why there is something rather than nothing. We can not avoid existence of time and as a result something will always exist. As such time existed and will exist for ever. As such something will exist for ever. Dynamic universe/multiverse is evolving from state to state and this change of events or snap shots of existence is being continued in time. We should not think that any finite amount energy will end at some point due to second law of thermodynamics. The energy is a magic game of opposites creating opposite entropy and a reverse arrow of time in some pockets to balance the other pockets. Read balloon inside balloon theory attached herewith.Attachment #1: 4_New_Physics_with_Emergent_Gravity_Mechanism._1.docAttachment #2: 4_I_Think_Dr._Datta_Makes_A_Valid_Point_-_an_Astronomy_Net_Blackholes_Forum_Message22.htm

    2 months later

    That's something brand new. Past that has no beginning. Could anything have no beginning and no ending? That seems to be illogical but has a right to exist and be discussed.

    personal statement writing tips

    6 months later

    Philip

    Interesting and clearly described. I like your last remarks "painting by the numbers, don't cross the lines".

    Steve

    4 months later

    Darwinian Universal

    The nature of the interaction between space and matter, what causes gravitational acceleration? is a question forefront in people's minds. But also the nature of the universal orders we observe, atomic and cosmological structures being very non-random and articulated. I will speak briefly to these now, but please bear in mind that I can corner these considerations with diverse justifications, if you should seek to test?.

    In simplest terms. What is the nature of the interaction between space and matter? The one we are going to consider now is arguably the simplest conceptual possibility. That Tuv (matter) is embedded in, and in the business of "metabolizing" a field of Guv (space). Guv and Tuv share equality, so it would make sense in terms of an energy transfer and conversion flowing from space to matter. So A. where does this Guv energy potential originate from? and B. what is it converted into that explains atomic process? A. Space possesses a cosmological expansive property which takes its measure as Auv cosmological redshift, which enables us to speculate that space that is metabolized by matter is a renewable resource. B. Conventional theory does not attribute a cause for the work actions of the fundamental forces, so we speculate that the energy potential derived from Auv space is converted to the mechanical actions of Gluons and Photons, and both taking their measure as magnitudes of velocity C.

    Summarizing

    Cosmological Auv represents the emergence rate of a universal energy field, which is then metabolized by matter on a local basis represented by the equation Guv = Tuv, enabling the atomic mechanical actions attributed to Gluons and Photons. So this is a really simple conceptualization, and an effective test would be to ask, do the following values possess equality, Auv = Guv = Tuv? Yes they do.

    Thats so far pretty brief and simple. I've put forward a hypothesis which relies on the extraordinary equality of various universal measures as evidence. But also provides an appealing chain of cause and effect that takes us beyond the notion of photons and Gluons being fundamental force. The theory of fundamental force being that of "force without a prior cause". The idea that Gluons and Photons are energy conserved systems, which somehow perform "work" functions as by-product, is aesthetically displeasing. It ascribes to theory of causeless work, and the actions of electron bonds being good example. Electron bonds manifest a property we can appreciate at the human scale of existence, evident as the glue that binds objects together. We can directly sense these bonds as we wrap our hands around objects and apply force against them, which hold resistant against our efforts. How can their persistent resistance to your forceful actions, be described in terms other than that of "work action"? We need to move past the notion of "causeless work actions".

    In addition to this, I will briefly mention a prospective explanation for atomic and cosmological structure, order, complexity, fine tuning. The code for which is written in photon and Gluon mechanics, a product of a long standing Co-evolution between two universal elements, Auv and Tuv. Auv being a regenerative elemental field of space, and the elemental aspect of Tuv being the Photons and Gluons that form the material universe.

    This hypothesis paints Auv as a regenerative field, and it can be speculated that anything that is continually regenerative, is capable of compounding changes, evolving, advancing its physical state. Tuv (matter) also demonstrates a capacity suggestive of re-generation, in the form of quark separations that generate identical copies of themselves. Not conceptually dissimilar to biological cellular divisions, which we understand leads to compounded changes we identify as Darwinian process. The standard theory of matter synthesis holds that photons created by a big bang event will spontaneously condense and precipitate to form atoms. This prescribes a whole lot of givens without adequate explanation. Atoms are wonderfully complex articulated machines, their properties evidenced by the universe they collectively build, including the form that makes you. The "given" that you must currently except for lack of an alternative explanation, is that "this can occur purely on basis of chance". However that is no longer the case as of the realizations presented here within, that allows for compounded changes to occur, leading to ever increased levels of complexity and fine tuning, an explanation for the world around us.

    This hypothesis brings to mind a scenario whereby the universe first emerges as a simplest possible configuration field quanta, and through continual regeneration compounded changes, evolved through ever shifting circumstances that eventuated as the universe we observe. A scenario like this might not easily come to mind, however I have begun to uncover a possible interpretation which can be judged for merit. And there is a persuasive case that can be made that the structure of the universe we observe around us, is evolved optimally for a purposeful interaction between space and matter, in terms of matter being spread out across space, optimized for atmospheric interaction.

    I opened this post with a question towards the nature of the interaction between space and matter. And I wouldn't really be doing the subject justice without prescribing cause, the motivation for gravitational acceleration. The main aspect of the puzzle of gravity, that holds us all spellbound. The before mentioned prescribes a scenario whereby natures forces are mediated via Photons and Gluons, which are enabled via a process of metabolism of the Auv elemental field of space. This being the case, it informs us where the motivation for universal force originates, and how it is mediated and subsequently expressed. The conventional take is that the strong nuclear force and gravity are two independent forces or phenomenon. But that ignores the rather obvious association between the two, that Gluons are the strong nuclear force from which mass is an emergent property, and it is the mass that responds to gravitational fields. So it is basic deduction that the (strong nuclear force) (Gluons) and (Mass) are all representative of one and the same property of matter. It is Gluonic Mass that both responds to gravitational fields and also possesses the capacity to mediate force, which is expressed as gravitational acceleration. In simplest terms, Gluons mediate the force that causes gravitational acceleration. If you want to qualify this possibility, then study the similarities that are known to exist between Gluons and Photons, and ask the question (if Photons can express motion, then could it be that Gluons can also express motion via the same general mechanism as Photons?

    These associations are made trivial within the wider context of the theory I refer to as Darwinian Universal, which theorizes that the differences between Photons and Gluons are mainly that of structural complexity, from which Gluons manifest the additional emergent properties of matter, being mass, nuclear and molecular bonds, heat process etc. Gluons that form matter are evolved Photons. My contest essay, which I should have titled Darwinian Universal, elaborates beyond what I have mentioned here.

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2890

    I would like to engage this subject with the FQXi community please? I propose that my essay discussion page would be the right place to hold such a discussion, so I invite you to join me there please? Nobody would stumble across it otherwise, so I'll sprinkle a couple of these invitations around the forum. Please keep in mind that I will only be notified of your reply, if you post at my essay page.

    Thank you kindly for your considerations

    Steve

    Darwinian Universal

    I'm very pleased with the reviews my essay received, and for the community score that tallied. However I havent engaged with the community in discussions about it yet, either in a sense that might test it or allow me to elaborate further. I have added a post to my essay thread titled Darwinian Universal, which presents an explanation for why the concept of fundamental forces is flawed, in terms of being considered an energy conserving system which undertakes perpetual work effort. Electron bond persistency in binding matter for example. Having framed it in terms of what conventional approach is conceptually missing, I then present a solution in terms of my concept. That the question of what the nature of the interaction is that exists between space and matter that would marry quantum mechanics and general relativity, is the same question as "what is the prior cause for the fundamental forces that enables their work effort?. I propose that photon and gluon activity is the product of the interaction with space, and this is why the terms of Guv and Tuv share equality. Its an energy transfer and conversion. So matter being in the business of consuming an elemental field of space that enables photon activity, dictating the rate of causality which we interpret as time. This is how it corresponds to the theory of spacetime.

    This raises the question, if space is a resource matter is dependent on to maintain activity, then how can the resource remain persistent over time. Why is it not finite and subject to depletion? Auv cosmological emergence of space to the rescue. I cannot present the physics that would answer the how of Auv's continual emergence, but I can point to the observation and values attributed to its emergence, and the equality they share with universal values of Guv and Tuv. That their equality is highly suggestive they share a relationship that is causal. That Auv is a renewable resource which enables photon activity, and that Auv and Tuv are both elements of a universal system that allows for compounded changes and evolved purposeful structure and complexities to emerge. That all the activities on both atomic and cosmological scales, are evolved and optimized for their reason for existence, which is for efficiency of interaction between the Auv elemental field of space, and Tuv matter.

    This theory prescribes cause, purpose and meanings to aspects of the world where there has been nothing of the sort presented before. I would like the opportunity to demonstrate to people that this concept is deserving of discussion. Are you willing to join me please and help me kick it off? I will be holding the discussion on my essay page thread.

    http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2890

    Thank you for your consideration

    Kind regards

    Steven Andresen

      Give nature an energy potential and it will invent a Darwinian circumstance of emergence. Take early oceanic life for example, algae invented a way to exploit the suns energy in a process known as Photosynthesis, which then founded the base of a food chain that blossomed through a diversified range of organisms of increasing levels of character and complexity. Krill that eat the algae, in turn eaten by small fish, eaten by bigger fish and squid, eaten by tuna, sharks, birds, dolphins and whales.

      Auv cosmological emergence is a like circumstance of Darwinian emergence, as a result of an as yet unidentified natural energy potential. Like the algae, this Auv elemental field of space foundations the base of a system that has compounded ever higher levels of universal order and complexity, in the form of atomic and cosmological structure. This is how elaborate Gluon and photon characteristics have emerged in the universe, and the circumstance whereby their activity is enabled by a metabolism of an Auv elemental field of space.