DIY experiment proving graviton is a particle

[philippeb8]

So the lack of evidence is the evidence?

It is common sense gravitons will lose energy because the subjected atoms will gain kinetic energy by being pulled in the opposite direction of the gravitons.

Also it is common sense the spacetime curvature is nonsense because I already proved you do not need to bend spacetime to explain the light bending or the perihelion precession.

 

[Crossbow]

Just because some experiments are null doesn't mean it refutes gravitational sheilding, I just means the gravitons are losing a lesser amount of energy.

This experiment can also be done repeatedly in a 12h cycle where the actual shield is the Earth itself but during the night.

I already discovered that 2 errors canceled each other in the particles accelerator so I'll have to review what has been done on the gravitational shielding already. Hopefully this won't date back to the 19th century...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So what is your evidence that Gravitons actually exist?

After all, Gravitons have never actually been seen or detected.

 

[philippeb8]

So what is your evidence that Gravitons actually exist?

After all, Gravitons have never actually been seen or detected.

That actually proves we cannot rely on the mainstream scientists.

I also did asked for assistance for my ISS experiment and they all ignored my request even if it is obvious.

So there you go. What more evidence do you need?

 

[Steve]

If someone was actually to use their iphone as proposed to complete this simple DIY experiment the speculation and discussion here would be redundant. Anyone game?

 

[Andy_Ross]

It is common sense gravitons will lose energy because the subjected atoms will gain kinetic energy by being pulled in the opposite direction of the gravitons.

Also it is common sense the spacetime curvature is nonsense because I already proved you do not need to bend spacetime to explain the light bending or the perihelion precession.

Claims without evidence.

 

[Andy_Ross]

That actually proves we cannot rely on the mainstream scientists.

I also did asked for assistance for my ISS experiment and they all ignored my request even if it is obvious.

So there you go. What more evidence do you need?

Again the lack of evidence is the evidence?

 

[Andy_Ross]

If someone was actually to use their iphone as proposed to complete this simple DIY experiment the speculation and discussion here would be redundant. Anyone game?

Do you think an iPhone would be sensitive enough?

 

[hecd2]

Do you think an iPhone would be sensitive enough?

No, by several orders of magnitude.

 

[Crossbow]

That actually proves we cannot rely on the mainstream scientists.

I also did asked for assistance for my ISS experiment and they all ignored my request even if it is obvious.

So there you go. What more evidence do you need?

So then you do not have any evidence that Gravitons exist.

As for me, I seriously doubted that you had any real evidence for the existence of Gravitons and now you have admitted that you do not have any evidence for the existence of Gravitons.

And since you cannot even show that Gravitons exist, then you cannot show some of the other things that you were discussing such as showing that Gravitons are particles and that the Moon can at least partially shield the Earth from Gravitons that are produced by the Sun.

Well now, ...

If you acted the same to the ISS scientists as you do here, then I expect that they soon figured out that your ideas are quite incorrect (to say the least) and that is why they ignored your request.

By the way, if mainstream scientists are so very wrong as you like to claim, then there would not be any ISS scientists for you to talk to and you would not have a computer to post your various ideas.

 

[Steve]

Do you think an iPhone would be sensitive enough?

Hey, it's not my experiment:

I didn't do the experiment yet but just to have an overview:

- Sun's g: G*1.9885e30/(1496e8^2)/9.8 = 6e-4
- Moon's g: G*7.342e22/(384400000^2)/9.8 = 3.38e-6

The iPhone's gravimeter is precise enough to go down to these orders of magnitude. You just need to go in some desert to eliminate any interference.

 

[philippeb8]

So then you do not have any evidence that Gravitons exist.

As for me, I seriously doubted that you had any real evidence for the existence of Gravitons and now you have admitted that you do not have any evidence for the existence of Gravitons.

And since you cannot even show that Gravitons exist, then you cannot show some of the other things that you were discussing such as showing that Gravitons are particles and that the Moon can at least partially shield the Earth from Gravitons that are produced by the Sun.

Others seem to understand the concept I am proposing already.

Well now, ...

If you acted the same to the ISS scientists as you do here, then I expect that they soon figured out that your ideas are quite incorrect (to say the least) and that is why they ignored your request.

By the way, if mainstream scientists are so very wrong as you like to claim, then there would not be any ISS scientists for you to talk to and you would not have a computer to post your various ideas.

You're mixing up astrophysicists and general physicists. I'm referring to theoretical astrophysicist mainly. The problem with them is they like to confuse people and to refer themselves as scientists but they are really a subbranch of science.

 

[Andy_Ross]

No, by several orders of magnitude.

to say the least!

 

[philippeb8]

to say the least!

Ok so based on the Solar and Lunar tides, I'm sure there's a way to measure that as well:
https://moon.nasa.gov/moon-in-motion/tides/

It's just a matter of knowing if it is precise enough or not.

 

[philippeb8]

Ok so based on the Solar and Lunar tides, I'm sure there's a way to measure that as well:
https://moon.nasa.gov/moon-in-motion/tides/

It's just a matter of knowing if it is precise enough or not.

Alright I will calculate the expected energy loss by the gravitons and come back. It's easier this way.

 

[cjameshuff]

If gravity were a particle-object interaction, it would have to travel faster than light and that goes against the basic laws of physics.

This is no more an issue for gravity than it is for electromagnetic fields. No FTL travel is required.

Intervening matter won't "absorb energy from the gravitons" any more than it absorbs energy from the virtual photons mediating the electromagnetic force. This happening would break conservation of energy, objects would heat up just from being in a gravitational field (or an electrostatic one, or a magnetic one). These aren't "real" particles, and don't have the usual relationship with mass-energy. There isn't anything to absorb.

 

[philippeb8]

This is no more an issue for gravity than it is for electromagnetic fields. No FTL travel is required.

Intervening matter won't "absorb energy from the gravitons" any more than it absorbs energy from the virtual photons mediating the electromagnetic force. This happening would break conservation of energy, objects would heat up just from being in a gravitational field (or an electrostatic one, or a magnetic one). These aren't "real" particles, and don't have the usual relationship with mass-energy. There isn't anything to absorb.

Thanks for the explanation but gaining kinetic energy doesn't mean heating up.

Also GR already breaks the conservation of energy with the gravitational redshift, whereas Finite Theory doesn't.

 

[ynot]

So what is your evidence that Gravitons actually exist?

After all, Gravitons have never actually been seen or detected.

Wonder if magnets have magnetons?

 

[wollery]

You're mixing up astrophysicists and general physicists. I'm referring to theoretical astrophysicist mainly. The problem with them is they like to confuse people and to refer themselves as scientists but they are really a subbranch of science.

That statement makes no sense. All scientists are in a subbranch of science.

 

[wollery]

Thanks for the explanation but gaining kinetic energy doesn't mean heating up.

If it's happening to individual particles, then it does mean exactly that.

 

[catsmate]

It is common sense gravitons will lose energy because the subjected atoms will gain kinetic energy by being pulled in the opposite direction of the gravitons.

Also it is common sense the spacetime curvature is nonsense because I already proved you do not need to bend spacetime to explain the light bending or the perihelion precession.

Oh good grief.......

It is if somebody's covering up.

I'm sure the thread is heading in that direction.