I have to complain about the law of gravity because I think something wrong is with it. And when I say wrong, I mean it isn't fully correct. I think I have a better way of explaining gravity. Newton said that gravity is a force that attracts other masses to each other. I have a better definition for gravity.

Note: This is not a theroy; this is a attemped complaint against a well known law of physics. Also, I am not planning to disprove the other part of gravity in Einstien's Relativity.

Now we all know the Earth rotates. This is because an centripetal force is acting on it. Like all masses, it has inertia, so it is trying to resist motion.

Now if you have been to a carnival, you might have been to a ride where you were pulled back against the wall because the whole ride was spinning very fast. That is because the ride created a centrifugal force that creates artificial, or simulated gravity, which makes you pulled back against the wall like it was gravity.

Well, the Earth does the same thing; it is creating a centrifugal force, which is actually its inertia while it is spinning, and while in orbit probably; but mostly spinning. Since it spins so fast, it creates a centrifugal force that creates artificial gravity. With that artificial gravity, everything within the earth is pulled down to the ground because the Earth created the centrifugal force to produce the artificial gravity.

As for other planets and the moon, it would depend on the spin rate of the planet and the moon. For example, the moon rotates once per orbit, which is why the "simulated gravity" is weak on the moon. Supposedly, the "simulated gravity" on Venus would be extremely weak because it rotates longer than its
year; 243 earth days.

This probably better explains things like why we are sent in the opposite direction when we try to push on something in space and why we are not like that on earth.

So I conclude, that it is not attraction, but centripetal and centrifugal forces that cause graivty.

Like I said, this is just a attempted complaint against gravity, nothing more.

Any comments, criticism, objections and thoughts are welcome.

Venus' gravity is only minorly lower than our own, and thus this would seem to disprove your theory fully. Not to mention that the moon also takes extremely long to rotate but only has a fifth of our gravity

Okay, why are you still referring to gravity? I said artifical-simulated gravity! I mentioned nothing of mass producing gravity and did not say that mass was anything important in my theory. Plus I would of said mass is meaningless because it is the centrifugal force or inertia that is creating artifical gravity to pull us down! Got an excuse?

Hum,
i agree - it`s not a "theroy".

Oops, I made a mistake in the works. I have to show the complaint again with new additions.

*=new addition

Now we all know the Earth rotates. This is because an centripetal force is acting on it. Like all masses, it has inertia, so it is trying to resist motion.

Now if you have been to a carnival, you might have been to a ride where you were pulled back against the wall because the whole ride was spinning very fast. That is because the ride created *a centripetal force towards the ride, while a centrifugal force tries to push you outward.* That creates artificial, or simulated gravity, which makes you pulled back against the wall like it was gravity.

Well, the Earth does the same thing; it is creating a centrifugal force, which is actually its inertia while it is spinning, and while in orbit probably; but mostly spinning. Since it spins so fast, it creates a centrifugal force that creates artificial gravity. With that artificial gravity, everything within the earth is pulled down to the ground because the Earth created the centrifugal force to produce the artificial gravity.

*In the process, the Earth while it spins produces an centripetal force pulling things inward toward the center of the earth. In return, a reaction force, called inertia or centrifugal force pushes you out of the center of the earth just like the sensation you felt on that carnival ride I told you about. Therefore, "simuated gravity", which, in return, creates gravity, is created.*

As for other planets and the moon, *the gravity, or "simulated gravity" would depend on the how fast the planet and the moon rotate.* For example, the moon rotates once per orbit, which is why the "simulated gravity" is weak on the moon. Supposedly, the "simulated gravity" on Venus would be extremely weak because it rotates longer than its year; 243 earth days. *The faster the
planet rotates, the stronger the "simulated gravity". Inversley, the slower the planet rotates, the weaker the "simulated gravity".*

This probably better explains things like why we are sent in the opposite direction when we try to push on something in space and why we are not like that on earth.

How is this now?

Not much better.

Is your "simulated gravity" supposed to correlate with actual gravity in any way?

Actual gravity is caused by mass, not rotation.

Oops, I made a mistake in the works. I have to show the complaint again with new additions.

*=new addition

Now we all know the Earth rotates. This is because an centripetal force is acting on it. Like all masses, it has inertia, so it is trying to resist motion.

Now if you have been to a carnival, you might have been to a ride where you were pulled back against the wall because the whole ride was spinning very fast. That is because the ride created *a centripetal force towards the ride, while a centrifugal force tries to push you outward.* That creates artificial, or simulated gravity, which makes you pulled back against the wall like it was gravity.

Well, the Earth does the same thing; it is creating a centrifugal force, which is actually its inertia while it is spinning, and while in orbit probably; but mostly spinning. Since it spins so fast, it creates a centrifugal force that creates artificial gravity. With that artificial gravity, everything within the earth is pulled down to the ground because the Earth created the centrifugal force to produce the artificial gravity.

*In the process, the Earth while it spins produces an centripetal force pulling things inward toward the center of the earth. In return, a reaction force, called inertia or centrifugal force pushes you out of the center of the earth just like the sensation you felt on that carnival ride I told you about. Therefore, "simuated gravity", which, in return, creates gravity, is created.*

As for other planets and the moon, *the gravity, or "simulated gravity" would depend on the how fast the planet and the moon rotate.* For example, the moon rotates once per orbit, which is why the "simulated gravity" is weak on the moon. Supposedly, the "simulated gravity" on Venus would be extremely weak because it rotates longer than its year; 243 earth days. *The faster the
planet rotates, the stronger the "simulated gravity". Inversley, the slower the planet rotates, the weaker the "simulated gravity".*

This probably better explains things like why we are sent in the opposite direction when we try to push on something in space and why we are not like that on earth.

How is this now?

Bad logic, I'm afraid. It does not match reality at all. Just as in your carnival ride example - which IS valid - the force created by the rotating Earth is attempting to force us away from it. That force is counter to gravity instead of creating it.

Okay, I was referring to centripetal force, which produces artificial gravity. Let me explain.

Imagine that you are in space, where you are inside a spaceship and you drop a book; it just floats. Now say the spaceship starts rotating. The ship produces a centripetal force, which is a "center seeking" force pulling you towards the walls of the ship as if you had weight, along with the ball. The effects are called artificial gravity.

This is, in my complaint, why the earth spins; if the earth did not spin, there would be no centripetal force, so you would just float. Since it spins, you experience artifical gravity. The centripetal force directs things towards the center of the earth downwards while inertia (centrifugal force) directs things upwards in the radically outward direction.

Like I said, this is only a complaint (It's not like I am trying to replace our understanding of gravity).

Does this make sense? If not, does anything in my complaint sound reasonable?

Okay, I was referring to centripetal force, which produces artificial gravity. Let me explain.

Imagine that you are in space, where you are inside a spaceship and you drop a book; it just floats. Now say the spaceship starts rotating. The ship produces a centripetal force, which is a "center seeking" force pulling you towards the walls of the ship as if you had weight, along with the ball. The effects are called artificial gravity.

This is, in my complaint, why the earth spins; if the earth did not spin, there would be no centripetal force, so you would just float. Since it spins, you experience artifical gravity. The centripetal force directs things towards the center of the earth downwards while inertia (centrifugal force) directs things upwards in the radically outward direction.

Like I said, this is only a complaint (It's not like I am trying to replace our understanding of gravity).

Does this make sense? If not, does anything in my complaint sound reasonable?

No, sorry, Granron. You are looking at it exactly backwards. Centripetal force does not send you toward the walls, that's centrifugal force - and it opposes gravity. Consider this: although our actual mass would remain the same, our weight would increase slightly if the Earth did not rotate. In fact, if you weighed yourself at the equator and did it again near the poles (where there is much less rotational effect), you'd find you weigh less at the poles.

I gather that you don't yet have a good grasp of angular rotation. I don't mean that as an insult at all as many people don't quite understand it. It would help you considerably if you looked up that term and studied it.

Actually there is no such force as centrifugal force. It is just Newton's first law of an object trying to keep going in a straight line.

My question is, if an object's gravity is caused by it's spin, because of centripetal or 'centrifugal' force, whichever you were referring to, how does an object create a gravitational field which would bend the path of light??

I'm sure that if you could explain this everyone here would believe your theory.

Earth, like any other object, is actually a complete "magnet", composed of many small bipolar "particles". Because of the two equal aspects of magnetism, the planets cannot remain steady, so they start to rotate synchronically and generate a seemingly only attracting force: "gravity". The entire galaxy rotates harmonically because of magnetism.

James, I do have a good grasp of angular rotation (in fact, I have been looking around on the internet for those things). It's just that I can't explain my complaint well when we have a understanding of circular forces that makes it harrd for me to do this.

Well, it doesn't matter. This was just a complaint; and I tried. Go ahead and believe what you want to believe.

James, I do have a good grasp of angular rotation (in fact, I have been looking around on the internet for those things). It's just that I can't explain my complaint well when we have a understanding of circular forces that makes it harrd for me to do this.

Well, it doesn't matter. This was just a complaint; and I tried. Go ahead and believe what you want to believe.

Ok maybe this will clear things up a little bit: In the carnival ride you're talking about what is actually happening is the wall is constantly changing our direction of velocity. In uniform circular motion the velocity is always tangential to the path. So basically the centripetal acceleration is the changing of direction of our velocity vector (if there's no rotational acceleration). The force you feel is the normal force of the wall on you -- this is the force changing your direction of velocity. There is no centrifugal force outwards -- it is just what we intuitively feel. We as people interpret the normal force as us flying outwards.

In the earth example you can think of it as we're always falling toward the center of the earth. In fact if you find the gravitational force using Newton's law of gravitation, you can get a number closer to the actual value at your point on earth by factoring in the rotation of the earth. It causes gravity to be less -- not more.

Now we all know the Earth rotates. This is because an centripetal force is acting on it. Like all masses, it has inertia, so it is trying to resist motion.
I think there is a fundamental problem with the above quote.
Inertia is not so much resisting motion it is more about resisting changes to motion.

If I am correct this may be at the very heart of the claim of rotattion causing gravity.
Once the earth started to spin in a vacuum it reqires no further energy to maintain that rotation . it's inertia could be suggested as being the energy needed to stop it's spin and not the spin itself.

Then again I am not all that versed in physics so if i am wrong please someone correct me.

You see the problem about using circular motion to determine gravitational pull??

Motion is relative, what if it wasn't the earth that was spinning around but the rest of the universe rotating around it?? What's going to happen? Do we get dragged off the surface of the earth and torn apart by the tidal forces of all the gravitational fields acting in all directions??