NASA discovers brand new force of nature

Plenty of animals on earth defy the laws the gravity. Be it walking up walls or lifting 1000's of times their own body weight. They do this by evolutionary means. So if animals can defy gravity then why can't spacetime?

So I propose whatever slowed those probes down has to do with billions of years of evolution. The universe evolves just like we do. I also support the living Universe theory. I see no difference between a virus living in a host and us living in the Universe. If life came from a big bang then what caused that big bang has to be life itself.

Life can't come from non life. When the big bang happened, something was alive to create life. Be it a being or a protein of some sort.

Try mixing up a test tube baby without starting with life as we know it. It can't be done! If it was done then that's called a robot or a sentient android. It will never be called life unless it can reproduce naturally. And when machines start to reproduce naturally then the human species is all in danger.

Originally posted by sandmannc40
Maybe Gravity is a stronger force than currently believed.

Or maybe gravity is junk science. Again, what we see in spacetime makes up 2% of the known Universe. That's according to the leading scientist. Who knows what this other 98% is doing? If we can defy gravity by manipulating spacetime through warp drives and whatnots, then that means the Universe is a solar construct created by humankind. It would mean we have absolutely know idea how it all works.

Heck, a few hundred years ago we believe the universe was a celestial sphere.

Put it like this...

If we can manipulate spacetime then that means the universe has no control over it's own existence. And that's a scary thought to me. That would mean any being in the universe can destroy the universe.

This is why I believe it's a living thing.

reply to post by Come Clean

Spiders walking on wall, birds flying, ants lifting "great" weights are not defying the laws of gravity and more than you are when you jump a few inches off the ground. They are obeying the laws of physics just as you are.

If that spider lifts it's legs (which have adhesive properties) off the wall, it wall fall. If a bird tucks it wings, it will fall. An ant isn't magically making its load lighter, it's using mechanical advantage (Try using a lever sometime. Are you "defying the laws of gravity" when you lift several hundred pounds with one?)

Put two rocks in a box then let them sit for 15 billion years. When you open it up after 15 billion years all you would find is two rocks.

Life can't come from non life!

reply to post by Phage


Phage, a ant with adhesive properties is trying to defy the laws of gravity correct?

Gravity is preventing this ant from doing what it needs to do to survive correct? That adhesive property is a mechanism for this ant to defy the laws of gravity in order for it to continue it's existence.

reply to post by Come Clean

The "laws of gravity" say that there is a force between two masses which is proportional to their mass and inversely proportional to the square of their distance.

Tell me how an ant is defying that. Are you claiming that an ant is reducing or eliminating that force? I would like to see some evidence of that.

And I guarantee you this. If gravity increased on Earth by threefold then we would all be stronger in 200 years. We will defy gravity and continue to exist.

Gravity just might be what we call anti-matter. Anti matter tries to destroy regular matter all the time.

reply to post by Phage


Tell me how you know how everything in the Universe works? If you believe in evolution then you must understand all things will do what it needs to do to survive. So if an ant walks up walls then it's doing what it needs to survive. Why can't we walk up walks? Why don't we have adhesive properties? Why don't all animals have adhesive properties?

Why would a lizard evolve into the point where it can walk on water? It needs to defy the laws of gravity so it can survive. I can't walk on water. Can you? Is there a need for you to walk on water? Once we require a need then humans will have web feet. That I gurantee you. Why? Because we would need a mechanism to defy the laws of gravity.

I suspect that this new phenomena ties in with something that was reported several years ago with Earth-orbiting probes that were recovered. The report said that for some mysterious reason the devices had lost mass during their journey.

I recall nothing more about the details, source or publication. So consider that rememberance with caution. Actually, I believe it was before the internet! It may have been something an old flying saucer rag. There was a writer/publisher named Ray Palmer that thought nothing of creating crap out of thin air to sell to us impressionable teenagers if it produced sales of his materials.

much moore possible it would be to say that the space-crafts velocity is to low to escape the gravity-pull from the sun...

the idea that... how farther away the lesser force could be wrong....and should be reconsiddert.

Originally posted by Come Clean
Put two rocks in a box then let them sit for 15 billion years. When you open it up after 15 billion years all you would find is two rocks.

Life can't come from non life!

Then how did we get here?

I am curious, as well, for the rest of the forum. I have asked many times, but don't really ever seem to get a response:

What is the temporal effect you would expect when an item is placed in "deep space", where there is less time dilation from surrounding stars?

reply to post by Come Clean

I don't know how everything works. For example, I don't know why the Pioneer spacecraft slowed down. But I do know gravity works, at least at the level that matters to us.

We can't walk up walls because we don't have tiny hairs on bottom of our feet. The lizard did not evolve the ability to "walk on water" (actually they have to run for it to work and it has more to do with surface tension that it does with gravity) because it "needed to". At some point the the process there was a mutation that allowed it to and that turned out to be pretty handy. But I don't see what evolution has to do with anything you are claiming.

You are talking about something changing the "laws of gravity" to suit its purposes. Spiders do not change them. Ants don't change them. Lizards don't change them. You have not provided an example of anything that can change the laws of physics.

If you look at the bottom of the food chain then most of those creatures can defy gravity by walking up walls. Why? Because if flies can't climb walls then frogs would all be fat. And there would be no flies.

Everytime we send a shuttle into space we are defying gravity. Humans don't like gravity. Gravity keeps us in our place. Gravity just might be the real boogeyman in all this.

So if anything I agree with all the gravity people. Somehow gravity doesn't want those probes to keep going.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


That's the trillion dollar question. I just don't know how life can come from non life. It all goes back to science vs religion.

Neither can explain how something came from nothing.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


How big is the item we placed into space? Is it probe sized or Jupiter sized? If I placed a probe sized object into space then it won't have any effect. The engery of that probe was subtracted from the energy of Earth.

It all equals out in the end.

reply to post by Phage


do you remember the NASA teather incident?
there was a miscalculation of how much energy it would induce and this overcharged state
caused a short circut at the base of the teather
now this level of induced voltage was proberly because of a localized electro-magnetic feild
surrounding earth
on a smaller scale when the probes were in orbit around charged planets they gathered a charge themselfs
this charge stabilized with the avaliable amount of energy in the surrounding envionment
as these probes left there slingshot orbits they encountered large amounts of charged particals
because of the stored surface charge they caused an aligning of the charged particals in space they encountered
this provided the probes with a soft of self induced ionic wind that is bearly percepable
as the probe travels and aligns these particals they strip a very small amount of charge from the probes surface charge
over time as the surface charge depleates and the particals the probe encounters become more spaced out the effect of the ionic wind is deminished
this causes the perceptable slow down we are witnessing

this is a theory that should still allow for the slow down without breaking any known laws (i think)

what do you think ?

xploder

reply to post by XPLodER

There is no question about what caused the current in the tether, it was what the whole experiment was about. It was the same thing that makes an electrical generator work. Move a long electrical conductor (the tether) through a magnetic field (the Earth's) and you get an electrical current. The tether did not build up a static charge (which is what you are talking about) an electrical current flowed through the tether.

The probes are not long electrical conductors. The magnetic field of the Sun is very inconstant. There is no appreciable current induced in the spacecraft.

The solar wind is composed of charged particles but particles of both positive and negative charges. Being exposed to the solar wind produces no net charge, it is electrically neutral.

The magnitude of the anomaly remained constant from 20AU from the Sun to 70AU from the sun. There was no change in the amount of acceleration over time or distance from the Sun.

reply to post by Phage


thank you for responding to my question
i only have 1 question about your answer/statement
quote"The probes are not long electrical conductors. The magnetic field of the Sun is very inconstant. There is no appreciable current induced in the spacecraft. "end quote

i think it was zorgon who provided me with a picture of a electrical strike from charged orbiting bodies

credit to zorgon



there may be a charge build up even in satalites
speculation from me

reply to post by XPLodER

Did Zorgon provide you with the source of the image? He can be kind of funny about doing that, he enjoys his little "secrets". I can't locate it and it's difficult to tell exactly what is seen in it.

I would think that if that panel is from a satellite, the damage seen is the result of a micrometeor rather than an induced current. The impact causes the release of charge separated plasma. That plasma can create a current which is probably what overloaded the panel. It's a completely different effect and does not result in a charge being built up in the satellite, the charge is in the plasma. There are thousands of satellites with thousands of solar panels up there. If movement through the magnetosphere produced charges in them which damaged their systems, they would not be as reliable as they are.

And again, there was an electrical current produced in the tether. That is not the same thing as an electrical charge.