Here is an analogy for gravitation
Gravitation has been redefined as space-time curvature by Einstein.
For instance, the sun stretches its surrounding space-time just as a child stretches the fabric of a trampoline.
The earth is then guided by the sun's space-time curvature as a marble would be by the trampoline's curvature provided the marble is given appropriate speed.
Even though colorful this analogy doesn't fit the reality of the solar system.
Both child and marble make physical contact with the trampoline's material fabric.
By contrast sun and earth are in contact with no material fabric at all. How could there be any interaction between non-material space-time (having no material body) and material mass?
In the analogy is a clue that is used next as a guide
The child, the marble and the trampoline are all of same nature; all are physical all made of matter or material mass.
In the solar system though, while the sun and earth are material, space-time is instead immaterial.
The clue retained here is that the elements at play, in order to interfere, cannot be of disparate constitutions.
Or, in order to interfere among them, the elements at play in the solar system must have identical constitutions.
Introducing the physical fabric that is behind the word gravity and behind its mathematics.
While science's mathematics, which fits reality, remains unquestionable, the following departs drastically from conventional thinking or the language that goes alongside the mathematics.
And to support the following unconventional thinking is this Albert Einstein's saying:
"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them."
- The question is: what is gravitation?
Or specifically: what physical entity constitutes gravitation?
- To start with let's state that motion is a physical entity, a fact shunned by science
In science Motion is relative and that infers that motion is elusive or that it is not a physical entity, as force is for instance.
Motion is an entity as real as matter though. While motion is not material as matter is, motion is physical and occurs just as matter exists.
Dear reader please acknowledge that motion is a physical entity.
You might think: "But I know that"! Then good for you, just continue...
Yet in case you're not convinced, overlap this line with your mouse cursor and read: motion is physical all right.
Here is physical proof that motion is a physical entity of its own:
Consider light; physicists teach us that light has no mass. Light which moves itself across space and which has no mass is pure motion.
Motion, in that specific embodiment that is light, is a physical entity alright.
- Observation of the gravitation phenomenon
Take your pencil, lift it above the table and release it; thanks to earth's gravity it falls or gets into motion.
- The nature of gravitation is motion
Taking in account the trampoline analogy, which states that interacting entities must be of same constitution, because Earth's gravity provides the pen's motion, Earth's gravity is made of physical motion.
As a general rule any gravitation, in this new interpretation, is physical motion; and that part of physical motion extern to the body of matter, that in case of Earth is extending from its surface to at least the moon, is considered here to be part of the material body.
Gravitation, interpreted as being physical motion, and as such relabeled gravimotion, fits all aspects of falling objects, while not questioning physics mathematics.
- You might argue that while standing still on earth you are not falling, or not in motion
Yet while standing on earth, it is reasonable to state that without the ground right there you would be falling farther down. The feeling you have under your feet while standing up instead of being labeled force can be labeled restrained motion.
And science's equation force = mass x acceleration precisely states that that force you are feeling under your feet (on the left of the equal "=" sign) is (on the right side of the equal "=" sign) motion, as acceleration is motion added to motion.
- A new interpretation of gravitation
As a consequence gravimotion departs greatly from science's two conventional interpretations of gravitation that are: force and space-time curvature; earth's gravimotion instead interacts directly with the pencil's own gravimotion through overlap with no intermediary whatsoever.
Note that Einstein's space-time and its curvature are already departing from the concept of force, and that that space-time curvature could be interpreted as being motion.
For such interaction to occur, 2 distinct yet overlapping motions, such as Earth's and Sun's gravitations/motions or earth's and pencils gravitations/motions must interact.
And that happens to be factual as demonstrated in science.
Here are 3 examples of motion interacting on motion
- Einstein famous "time dilation concept" is used as first witness.
Time dilation, and that has been verified experimentally, coincides to the slowing down of a clock when that clock overall motion is increased (in a plane for instance).
In that experiment physicists claim that time is slowed down. Yet that is misinterpreting reality.
A pragmatic mind may instead state that the clocks' internal motion mechanism is slowed down by the clock's overall motion.
- Another example of motion interacting on motion is the Coriolis effect.
In this case earth's spin motion interacts with the motion of storms moving from equator to pole, through difference of pressure.
The spin of earth creates a swirling effect that transforms the storms into cyclones.
- A third case of motion interacting on motion is Einstien's demonstration that gravity (convergent motion in gravimotion) deflects light rays (pure linear motion in gravimotion).
All in all, gravitation is physically made of that physical entity called motion; and Einstein physical constitution of space-time maybe interpreted as being made of motion.
As already mentioned, note that the force of gravity is mathematically equivalent to an acceleration in science; because acceleration is motion added to motion, the claim that gravitation is motion is in compliance with science's theory.
Granted, it's not easy to give up the concept of force; and do not be fooled, it is still anchored in my own mind.
Once more though Einstein helped me a lot, first in convincing myself about my own ideas and then in writing about gravimotion, he said: "It is harder to crack prejudice than an atom."
Gravimotion and physics...
The idea behind gravimotion is not to challenge physics' mathematical theories.
On the other hand gravimotion's interpretation of Nature challenges the conventional interpretations made of physics mathematics.
In order to emphasize the distinction, consider that gravimotion is a non-conventional interpretation of Nature, nevertheless based on physics' mathematics.
The ultimate goal is to propose ideas that describes Nature in a way that makes sense, while definitely not to challenge physics mathematics.
At the core of gravimotion is a new definition of motion.
In science motion is relative; yet, when one reads attentively Einstein's writings, one finds instead that it is the observation of motion that is relative.
Motion, per se, cannot be defined as being relative; and motion is not referred to reference systems in gravimotion, as it is for science's relative speed.
Motion in gravimotion is expressed in terms-of (in fractions-of) motion of light.
Unlike the alleged relativity of motion (actually motion observation), the reality of motion is independent of any reference system that we human need to associate to any observation in order to represent reality with mathematics.
In short relativity concerns physically the observation of motion and does not apply to (is not a characteristic of) motion per se.
And because the observation of motion is as real as the reality of motion the relativity theory holds true.
By the way, this alleged relativity of motion may very likely be the reason for which gravity being interpreted as motion has, up to this day, been overlooked by all; as relative motion cannot be imagined as being a physical entity.
In gravimotion we make abstraction of the abstract in favor of the physical.
Somehow one's mind to start with is reluctant to the idea that motion is what makes the pencil fall...
That can't be! That's too simple! There is no force in motion! It goes against physics fundamental tenets etc...
Yet I ask the question: why does one's mind consider not motion that one's eyes see?
Why does one's mind imagines this complex chain of events: the earth's (inert) mass creates (mysteriously) a (dynamic) force (or space-time curvature), and that force (or space time curvature), which is applied (in a mysterious way) to the pencil's mass moves the pencil's mass?
When one can simply think that some type of motion surrounds the earth that controls the very motion of the pencil.
A great difficulty for newcomers to gravimotion is to integrate our human concept of force into this new definition of motion; a fact yet embodied in Newton's first law: an object in uniform motion represents a force when hitting an obstacle at rest.
A great advantage of this new gravimotion interpretation is that it unifies under one single reality of motion all those mental concepts of ours that are: acceleration, force, gravity, space-time and space and time.
This author favors to base its own description of gravitation on the tangible entity of motion rather than on hypothetical space, time and alleged curvature and force.
First gravimotion is bringing back into the physical world the explanation of gravitation, then and at same time gravimotion overwhelmingly simplifies that explanation.
This page is like the tip of an iceberg; in gravimotion far many more human traditional concepts are, as just done for gravitation, turned downside-up into motion...
Return to top of page