The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.

 [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
 you do not have a mind, forget it.]

Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity.
That is its only quality. (Therefore
it can travel inside the Sun without
being destroyed.) Now...

This ping-pong ball is approaching
the surface of the Sun. As it does so
the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
increases on the ping-pong ball.

  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
  the ping-pong ball will be at its
  maximum.]

The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
will begin to decrease.

  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
  travels closer and closer to the center
  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
  that there will be a growing amount of
  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
center of a great hollow).

     Conclusions from the above
         thought experiment:

There is either a huge cavity at the center
of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
therein where there isn't as much Sun-
matter as there must be surrounding it.
According to the current laws of gravity.

However, current theory says that the center
of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
fact: It is at the center of every star that the
fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
place--exactly because this is the region of
the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

 These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximun
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.  *

Which is it? SEE:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...


.

Aardvark wrote:
>   The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.
> 
>  [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
>  you do not have a mind, forget it.]
> 
> Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
> which is only affected by gravity.
> That is its only quality. (Therefore
> it can travel inside the Sun without
> being destroyed.) Now...
> 
> This ping-pong ball is approaching
> the surface of the Sun. As it does so
> the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
> increases on the ping-pong ball.
> 
>   [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>   the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>   the ping-pong ball will be at its
>   maximum.]
> 
> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> will begin to decrease.
> 
>   [This is because as the ping-pong ball
>   travels closer and closer to the center
>   of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
>   ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
>   that there will be a growing amount of
>   Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
> 
> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> center of a great hollow).

   You must have assume friction on your magic pink ping=pong ball.


> 
>      Conclusions from the above
>          thought experiment:
>


   This next paragraph is without merit.

> There is either a huge cavity at the center
> of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
> therein where there isn't as much Sun-
> matter as there must be surrounding it.
> According to the current laws of gravity.

   Nope.


> 
> However, current theory says that the center
> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
> the greatest amount of pressure exists. 

   And highest density and temperature.



In
> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> place--exactly because this is the region of
> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

   Because the temperature pressure and density are high
   enough for fusion reactions to take place.

On Oct 7, 6:34 pm, Aardvark  wrote:
>   The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.
>
>  [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
>  you do not have a mind, forget it.]
>
> Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
> which is only affected by gravity.
> That is its only quality. (Therefore
> it can travel inside the Sun without
> being destroyed.) Now...
>
> This ping-pong ball is approaching
> the surface of the Sun. As it does so
> the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
> increases on the ping-pong ball.
>
>   [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>   the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>   the ping-pong ball will be at its
>   maximum.]
>
> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> will begin to decrease.
>
>   [This is because as the ping-pong ball
>   travels closer and closer to the center
>   of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
>   ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
>   that there will be a growing amount of
>   Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
jr writes
Your entire thought conjecture is far worse than Einstein's thought
conjectures.  The ping pong ball cannot be. And if it were the
pressure of the mass it has penetrated will crush it not attract it.
Have a good time.
johnreed
>
> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> center of a great hollow).
>
>      Conclusions from the above
>          thought experiment:
>
> There is either a huge cavity at the center
> of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
> therein where there isn't as much Sun-
> matter as there must be surrounding it.
> According to the current laws of gravity.
>
> However, current theory says that the center
> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
> the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> place--exactly because this is the region of
> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>
>  These are two self-excluding viewpoints:
>
> One of them can be correct while the other
> one is not. But both of them cannot be
> correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
> AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
> hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
> at the center of the stars because the center
> of every star is its region of maximun
> pressure--and therefore the effect of
> gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
> inside the stars.  *
>
> Which is it? SEE:
>
> http://physics.sdrodrian.com
>
> S D Rodrianhttp://sdrodrian.comhttp://physics.sdrodrian.comhttp://mp3.sdrodrian.com
>
> * Of course, once The Great Thinkers
> (who once thought the world was flat,
> that the universe revolved around the
> Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
> explained the observable deficiencies
> of gravity, that the entire universe
> erupted from a magic bean, and that
> it was constructed of vibrating strings
> tuned into existence by unimaginably
> tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
> Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
> awhile I'm sure they will be able to
> come up with any number of their usual
> outrageously reality-denying/logic-
> twisting solutions to this puzzle.
>
> ... when they could just visit:http://physics.sdrodrian.com
>
> And WHY have none of them even
> thought about this self-contradiction
> (when it's so impertinently obvious)...?
>
> Well, because we teach our so-called
> Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
> is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
> and so on. And we not only require
> that they do not challenge the validity
> of what we are "teaching them" but
> we actually demand that they accept it
> all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:
>
> Can you imagine what would happen
> if when the Great Professor is mumbling
> "7times3is859..." to his class a student
> were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
> you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
> is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
> such a mere student would get? And
> what student does not understand this?
>
> By the way: The dramatization above is
> an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
> only. [This disclaimer is always required
> when addressing former students of all
> such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]
>
> Ah! O well ...
>
> .

In article <969cc108-c6ac-4ef2-933c-0a1045729cb8@
2g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, randamajor@yahoo.com says...
> Your entire thought conjecture is far worse than Einstein's thought
> conjectures.  The ping pong ball cannot be.

The whole point of having thought conjecture's is that "they cannot be". 
Otherwise you would just do the experiment.


> And if it were the
> pressure of the mass it has penetrated will crush it not attract it.

It is a magic ping-pong ball and is affected only by gravity. That is, 
not affected by anything else. Not perturbed by forces other than 
gravity. Impervious to non-gravitational forces. I thought that was 
explained.


> Have a good time.
> 

And you.

-- 
Alan LeHun

In article <1c14d5b0-1d87-407c-9dc9-
6db026901afe@f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, ar@sdrodrian.com says...
> However, current theory says that the center
> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
> the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> place--exactly because this is the region of
> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
> 

Yes. This may well be due to the sun being made, not of magic ping-pong 
balls, but of normal matter which, unlike said magic ping-pong balls, 
are affected by forces other than gravity.

You are however, correct in surmising that gravitational forces in the 
center of stars are negligible. 

hth

-- 
Alan LeHun

The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.

 [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
 you do not have a mind, forget it.]

Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity.
That is its only quality. (Therefore
it can travel inside the Sun without
being destroyed.) Now...

This ping-pong ball is approaching
the surface of the Sun. As it does so
the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
increases on the ping-pong ball.

  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
  the ping-pong ball will be at its
  maximum.]

The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
will begin to decrease.

  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
  travels closer and closer to the center
  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
  that there will be a growing amount of
  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
center of a great hollow).

     Conclusions from the above
         thought experiment:

There is either a huge cavity at the center
of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
therein where there isn't as much Sun-
matter as there must be surrounding it.
According to the current laws of gravity.

However, current theory says that the center
of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
fact: It is at the center of every star that the
fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
place--exactly because this is the region of
the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

 These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximun
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

******************************

On Oct 8, 1:12 am, Virgil  wrote:

> Newton proves a long time ago that the
> gravitational attraction at its
> center due to a body with radially symmetric
> mass distribution is always zero.
> Note that this is the case even though that
> mass distribution has mass at it center.

Newton "conveniently" leaves out the
matter of "pressures" at that center, just
as exactly what gravity might be was
something he knew was beyond his field
of knowledge:

If you propose that there is ANY pressure
at all at the Sun's center, then you will
need to explain where such pressure
comes from... considering that the "left
inner wall surface" [of my proposed
hollow at the Sun's center] is under MORE
gravitational pull from the left wall than
from the right wall (on the other side of
that hollow): There may be as much mass
in the right wall as in the left wall, yes,
but the mass of the left wall is obviously
closer to the "left inner wall surface."

You may stuff as much mass as you
like at the Sun's center--just explain
the mechanism which does the "stuffing."

For what's the use of merely noting one
has spotted a phenomenon--without also
attempting to explain it, when explaining
phenomena is the highest aim of science.

  NOTE: Einstein's mind was of a clever
  but lazy nature, thereby (the moronic
  mathematical fudge factor so-called
  "cosmological constant"). You have
  to understand that relativity only
  describes gravity in the way it is seen
  to work; Einstein too never goes so far
  as to even try to explain by what means
  it might be working. And so it remains.
  [The so-called "graviton" is merely a
  theoretical proposal ... it is a physical
  impossibility, but it's the only thing
  they have--It is in Einstein's mind that
  it is a physical impossibility because it
  would require instantaneous action
  at impossible distances, a problem
  which itself drove Einstein to come up
  with gravity as a strictly geometrical
  description instead of a "real" (physical)
  solution as might be provided by a
  possible graviton. Like Newton, Einstein
  recognized that explaining what gravity
  actually was... was quite beyond his field
  of knowledge.]

Today we can see the problems of lacking
a real/actual understanding of what gravity
actually is when everywhere we look gravity
seems to misbehave; The galaxies do not
behave as if they were perfectly observing
the laws of gravity (acording to which they
should all be flying apart). Not to mention
the problem of the Sun & the Ping-Pong ball.

*******************************

On Oct 7, 11:07 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Aardvark wrote:
> > Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> > of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> > and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> > center of a great hollow).
>
> You must have assumed friction on your
> magic ping-pong ball.

Actually no: I imagined that, according to
Newton, once it reached the exact center
of the Sun it struck an identical ping-pong
ball coming at it with the same force (where
they both magically combined into a single
bigger ping-pong ball). I'm used to dealing
with these questions: When I told my little
nephew the story of Pinocchio he seemed
much more interested in knowing WHY the
toy-maker had made him with a bellows-
mechanism for talking; How did he know
Pinocchio was going to be doing any talking!

>  This next paragraph is without merit.

Gee, I wonder why--

> > According to the current laws of gravity.

>    Nope.

Any particular reason why not?

>> In fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> > fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> > place--exactly because this is the region of
> > the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>
> Because the temperature pressure and density
> are high enough for fusion reactions to take place.

You seem to know this. And yet it eludes you
that my post is all about challenging you to tell me
where that "high enough" pressure is coming from!

*************************************

On Oct 8, 12:12 am, johnreed wrote:

> The ping pong ball cannot be. And if it were
> the pressure of the mass it has penetrated
> will crush it not attract it.

It is a magic ping-pong ball. You missed that
didn't you!

> Have a good time. johnreed

Man! You have no idea!

********************************

On Oct 8, 2:41 am, "AndyW" wrote:

> ... were the heck did the big hollow
> come from???

There's always one in every crowd. This
is why I'd rather shoot myself in the foot
than teach!

***************************

On Oct 8, 3:11 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
SDR wrote:
>>  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>>  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>>  the ping-pong ball will be at its
>>  maximum.]
>> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
>> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
>> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
>> will begin to decrease.

> It is always true if the body has constant
> density, but the Sun doesn't.

Another Pinocchio explanation required.

You also missed the fact that the highest
gravitational pull "down" is NOT at the
surface of a sphere but a little bit up from
it (since at the surface part of that pull
will be defrayed from the sphere's sides).

*********************************

On Oct 7, 11:42 pm, "Androcles" wrote:

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> >  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
> >  travels closer and closer to the center
> >  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
> >  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
> >  that there will be a growing amount of
> >  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
>
> No it won't. This is because the density gradient
> is non-homogeneous.

Yes it is, if I so command it: This being a
thought experiment of mine, I can make of it
anything I wish. Even a giraffe. Live with it.

> Oh... I thought you said there was a fuckin'
> ping pong ball there...

Read my post again: It's about this ping-pong
ball slowly making its way there. Albeit, I
don't recall saying it started having sex once
it got there: You made that part up.

> Make up your non-existent mind.

I made it up: Now it exists! That was easy.

> ... any hollow magic ping pong ball will
> be crushed.

Not if my magic is strong enough. And
I have VERY nice thoughts--My magic is
therefore unstoppable! [Frankly, I don't
believe you've quite grasped the concept
of "magic."]

> ...  magic ping pong balls
> don't even make it to the bottom
> of my kitchen sink, they FLOAT.

I take it you have spent a lot of time
plunging magic ping-pong balls into your
sink then: May I suggest a girl-friend.
She'll smack you up the side of yer head:
Fix'ya right up.

All right now, I knew this is where I'd
eventually end up: Listen up! Once there
was a toy maker named Geppetto ...

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com



.

"Aardvark"  
news:1c14d5b0-1d87-407c-9dc9-6db026901afe@f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
>  The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.
>
> [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
> you do not have a mind, forget it.]
>
> Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
> which is only affected by gravity.
> That is its only quality. (Therefore
> it can travel inside the Sun without
> being destroyed.) Now...
>
> This ping-pong ball is approaching
> the surface of the Sun. As it does so
> the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
> increases on the ping-pong ball.
>
>  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>  the ping-pong ball will be at its
>  maximum.]

And "hydrostatic" pressure is zero.
>
> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> will begin to decrease.

And the hydrostatic pressure will begin to increase.
>
>  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
>  travels closer and closer to the center
>  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
>  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
>  that there will be a growing amount of
>  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
>
> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> center of a great hollow).

The hydraulic pressure will achive its maximum.
>
>     Conclusions from the above
>         thought experiment:
>
> There is either a huge cavity at the center
> of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
> therein where there isn't as much Sun-
> matter as there must be surrounding it.
> According to the current laws of gravity.

If there is the maximum pressure there is the region with the most condensed 
matter.
S*
>
> However, current theory says that the center
> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
> the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> place--exactly because this is the region of
> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>
> These are two self-excluding viewpoints:
>
> One of them can be correct while the other
> one is not. But both of them cannot be
> correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
> AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
> hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
> at the center of the stars because the center
> of every star is its region of maximun
> pressure--and therefore the effect of
> gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
> inside the stars.  *
>
> Which is it? SEE:
>
> http://physics.sdrodrian.com
>
> S D Rodrian
> http://sdrodrian.com
> http://physics.sdrodrian.com
> http://mp3.sdrodrian.com
>
> * Of course, once The Great Thinkers
> (who once thought the world was flat,
> that the universe revolved around the
> Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
> explained the observable deficiencies
> of gravity, that the entire universe
> erupted from a magic bean, and that
> it was constructed of vibrating strings
> tuned into existence by unimaginably
> tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
> Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
> awhile I'm sure they will be able to
> come up with any number of their usual
> outrageously reality-denying/logic-
> twisting solutions to this puzzle.
>
> ... when they could just visit:
> http://physics.sdrodrian.com
>
> And WHY have none of them even
> thought about this self-contradiction
> (when it's so impertinently obvious)...?
>
> Well, because we teach our so-called
> Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
> is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
> and so on. And we not only require
> that they do not challenge the validity
> of what we are "teaching them" but
> we actually demand that they accept it
> all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:
>
> Can you imagine what would happen
> if when the Great Professor is mumbling
> "7times3is859..." to his class a student
> were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
> you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
> is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
> such a mere student would get? And
> what student does not understand this?
>
> By the way: The dramatization above is
> an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
> only. [This disclaimer is always required
> when addressing former students of all
> such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]
>
> Ah! O well ...
>
>
> .

Dear Aardvark:

On Oct 7, 6:34 pm, Aardvark  wrote:
>   The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.
>
>  [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
>  you do not have a mind, forget it.]
>
> Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
> which is only affected by gravity.
> That is its only quality. (Therefore
> it can travel inside the Sun without
> being destroyed.) Now...

Like Dark Matter.

> This ping-pong ball is approaching
> the surface of the Sun. As it does so
> the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
> increases on the ping-pong ball.
>
>   [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>   the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>   the ping-pong ball will be at its
>   maximum.]

Actually, no.  Even on Earth, with a roughly uniform density, g
increases for some distance below ground.  The Sun's denisty increases
for as deep as we can receive light of any wavelength.

> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> will begin to decrease.

At some distance below the surface, but OK.

>   [This is because as the ping-pong ball
>   travels closer and closer to the center
>   of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
>   ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
>   that there will be a growing amount of
>   Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

"differential" or "un-offset" mass decreases.

> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> center of a great hollow).

Does the ping pong ball have no momentum?  If not, how was it
travelling in the first place?

>      Conclusions from the above
>          thought experiment:
>
> There is either a huge cavity at the center
> of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
> therein where there isn't as much Sun-
> matter as there must be surrounding it.
> According to the current laws of gravity.

Does not follow.  Matter has momentum, and matter interacts in ways
other than gravitationally.  Therefore there is pressure to keep
matter above from moving below.

> However, current theory says that the center
> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
> the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> place--exactly because this is the region of
> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

And pressure also is seen to increase, as far down as we can see.

>  These are two self-excluding viewpoints:
>
> One of them can be correct

That the components of the Sun interact by other than gravity...

> while the other one is not.

That matter in the Sun is Dark Matter-like.

> But both of them cannot be correct at the
> same time:

Done.

> Either gravity exists AND the center of the
> Sun (of every star) is hollow.

Clearly in contradiction with the available data, and without any
merit.

> Or fusion DOES indeed take place at the
> center of the stars because the center
> of every star is its region of maximun
> pressure--and therefore the effect of
> gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
> inside the stars.  *
>
> Which is it?

The "somehow voided" is called "pressure".  Normal matter is not Dark
Mater-like.

David A. Smith

Aardvark wrote:
> 
>   The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.
> 
>  [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
>  you do not have a mind, forget it.]
> 
> Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
> which is only affected by gravity.
> That is its only quality. (Therefore
> it can travel inside the Sun without
> being destroyed.) Now...
> 
> This ping-pong ball is approaching
> the surface of the Sun. As it does so
> the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
> increases on the ping-pong ball.

As the inverse square of the distance between the two centers of
mass.  
 
>   [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>   the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>   the ping-pong ball will be at its
>   maximum.]

No.  The sun is not a homogeneous body with depth, nor is the Earth,

"CRC Handbook," 88th Edition, p. 14-13. 
<http://www.splung.com/kinematics/images/gravitation/variation%20of%20g.png>
http://www.typnet.net/Essays/EarthGrav.htm
 bottom
 Terrestrial gee increases with depth to 50% radius

 > The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> will begin to decrease.

BULLSHIT 

>   [This is because as the ping-pong ball
>   travels closer and closer to the center
>   of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
>   ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
>   that there will be a growing amount of
>   Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

You are ignorant at best, and most likely stupid.
 
> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> center of a great hollow).
> 
>      Conclusions from the above
>          thought experiment:
> 
> There is either a huge cavity at the center
> of the Sun,
[snip rest of crap]

Stupid confirmed.  What of the weight of the overlying strata?

idiot

-- 
Uncle Al 
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ 
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) 
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

On Oct 8, 12:45 pm, Uncle Al quoted Newton:

> As the inverse square of the distance between
> the two centers of mass ... or something

hoping nobody noticed that he had no idea
what the hell he was talking about ... then
he wrote:

> No.  The sun is not a homogeneous body
> with depth, nor is the Earth, it is a pretty
> pretty ball up ... up in the air, above the clouds!

Then he ran through his usual obfuscations
and cheap magician's quick hand motions:

> "CRC Handbook," 88th Edition, p. 14-13.
> <http://www.splung.com/kinematics/images
> /gravitation/variation%20of%20...>http:
> //www.typnet.net/Essays/EarthGrav.htm
> bottom
> Terrestrial gee increases with depth to 50% radius

And finally, frustrated over the fact that he really
wasn't saying anything, he exclaimed:

> BULLSHIT

and:

> You are ignorant at best, and most likely stupid.
> [snip rest of crap]

Perhaps he was in the bathroom.

> Stupid confirmed.  What of the weight of the
> overlying strata?

Egads! He tried to think a little bit there. But

> idiot

> O God, what is "weight" ...? What is gravity?!

Uncle Al finally acknowledged that he could not
(think) and went back to his forte (there, in
the crapper). Relieved at last, or eventually...

RE:

  The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.

 [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
 you do not have a mind, forget it.]

Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity.
That is its only quality. (Therefore
it can travel inside the Sun without
being destroyed.) Now...

This ping-pong ball is approaching
the surface of the Sun. As it does so
the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
increases on the ping-pong ball.

  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
  the ping-pong ball will be at its
  maximum.]

The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
will begin to decrease.

  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
  travels closer and closer to the center
  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
  that there will be a growing amount of
  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
center of a great hollow).

     Conclusions from the above
         thought experiment:

There is either a huge cavity at the center
of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
therein where there isn't as much Sun-
matter as there must be surrounding it.
According to the current laws of gravity.

However, current theory says that the center
of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
fact: It is at the center of every star that the
fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
place--exactly because this is the region of
the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

 These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximun
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

******************************

On Oct 8, 6:56 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
> "Virgil" wrote that
> > Newton proved a long time ago that the
> > gravitational attraction at its
> > center due to a body with radially symmetric
> > mass distribution is always zero.
>
> He did not prove (and it is not true) that
> gravitational field strength must
> decrease when moving closer to the the centre
> of the radially symmetric
> sphere. Whilst it is zero at the centre, it is
> arbitrarily large arbitrarily
> close to the centre (at least in Newtonian physics).

You're going to have to cite here.

Meanwhile, understand this: Newton
had no idea whatsoever what made the Sun
(or any star) burn the way they did/do/does:

It was not until around Einstein's time that
astrophysicists would at last able to put together
a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
furnace--and all the data says that this is only
possible at the most central portion of the core:
there just isn't enough pressure outside it to
bring matter close enough together to produce
the required sustained fusion. Look it up.

The problem, of course, is that all the theories
of gravity produce NOT the greatest pressure
at the Sun's (and any other star's) core but a
great big hollow (or, at the least, a horrific
decrease of the gravitational "concentration
of matter" required to "push it/bring it together"
close enough for fusion to occur!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newton never gave this a thought (it never
troubled him in the least that his theories of
gravity said that the Sun could not possibly
be working--turned ON--) for the simple
reason that he did not KNOW that the Sun
worked by means of nuclear FUSION and
that the only way nuclear fusion can be
produced inside the Sun is if the greatest
(not the least, but the highest) possible
pressures are concentrated at the Sun's core.

Had he known this, it would have blown
his mind--until he went on the Internet, of
course, and visited:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

learning there, from Mister Rodrian, the
correct way in which the universe works.

It would not have changed his theories of
motion/gravity. It would simply have made
them actual. Hoorah!

********************************

On Oct 8, 1:12 am, Virgil  wrote:

> Newton proves a long time ago that the
> gravitational attraction at its
> center due to a body with radially symmetric
> mass distribution is always zero.
> Note that this is the case even though that
> mass distribution has mass at it center.

Newton "conveniently" leaves out the
matter of "pressures" at that center, just
as exactly what gravity might be was
something he knew was beyond his field
of knowledge:

If you propose that there is ANY pressure
at all at the Sun's center, then you will
need to explain where such pressure
comes from... considering that the "left
inner wall surface" [of my proposed
hollow at the Sun's center] is under MORE
gravitational pull from the left wall than
from the right wall (on the other side of
that hollow): There may be as much mass
in the right wall as in the left wall, yes,
but the mass of the left wall is obviously
closer to the "left inner wall surface."

You may stuff as much mass as you
like at the Sun's center--just explain
the mechanism which does the "stuffing."

For what's the use of merely noting one
has spotted a phenomenon--without also
attempting to explain it, when explaining
phenomena is the highest aim of science.

  NOTE: Einstein's mind was of a clever
  but lazy nature, thereby (the moronic
  mathematical fudge factor so-called
  "cosmological constant"). You have
  to understand that relativity only
  describes gravity in the way it is seen
  to work; Einstein too never goes so far
  as to even try to explain by what means
  it might be working. And so it remains.
  [The so-called "graviton" is merely a
  theoretical proposal ... it is a physical
  impossibility, but it's the only thing
  they have--It is in Einstein's mind that
  it is a physical impossibility because it
  would require instantaneous action
  at impossible distances, a problem
  which itself drove Einstein to come up
  with gravity as a strictly geometrical
  description instead of a "real" (physical)
  solution as might be provided by a
  possible graviton. Like Newton, Einstein
  recognized that explaining what gravity
  actually was... was quite beyond his field
  of knowledge.]

Today we can see the problems of lacking
a real/actual understanding of what gravity
actually is when everywhere we look gravity
seems to misbehave; The galaxies do not
behave as if they were perfectly observing
the laws of gravity (acording to which they
should all be flying apart). Not to mention
the problem of the Sun & the Ping-Pong ball.

*******************************

On Oct 7, 11:07 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Aardvark wrote:
> > Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> > of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> > and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> > center of a great hollow).
>
> You must have assumed friction on your
> magic ping-pong ball.

Actually no: I imagined that, according to
Newton, once it reached the exact center
of the Sun it struck an identical ping-pong
ball coming at it with the same force (where
they both magically combined into a single
bigger ping-pong ball). I'm used to dealing
with these questions: When I told my little
nephew the story of Pinocchio he seemed
much more interested in knowing WHY the
toy-maker had made him with a bellows-
mechanism for talking; How did he know
Pinocchio was going to be doing any talking!

>  This next paragraph is without merit.

Gee, I wonder why--

> > According to the current laws of gravity.

>    Nope.

Any particular reason why not?

>> In fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> > fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> > place--exactly because this is the region of
> > the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>
> Because the temperature pressure and density
> are high enough for fusion reactions to take place.

You seem to know this. And yet it eludes you
that my post is all about challenging you to tell me
where that "high enough" pressure is coming from!

*************************************

On Oct 8, 12:12 am, johnreed wrote:

> The ping pong ball cannot be. And if it were
> the pressure of the mass it has penetrated
> will crush it not attract it.

It is a magic ping-pong ball. You missed that
didn't you!

> Have a good time. johnreed

Man! You have no idea!

********************************

On Oct 8, 2:41 am, "AndyW" wrote:

> ... were the heck did the big hollow
> come from???

There's always one in every crowd. This
is why I'd rather shoot myself in the foot
than teach!

***************************

On Oct 8, 3:11 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
SDR wrote:
>>  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>>  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>>  the ping-pong ball will be at its
>>  maximum.]
>> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
>> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
>> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
>> will begin to decrease.

> It is always true if the body has constant
> density, but the Sun doesn't.

Another Pinocchio explanation required.

You also missed the fact that the highest
gravitational pull "down" is NOT at the
surface of a sphere but a little bit up from
it (since at the surface part of that pull
will be defrayed from the sphere's sides).

*********************************

On Oct 7, 11:42 pm, "Androcles" wrote:

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> >  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
> >  travels closer and closer to the center
> >  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
> >  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
> >  that there will be a growing amount of
> >  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
>
> No it won't. This is because the density gradient
> is non-homogeneous.

Yes it is, if I so command it: This being a
thought experiment of mine, I can make of it
anything I wish. Even a giraffe. Live with it.

> Oh... I thought you said there was a fuckin'
> ping pong ball there...

Read my post again: It's about this ping-pong
ball slowly making its way there. Albeit, I
don't recall saying it started having sex once
it got there: You made that part up.

> Make up your non-existent mind.

I made it up: Now it exists! That was easy.

> ... any hollow magic ping pong ball will
> be crushed.

Not if my magic is strong enough. And
I have VERY nice thoughts--My magic is
therefore unstoppable! [Frankly, I don't
believe you've quite grasped the concept
of "magic."]

> ...  magic ping pong balls
> don't even make it to the bottom
> of my kitchen sink, they FLOAT.

I take it you have spent a lot of time
plunging magic ping-pong balls into your
sink then: May I suggest a girl-friend.
She'll smack you up the side of yer head:
Fix'ya right up.

All right now, I knew this is where I'd
eventually end up: Listen up! Once there
was a toy maker named Geppetto ...

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com



.

On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 11:15:07 +0100, Alan LeHun 
wrote:

>In article <1c14d5b0-1d87-407c-9dc9-
>6db026901afe@f10g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>, ar@sdrodrian.com says...
>> However, current theory says that the center
>> of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
>> the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
>> fact: It is at the center of every star that the
>> fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
>> place--exactly because this is the region of
>> the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>> 
>
>Yes. This may well be due to the sun being made, not of magic ping-pong 
>balls, but of normal matter which, unlike said magic ping-pong balls, 
>are affected by forces other than gravity.
>
>You are however, correct in surmising that gravitational forces in the 
>center of stars are negligible. 

Or any other spherical body, for that matter. For a hollow
sphere, the gravition is zero anywhere within the hollow.

-- 
   ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen@cox.net) *************
   *       Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow         *
   * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

In article
,
   Aardvark  wrote:

> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges past the surface of the Sun, the
> pull of the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball will begin to decrease.

And the ball will be travelling very fast.
[Snip]

> Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center of the Sun it will achieve
> gravity equilibrium and lie forever suspended there (at the exact center
> of a great hollow).

UNTRUE. The ball, being unaffected by radiation pressure, viscosity etc will
have reached its maximum speed and will fly on away from the centre,
gradually slowing. After leaving the sun it will carry on, slowing, and come
to a halt at the distance from the sun at which it started.

If you start from a false premise you are unlikely to arrive at the truth!

-- 
Rodney Blackall (retired meteorologist)(BSc, FRMetS)
Buckingham, ENGLAND
Using Acorn SA-RPC, OS 4.02 with ANT INS and Pluto 3.03j

Obviously the ping-pong ball overwhelmed
the fragile minds of many of the posters
here (I only used it as strictly a focusing
device, but far far too many poor souls here
were simply dumbfounded by a ping-pong
ball inside the Sun and wrecked their brains
over how it was reacting in there). And
this in spite of my warning then that if they
didn't have a mind they ought not try to
work their way through my [sic.] "mind"
experiment. Forget the ping-pong ball guys:
I only chose it, instead of a golf ball, say,
because it (too) most ironically is hollow.
Now, consider, instead:

  Superman and The Sun Experiment.

[A thought experiment--further simplified
now for those who just cannot get past the
ping-pong ball of the original experiment.]

NOTE: This is happening in an universe
in which gravity behaves as everybody
thinks it does (Newton, Einstein, & you):

        And, why Superman?
	Because not only is
	Superman immune
	to gravity, while still
	able to feel it (we've
	often seen him just
	floating about in many
	of his movies but
	we've never seen him
	floating away every
	time he closes his
	eyes)... but he is also
	actually strengthened
	by the rays of our
	yellow Sun--Therefore
	he actually becomes
	most superest of all
	INSIDE the Sun!

The problem, of course was: getting a
hold of him. Luckily I knew where Lois
Lane worked and gave her a ring, in
exchange for which she quickly agreed
to help me meet him (Superman--By
the way, his name is Super Man not
"Joey Superman" or other, it's just that
he's not uppity and never insists he be
called MISTER Man): I very quickly
explained the nature of my experiment
to Super Man, and he agreed to undertake
to travel to the center of the Sun for the
sake of those poor souls who would
never grasp the meaning/purpose of
this thought experiment because they
had been struck dumb by the only thing
they were able to see from that instant
onwards, namely the bouncing ping-
pong ball.

--Your announcer is Mr. Maxwell Smart:

  BEGIN THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Now: Imagine Superman approaching
the surface of the Sun.

As he does so he feels the pull of the
Sun's gravity gradually increasing.

  [When he is at the Sun's surface, or
  pretty near it, Superman will feel the
  pull of the Sun's gravity to be at its
  maximum.]

The instant Superman plunges past the
surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
And it will continue to decrease as he
flies towards the Sun's center.

  [This is because as Superman travels
  closer and closer to the center of the
  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
  on him is decreasing, all the time that
  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
  mass behind him pulling back on his
  super body. We can set aside the Sun
  mass to the sides, but we must still
  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]

Once Superman reaches the center of the
Sun he will feel either no gravity there (or
very little if any); and, if he so wishes, he
can lie there forever just floating about
impervious to all INCLUDING gravity (at
the exact center of a great hollow which
the laws of gravity tell us will be found
thereabouts because most of the matter
at the center of the Sun will have been
"pulled" away from its center [there may
remain a single hydrogen atom at the exact
gravitational center of this hollow... but
certainly during 5 billion years of "pulling"
most other atoms will have been pulled
aside because they could NOT also be at
the exact gravitational center unless they
were one system, of course. If there is a
perfect hollow it is because its "left inner
wall surface" is under MORE gravitational
pull from the left wall than from the right
wall (on the other side of that hollow):
There may be as much mass in the right
wall of The Great Hollow as in the left
wall of The Great Hollow, yes, but the
mass of the left wall of The Great Hollow
is obviously closer to the "left inner wall
surface" [to quote a certain Mr. Rodrian].

Or Superman can, as he did, leave the
inside of the Sun to report on his findings.
I am sure that many posters here would
have wanted me to ask Superman why he
wears his yellowing underwear on the
outside of his pants and neat-o stuff like
that--but he suddenly had to fly off, as
he saw that Lois, in reaching for an aspirin,
had swallowed a suicide pill she was
doing a story on instead and died. Now
Superman would have to travel back in
time a couple of hours to save her... yet
again! [Thank you Mister Smart.]

     END THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Now, what are the implications of this
thought experiment? [Hint: They have
nothing whatever to do with Superman,
and, nor with Lois Lane either.]

1. From the size of the Sun brainiacs've
    calculated that the only place in it
    where there's enough gravitational
    pressure to produce fusion is in a
    relatively compact central core. Most
    of the Sun is just plasma so loosely
    flying about that it's hard for enough
    matter to be brought close enough
    for atoms & stuff like that to smash
    together in order to sustain a fusion
    chain-reaction.

2. The only method brainiacs know of
    to produce the required pressures is
    if gravity is trying to push all the
    mass of the Sun into its very core.

3. And yet, as illustrated by Superman's
    voyage, the very laws of gravity tell
    us that once you start getting closer
    and closer to such a central core, the
    gravitational pressure should steadily
    decrease rather than increase: a very
    substantial mass of the Sun ought to
    be moving away from its central core.

Now, most posters here will probably
wish to know if I asked Super Man for
his autograph or something like that.
But, not for those posters but, for those
persons with a mind, some very deeply
fundamental questions about reality will
now have to be addressed:

1. Is the Sun the result of gravity, as
    we have heretofore understood gravity?

2. Obviously there exists the required
    pressure at the Sun's core for fusion
    to occur, or the Sun would not be ON.

3. How does that pressure come to be,
    if the laws of gravity as we understand
    them tell us it ought not exist there!

This is certainly a self-contradiction
the existence of which is telling us
something very profound about the
nature of how we understand reality
(apparently we are misunderstanding
it somewhere/somehow).

CONTINUANCE:

These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximum
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://thesolutionisthis.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

*******************************
IN THE FOLLOWING REPLIES TO POSTERS
I HAVE SOME HARMLESS FUN PLAYING
PING-PONG. HOPE YOU ENJOY THEM TOO:
*******************************

On Oct 9, 9:08 am, Frederick Williams wrote:
> Aardvark wrote:
> > Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> > of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> > and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> > center of a great hollow).
>
> As I have already told you, the ping-pong ball
> will oscillate about the sun's centre.

Fred: The entire universe just changed
and you missed it because you were too busy
watching a ping-pong ball oscillating! [I
guess it's true, as the poet says: "A small
mind is always closer to the details."] Now
you will have to wait until somebody points
out to you that the universe has changed--
Is that your phone ringing? You may be
about to get lucky. Answer it!

********************************

On Oct 8, 6:56 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
> "Virgil" wrote that
> > Newton proved a long time ago that the
> > gravitational attraction at its
> > center due to a body with radially symmetric
> > mass distribution is always zero.
>
> He did not prove (and it is not true) that
> gravitational field strength must
> decrease when moving closer to the the centre
> of the radially symmetric
> sphere. Whilst it is zero at the centre, it is
> arbitrarily large arbitrarily
> close to the centre (at least in Newtonian physics).

>> You're going to have to cite here.

> Cite? That somebody didn't prove something, and
> its not true?

No. You're going to have to cite on how
my "magical ping-pong ball which is only
affected by gravity" behaves otherwise than
how I described it does in my post. Please do.

You, and other posters, obviously do not
believe in magic. And for your benefit I then
provided a way for my "magical ping-pong
ball which is only affected by gravity" to stop
at the center of the Sun's Great Hollow:

START QUOTE

  Actually no: I imagined that, according to
  Newton, once it reached the exact center
  of the Sun it struck an identical ping-pong
  ball coming at it with the same force (where
  they both magically combined into a single
  bigger ping-pong ball). I'm used to dealing
  with these questions: When I told my little
  nephew the story of Pinocchio he seemed
  much more interested in knowing WHY the
  toy-maker had made him with a bellows-
  mechanism for talking; How did he know
  Pinocchio was going to be doing any talking!

END QUOTE

I hope this satisfies you. But if it doesn't
then please by all means do cite how it is
possible for my "magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity" to move
otherwise than however I say it does.

It will be interesting to hear it, I'm sure.

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3s.sdrodrian.com

********************************

Meanwhile, understand this: Newton
had no idea whatsoever what made the Sun
(or any star) burn the way they did/do/does:

It was not until around Einstein's time that
astrophysicists would at last able to put together
a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
furnace--and all the data says that this is only
possible at the most central portion of the core:
there just isn't enough pressure outside it to
bring matter close enough together to produce
the required sustained fusion. Look it up.

The problem, of course, is that all the theories
of gravity produce NOT the greatest pressure
at the Sun's (and any other star's) core but a
great big hollow (or, at the least, a horrific
decrease of the gravitational "concentration
of matter" required to "push it/bring it together"
close enough for fusion to occur!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newton never gave this a thought (it never
troubled him in the least that his theories of
gravity said that the Sun could not possibly
be working--turned ON--) for the simple
reason that he did not KNOW that the Sun
worked by means of nuclear FUSION and
that the only way nuclear fusion can be
produced inside the Sun is if the greatest
(not the least, but the highest) possible
pressures are concentrated at the Sun's core.

Had he known this, it would have blown
his mind--until he went on the Internet, of
course, and visited:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

learning there, from Mister Rodrian, the
correct way in which the universe works.

It would not have changed his theories of
motion/gravity. It would simply have made
them actual. Hoorah!

**********************************

Newton "conveniently" leaves out the
matter of "pressures" at that center, just
as exactly what gravity might be was
something he knew was beyond his field
of knowledge:

If you propose that there is ANY pressure
at all at the Sun's center, then you will
need to explain where such pressure
comes from... considering that the "left
inner wall surface" [of my proposed
hollow at the Sun's center] is under MORE
gravitational pull from the left wall than
from the right wall (on the other side of
that hollow): There may be as much mass
in the right wall as in the left wall, yes,
but the mass of the left wall is obviously
closer to the "left inner wall surface."

You may stuff as much mass as you
like at the Sun's center--just explain
the mechanism which does the "stuffing."

For what's the use of merely noting one
has spotted a phenomenon--without also
attempting to explain it, when explaining
phenomena is the highest aim of science.

  NOTE: Einstein's mind was of a clever
  but lazy nature, thereby (the moronic
  mathematical fudge factor so-called
  "cosmological constant"). You have
  to understand that relativity only
  describes gravity in the way it is seen
  to work; Einstein too never goes so far
  as to even try to explain by what means
  it might be working. And so it remains.
  [The so-called "graviton" is merely a
  theoretical proposal ... it is a physical
  impossibility, but it's the only thing
  they have--It is in Einstein's mind that
  it is a physical impossibility because it
  would require instantaneous action
  at impossible distances, a problem
  which itself drove Einstein to come up
  with gravity as a strictly geometrical
  description instead of a "real" (physical)
  solution as might be provided by a
  possible graviton. Like Newton, Einstein
  recognized that explaining what gravity
  actually was... was quite beyond his field
  of knowledge.]

Today we can see the problems of lacking
a real/actual understanding of what gravity
actually is when everywhere we look gravity
seems to misbehave; The galaxies do not
behave as if they were perfectly observing
the laws of gravity (acording to which they
should all be flying apart). Not to mention
the problem of the Sun & the Ping-Pong ball.

*******************************

On Oct 7, 11:07 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:
> Aardvark wrote:
> > Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
> > of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
> > and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
> > center of a great hollow).
>
> You must have assumed friction on your
> magic ping-pong ball.

Actually no: I imagined that, according to
Newton, once it reached the exact center
of the Sun it struck an identical ping-pong
ball coming at it with the same force (where
they both magically combined into a single
bigger ping-pong ball). I'm used to dealing
with these questions: When I told my little
nephew the story of Pinocchio he seemed
much more interested in knowing WHY the
toy-maker had made him with a bellows-
mechanism for talking; How did he know
Pinocchio was going to be doing any talking!

>  This next paragraph is without merit.

Gee, I wonder why--

> > According to the current laws of gravity.

>    Nope.

Any particular reason why not?

>> In fact: It is at the center of every star that the
> > fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
> > place--exactly because this is the region of
> > the highest amount of gravitational pressures!
>
> Because the temperature pressure and density
> are high enough for fusion reactions to take place.

You seem to know this. And yet it eludes you
that my post is all about challenging you to tell me
where that "high enough" pressure is coming from!

*************************************

On Oct 8, 12:12 am, johnreed wrote:

> The ping pong ball cannot be. And if it were
> the pressure of the mass it has penetrated
> will crush it not attract it.

It is a magic ping-pong ball. You missed that
didn't you!

> Have a good time. johnreed

Man! You have no idea!

*******************************
SEE: THIS IS WHY I HAD TO RECRUIT
SUPERMAN TO TAKE THE PLACE OF THE
MAGIC PING-PONG BALL!
********************************

On Oct 8, 2:41 am, "AndyW" wrote:

> ... were the heck did the big hollow
> come from???

There's always one in every crowd. This
is why I'd rather shoot myself in the foot
than teach!

***************************

On Oct 8, 3:11 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
SDR wrote:
>>  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
>>  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
>>  the ping-pong ball will be at its
>>  maximum.]
>> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
>> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
>> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
>> will begin to decrease.

> It is always true if the body has constant
> density, but the Sun doesn't.

Another Pinocchio explanation required.

You also missed the fact that the highest
gravitational pull "down" is NOT at the
surface of a sphere but a little bit up from
it (since at the surface part of that pull
will be defrayed from the sphere's sides).

*********************************

On Oct 7, 11:42 pm, "Androcles" wrote:

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> Define "surface" of a plasma density gradient.

Sure: Soon as yer notice a change in that density.

> >  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
> >  travels closer and closer to the center
> >  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
> >  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
> >  that there will be a growing amount of
> >  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]
>
> No it won't. This is because the density gradient
> is non-homogeneous.

Yes it is, if I so command it: This being a
thought experiment of mine, I can make of it
anything I wish. Even a giraffe. Live with it.

> Oh... I thought you said there was a fuckin'
> ping pong ball there...

Read my post again: It's about this ping-pong
ball slowly making its way there. Albeit, I
don't recall saying it started having sex once
it got there: You made that part up.

> Make up your non-existent mind.

I made it up: Now it exists! That was easy.

> ... any hollow magic ping pong ball will
> be crushed.

Not if my magic is strong enough. And
I have VERY nice thoughts--My magic is
therefore unstoppable! [Frankly, I don't
believe you've quite grasped the concept
of "magic."]

> ...  magic ping pong balls
> don't even make it to the bottom
> of my kitchen sink, they FLOAT.

I take it you have spent a lot of time
plunging magic ping-pong balls into your
sink then: May I suggest a girl-friend.
She'll smack you up the side of yer head:
Fix'ya right up.

All right now, I knew this is where I'd
eventually end up: Listen up! Once there
was a toy maker named Geppetto ...

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com



.

B, net != gross.  Learn vector arithmetic.

> The instant Superman plunges past the
> surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
> of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
> And it will continue to decrease as he
> flies towards the Sun's center.
>
>  [This is because as Superman travels
>  closer and closer to the center of the
>  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
>  on him is decreasing, all the time that
>  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
>  mass behind him pulling back on his
>  super body. We can set aside the Sun
>  mass to the sides, but we must still
>  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]
>

Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass" pulling on him decreases, so does 
his distance from the centre of the Sun which causes the force of gravity to 
increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).

The gravity could increase or decrease as superman flew towards the centre 
of the Sun; my guess is that it would increase but without calculating it I 
wouldn't really know.

Making basic mistakes like this really just indicates that you have not even 
the most basic understanding of physics, and hence its not worth reading to 
the end of your post.

In alt.sci.physics.new-theories Aardvark  wrote:
> Obviously the ping-pong ball overwhelmed
> the fragile minds of many of the posters
> here (I only used it as strictly a focusing
> device, but far far too many poor souls here
> were simply dumbfounded by a ping-pong
> ball inside the Sun and wrecked their brains
> over how it was reacting in there). And
> this in spite of my warning then that if they
> didn't have a mind they ought not try to
> work their way through my [sic.] "mind"
> experiment. Forget the ping-pong ball guys:
> I only chose it, instead of a golf ball, say,
> because it (too) most ironically is hollow.

You seem to be attempting to describe a variation of a classical thought
experiment.  Imagine a tunnel drilled through the earth, directly through
the centre (assume all the technology to permit this exists.) The tunnel is
then evacuated to reduce friction to zero.  What happens to an object that
is dropped into the tunnel?

The object has mass and inerta and will accellerate due to gravity. All the
time the object falls down the tunnel, there is more mass ahead than behind
so there is always an attractive force and the object accellerates. When the
object reaches the centre of the earth its speed is a maximum and due to
inerta it will just keep on going.  Now, there is always more mass behind
the object and it will start to slow down, but the experiment is symmetrical
and the object will just reach the surface at the other end of the tunnel. 
Whereupon, it will oscillate back and forth.  It helps to know that
gravitation in a spherical body is linearly dependent on the distance from
the centre (not the square law observed outside the body.) 

The Sun is no different.

-- 
Don't believe in God? You are not alone. FreeThoughtAction.org

Aardvark wrote:
[snip crap]

>   Superman and The Sun Experiment.
[snip 600 lines of crap]
 
 
> It was not until around Einstein's time that
> astrophysicists would at last able to put together
> a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
> ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
> furnace
[snip all furthr crap]

Physical Review 73(7) 803 (1948)

idiot

-- 
Uncle Al 
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ 
 (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) 
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2

On Oct 10, 2:35 am, "Peter Webb"
 wrote:
> > The instant Superman plunges past the
> > surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
> > of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
> > And it will continue to decrease as he
> > flies towards the Sun's center.
>
> >  [This is because as Superman travels
> >  closer and closer to the center of the
> >  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
> >  on him is decreasing, all the time that
> >  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
> >  mass behind him pulling back on his
> >  super body. We can set aside the Sun
> >  mass to the sides, but we must still
> >  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]
>
> Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass"
> pulling on him decreases, so does
> his distance from the centre of the Sun
> which causes the force of gravity to
> increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).

Do you even read what you're typing?
What you have just said is that "while he
is getting closer to the center of the Sun
his distance from the center of the Sun
decreases!" Your thinking processes may be
impaired, perhaps by alcohol (speculation).

I don't believe it is worth wasting time trying
to make you "see" that as he travels closer to
the center of he Sun the amount of mass "pulling
on him" is always decreasing--And how a
decreasing amount of mass can increase the
pull of gravity is something like expecting a
pebble resting on the surface of the earth to
suddenly fly off into space on its own!

Sir, think before you speak. And certainly THINK
before you type. And then please re-read it and
re-read it again. You'll come across much better.
AND if you're drunk, by all means give your
typing mechanism to a friend.

> The gravity could increase or decrease as
> superman flew towards the centre
> of the Sun; my guess is that it would
> increase but without calculating it I
> wouldn't really know.

Don't bother calculating. Just close your eyes
and imagine yourself at the center of the Sun,
the Earth, of any other celestial body: All
around you there is an equal amount of mass
pulling at you. Now, which way would you be
"pulled" and how strongly? THINK. All you
need to do is THINK.

> Making basic mistakes like this really just
> indicates that you have not even
> the most basic understanding of physics,
> and hence its not worth reading to
> the end of your post.

I am strangely satisfied that you do not have
the curiosity to read the rest of my post. It
tells me that I have forged the right path when
someone as lost in this world as you decides
to wander off in some crazy direction.

Thank you, I appreciate it:

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com


.

On Oct 10, 3:09 pm, Uncle Al sputtered:
> Aardvark wrote:
> [snip crap]
> >   Superman and The Sun Experiment.
> [snip 600 lines of crap]

Jeepers, Al, you sure do have a lot
of crap on your mind--You definitely
need a mental laxative!

> > It was not until around Einstein's time that
> > astrophysicists would at last able to put together
> > a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
> > ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
> > furnace

> [snip all furthr crap]
> Physical Review 73(7) 803 (1948)
> idiot

Dear idiot:

Albert Einstein
Born: 14th of March, 1879
Died: 18th of April, 1955

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com


.

In article ,
Aardvark   wrote:

>  Superman and The Sun Experiment.

Is there one Superman in this experiment or two?

>Now: Imagine Superman approaching
>the surface of the Sun.

Oh, for Christ's sake.

You persist in complicating your argument.  You don't need
a ping pong ball (or two) or Superman or anything else.

Your position is that since there is no gravitational force
at the center of the sun then there should be nothing there
at all.  A big, empty hollow.  Presumably because, with not
gravity, there is nothing to hold things there so things will
tend to leave.  That's wrong.  There will be no gravity to
hold things in place, but there will certainly be hydrostatic
pressure and that's going to be more than sufficient.

Where does the pressure come from if there is no gravity, you
ask?  There's no gravitational force at the exact center, but
most of the mass is somewhere else and it is all feeling a force
towards the center.  That's where the pressure comes from.

That's all.  You spend so much time trying to be cute you can't
even be bothered to learn anything.

Alan
-- 
Defendit numerus

On Oct 8, 3:26 am, Aardvark  wrote:
> On Oct 8, 3:11 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:
> SDR wrote:
> >>  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
> >>  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
> >>  the ping-pong ball will be at its
> >>  maximum.]
> >> The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
> >> past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
> >> the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
> >> will begin to decrease.
> > It is always true if the body has constant
> > density, but the Sun doesn't.
>
> Another Pinocchio explanation required.
>
> You also missed the fact that the highest
> gravitational pull "down" is NOT at the
> surface of a sphere but a little bit up from
> it (since at the surface part of that pull
> will be defrayed from the sphere's sides).

Where is the strongest tug over Earth?

Gravital pressure goes into elèctric pressure.  End of spell.

data says -> data say

-Aut

On Oct 10, 1:23 pm, Aardvark  wrote:
> On Oct 10, 2:35 am, "Peter Webb"
> > Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass"
> > pulling on him decreases, so does
> > his distance from the centre of the Sun
> > which causes the force of gravity to
> > increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).
>
> Do you even read what you're typing?
> What you have just said is that "while he
> is getting closer to the center of the Sun
> his distance from the center of the Sun
> decreases!" Your thinking processes may be
> impaired, perhaps by alcohol (speculation).

He did not, liar.

> I don't believe it is worth wasting time trying
> to make you "see" that as he travels closer to
> the center of he Sun the amount of mass "pulling
> on him" is always decreasing--And how a

but at whot rate?

> decreasing amount of mass can increase the
> pull of gravity is something like expecting a
> pebble resting on the surface of the earth to
> suddenly fly off into space on its own!

He didn't say thet, liar.

> Sir, think before you speak. And certainly THINK
> before you type. And then please re-read it and
> re-read it again. You'll come across much better.

you

"Aardvark"  wrote in message 
news:a2ece227-29d1-4e01-a20e-905aa63f0815@a21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 10, 2:35 am, "Peter Webb"
>  wrote:
>> > The instant Superman plunges past the
>> > surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
>> > of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
>> > And it will continue to decrease as he
>> > flies towards the Sun's center.
>>
>> >  [This is because as Superman travels
>> >  closer and closer to the center of the
>> >  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
>> >  on him is decreasing, all the time that
>> >  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
>> >  mass behind him pulling back on his
>> >  super body. We can set aside the Sun
>> >  mass to the sides, but we must still
>> >  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]
>>
>> Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass"
>> pulling on him decreases, so does
>> his distance from the centre of the Sun
>> which causes the force of gravity to
>> increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).
>
> Do you even read what you're typing?
> What you have just said is that "while he
> is getting closer to the center of the Sun
> his distance from the center of the Sun
> decreases!" Your thinking processes may be
> impaired, perhaps by alcohol (speculation).
> I don't believe it is worth wasting time trying
> to make you "see" that as he travels closer to
> the center of he Sun the amount of mass "pulling
> on him" is always decreasing--And how a
> decreasing amount of mass can increase the
> pull of gravity is something like expecting a
> pebble resting on the surface of the earth to
> suddenly fly off into space on its own!
>

The mass decreases, but the distance to the centre of the mass also 
decreases.

Newton's formula for acceleration (gravitational force) is

a = Gm/r^2

Whilst the value of the total mass enclosed (m in this case) decreases as 
you move closer to the centre, so obviously does r, which acts to increase 
the gravitational force as r decreases.

In a homogenous (constant density) body, the change in mass varies as r^3 
but the distance varies as 1/r^2, so gravity decreases as you move towards 
the centre. However, the earth, Sun, regular stars etc do not have constant 
density, and in these cases it is very likely that the maximum acceleration 
due to gravity lies well under the surface of these objects.

If you still don't believe it, I can give you a numeric counter-example.

Consider an astronomical object of radius 10r. It consists of a core of mass 
m of radius r, and  another far lighter shell going from x=r to x=10r also 
of total mass m.

The gravitational acceleration on the surface of this body is:

A = force from central core + force from shell
= Gm/(10r)^2 + Gm/(10r)^2
= (2/100) * G m/r^2

The gravitational force at r=1 is:

A = force from central core + force from shell
= Gm/(r)^2 + 0

As you can see, the gravitational force at r=1 is 50 times greater than at 
r=10 ie at the surface

Do you understand now? Is there any part of the above you don't understand?

On Oct 10, 8:38 pm, "Peter Webb" wrote:
> "Aardvark"  wrote in message
>> On Oct 10, 2:35 am, "Peter Webb"
>>  wrote:
>>>> The instant Superman plunges past the
>>>> surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
>>>> of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
>>>> And it will continue to decrease as he
>>>> flies towards the Sun's center.

>>>>  [This is because as Superman travels
>>>>  closer and closer to the center of the
>>>>  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
>>>>  on him is decreasing, all the time that
>>>>  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
>>>>  mass behind him pulling back on his
>>>>  super body. We can set aside the Sun
>>>>  mass to the sides, but we must still
>>>>  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]

>>> Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass"
>>> pulling on him decreases, so does
>>> his distance from the centre of the Sun
>>> which causes the force of gravity to
>>> increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).

>> Do you even read what you're typing?
>> What you have just said is that "while he
>> is getting closer to the center of the Sun
>> his distance from the center of the Sun
>> decreases!" Your thinking processes may be
>> impaired, perhaps by alcohol (speculation).
>> I don't believe it is worth wasting time trying
>> to make you "see" that as he travels closer to
>> the center of he Sun the amount of mass "pulling
>> on him" is always decreasing--And how a
>> decreasing amount of mass can increase the
>> pull of gravity is something like expecting a
>> pebble resting on the surface of the earth to
>> suddenly fly off into space on its own!

> The mass decreases, but the distance to the centre
> of the mass also decreases...

Please STOP RIGHT THERE: don't repeat the
nonsense you wrote (which I paraphrased
perhaps with too much sarcasm), Follow the
consequences of gravity acting on Superman
as he approaches the center of the Sun (NOT
in reality BUT as the laws of gravity would
have it be):

The Sun is not solid but a plasma ball. This
means it can expand (or contract) as much as
it needs to in order to accommodate behaving
as the laws of gravity say it ought to behave:

This means that every particle in it is free to
move to its region of the greatest gravitational
field strength from its region of lowest
gravitational field strength (even in its core,
which may be 10 times denser than lead, but
is still a plasma).

Are you suggesting that every one such particle
will move to the area of the least gravitational
field strength from the area of the highest
gravitational field strength? That's the whole
point of this series of posts right there.

There is no question that the Sun works exactly
as we all believe it does and that the highest
pressure exists at its core (I just told you how
much pressure there is there producing a
density 10 times greater than that of lead).

The question to consider is NOT how the SUN
actually behaves, but how would a plasma ball
like the Sun behave were it indeed obeying the
classically delineated laws of gravity (that say the
strength of gravity acting on a body descending
to its center decreases. Do you understand now?

I guess it's true: no one understands sarcasm.

A solid ball may convey pressures from one point
to others, but a plasma ball like the Sun would
(were it only under the design of gravity alone)
eventually describe in space the field(s) of gravity
acting upon it ... exactly like iron filings describe
the fields of a magnet acting on them.

And then you would have to "see" its mass (the
equivalent of the Sun's iron filings) describing
a "more massive" shell around a "less massive"
center.

We don't see that (in fact, it is a physical
impossibility because then the Sun would not
be ON).

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com


.

"Aardvark"  wrote in message 
news:bf3b5666-40f5-4786-b6cd-e117741479a9@k17g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 10, 8:38 pm, "Peter Webb" wrote:
>> "Aardvark"  wrote in message
>>> On Oct 10, 2:35 am, "Peter Webb"
>>>  wrote:
>>>>> The instant Superman plunges past the
>>>>> surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
>>>>> of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
>>>>> And it will continue to decrease as he
>>>>> flies towards the Sun's center.
>
>>>>>  [This is because as Superman travels
>>>>>  closer and closer to the center of the
>>>>>  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
>>>>>  on him is decreasing, all the time that
>>>>>  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
>>>>>  mass behind him pulling back on his
>>>>>  super body. We can set aside the Sun
>>>>>  mass to the sides, but we must still
>>>>>  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]
>
>>>> Incorrect. Whilst the amount of "Sun mass"
>>>> pulling on him decreases, so does
>>>> his distance from the centre of the Sun
>>>> which causes the force of gravity to
>>>> increase (by a factor proportional to 1/r^2).
>
>>> Do you even read what you're typing?
>>> What you have just said is that "while he
>>> is getting closer to the center of the Sun
>>> his distance from the center of the Sun
>>> decreases!" Your thinking processes may be
>>> impaired, perhaps by alcohol (speculation).
>>> I don't believe it is worth wasting time trying
>>> to make you "see" that as he travels closer to
>>> the center of he Sun the amount of mass "pulling
>>> on him" is always decreasing--And how a
>>> decreasing amount of mass can increase the
>>> pull of gravity is something like expecting a
>>> pebble resting on the surface of the earth to
>>> suddenly fly off into space on its own!
>
>> The mass decreases, but the distance to the centre
>> of the mass also decreases...
>
> Please STOP RIGHT THERE: don't repeat the
> nonsense you wrote (which I paraphrased
> perhaps with too much sarcasm),

Consider an astronomical object of radius 10r. It consists of a core of mass
m of radius r, and  another far lighter shell going from x=r to x=10r also
of total mass m.

The gravitational acceleration on the surface of this body is:

A = force from central core + force from shell
= Gm/(10r)^2 + Gm/(10r)^2
= (2/100) * G m/r^2

The gravitational force at r=1 is:

A = force from central core + force from shell
= Gm/(r)^2 + 0

As you can see, the gravitational force at r=1 is 50 times greater than at
r=10 ie at the surface

Do you understand now? Is there any part of the above you don't understand?

In article
,
   Aardvark  wrote:

> There is no question that the Sun works exactly as we all believe it does
> and that the highest pressure exists at its core (I just told you how
> much pressure there is there producing a density 10 times greater than
> that of lead).

Only 10 times density of lead?! You must be joking. The answer is measured
in TONS per MATCHBOX.

-- 
Rodney Blackall (retired meteorologist)(BSc, FRMetS)
Buckingham, ENGLAND
Using Acorn SA-RPC, OS 4.02 with ANT INS and Pluto 3.03j

In article , 
rblackall@rodsrisc.demon.co.uk says...


> Only 10 times density of lead?! You must be joking. The 
answer is measured
> in TONS per MATCHBOX.
> 

How big a matchboxbox? The density at the core of the sun is 
generally acepted as being about 150g/cm^3, and I would guess 
your average matchbox at being about 4-5 cm^3 maybe a smidgen 
more.

I will accept TON per MATCHBOX. :)
I will also accept correction and/or clue.


-- 
Alan LeHun

In uk.sci.misc message ,
Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:03:32, Alan LeHun  posted:
>In article ,
>rblackall@rodsrisc.demon.co.uk says...
>
>> Only 10 times density of lead?! You must be joking. The
>answer is measured
>> in TONS per MATCHBOX.
>>
>
>How big a matchboxbox? The density at the core of the sun is
>generally acepted as being about 150g/cm^3, and I would guess
>your average matchbox at being about 4-5 cm^3 maybe a smidgen
>more.
>
>I will accept TON per MATCHBOX. :)
>I will also accept correction and/or clue.

I have measured a standard, but not recent, Bryant and May box (average
contents 35).  It is 1.4 * 3.1 * 4.8 cm - nearly 21 cc - @150g/cc, that
would be a little over 3 kg.  Wikipedia, 150 tonnes/metre^3.

Someone may be thinking of the Companion of Sirius.

XP uk.s.a added.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk  Turnpike v6.05  MIME.
 Web  <URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
  Astro stuff via astron-1.htm, gravity0.htm ; quotings.htm, pascal.htm, etc.
 No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

In article ,
   Alan LeHun  wrote:
> > Only 10 times density of lead?! You must be joking. The answer is
> >measured in TONS per MATCHBOX.
> > 

> How big a matchboxbox? The density at the core of the sun is 
> generally acepted as being about 150g/cm^3, and I would guess 
> your average matchbox at being about 4-5 cm^3 maybe a smidgen 
> more.

> I will accept TON per MATCHBOX. :)
> I will also accept correction and/or clue.

My error, I must have been thinking neutron stars - a few billion years
premature!

-- 
Rodney Blackall (retired meteorologist)(BSc, FRMetS)
Buckingham, ENGLAND
Using Acorn SA-RPC, OS 4.02 with ANT INS and Pluto 3.03j

In article , 
rblackall@rodsrisc.demon.co.uk says...
> > I will accept TON per MATCHBOX. :)
> > I will also accept correction and/or clue.
> 
> My error, I must have been thinking neutron stars - a few billion years
> premature!
> 

My error too, I was thinking Kg per g, or a box of Cooks 
Kitchen matches, or something. 

John has sorted us out....

-- 
Alan LeHun

On Oct 8, 11:37 pm, "Nightcrawler"
 wrote:
> "John Santos" <john.san...@post.harvard.
edu> wrote in messagenews:
MPG.2538809c369d2948989686
@news.giganews.com...
>> No.  This is where you go wrong.
>> It would *not* stop.
>> All the while it was approaching the center
>> of the Sun, it would
>> continue to accelerate, though the rate
>> of acceleration would
>> decline to 0 at the center.  However,
>> it would continue to
>> possess all the velocity, momentum and
>> kinetic energy it had
>> acquired while accelerating downward.
>> As it reached the center,
>> it would have exactly enough velocity to
>> reach the surface of
>> the Sun on the other side, plus whatever
>> initial velocity it
>> had when it first reached the surface
>> of the Sun.  So it would
>> go flying off into space after emerging
>> from the far side of
>> the Sun.  (If it had originally fallen
>> from a long distance,
>> such as interstellar space, it would
>> eventually fly off again
>> and never return, since the velocity
>> it would acquire falling
>> from interstellar space to the surface
>> of the Sun would be
>> exactly the escape velocity *from*
>> the surface of the sun.
>> It is easy to prove this by conservation
>> of energy, as well
>> as by a detailed integration
>> of the forces involved.
>> All your subsequent conclusions are
>> incorrect, due to this
>> fundamental error.

That misunderstanding is why I substituted
Superman for the ping-pong ball AND YET
so many monkeys [yes: here] continued to
misunderstand my simple little thought-
experiment that I despair of my fellow
monkeys ever evolving into thinking beings
any time in the near future. --SDR

> Of course, the OP did not state that
> the ping pong ball would
> be immune to the density of the matter
> within the sun.  So, the
> ball would essentially just get buffeted
> around and most likely
> would never even get close to the sun.

This poster is obviously slowing crawling
his way towards becoming some sort of
hominid. He is probably capable of standing
upright and his legs are also probably
longer than his arms now (from his post).

> He's also in error in that he is
> presuming that the matter of the
> sun will not press in and fill any voids

Unfortunately he's thinking of the Sun
sphere more like a vessel in his hand
here on earth [instead of a free-floating
ball of gas/plasma out in space] wherein
the more water he pours into his vessel
the more it weighs (whereas the whole
entire Sun doesn't really weigh anything
whatever at all [pouring "more" into it
doesn't really make it "weigh" more]:
the Sun's "weights" are all relativistically
spread about/inside its space... much like
"a pound of stuff" only weighs a pound
on the surface of the earth... and if it
is out "in space" it weighs nothing whatever
at all--you know, much like the Sun itself).

This monkey, unlike the other poster, may
be able to stand upright, but he's still a
poor ole monkey, pure & simple...

> that there are, and specifically
> ignores the fact that the sun is a fusion
> reactor which needs a
> constant supply of fuel to maintain
> the reaction.  If there was a

"if there were" ...

> "void", then the reaction would stop.

Yes! --That-- happens to be my point:

The ongoing fusion reaction proves that
in the Sun sphere Gravity could NOT be
working as it OUGHT TO BE working:

There is NO MECHANISM in a gas/plasma
ball (large enough for 1,300,000 Earths
to fit in it) for the outer shell mass to
transmit enough cumulative pressures
to the core ... since gravity is actually
declining the closer one gets to the core:

There are too many earth-masses around
every earth-mass at, say, 1/4 of the way
to the core pulling out towards the surface
for it to "press" all its mass towards the
core: In the end, once you start getting to
98/100th of the way to the core those earth-
masses are pressing more against core-
wards than core-wise [or, negative gravity
--at the core itself there should be no
gravity pressure at all]. Not being ONE
SOLID BALL the earth-masses in the Sun
have no way to add their gravitational
pressure towards the core. SINCE they
are obviously not falling towards the center
like Newton apples but existing in place. Or:

Imagine not an earth-mass but one given
atom "existing" inside the Sun sphere:
ANYWHERE YOU PLACE IT it will always
"feel" less and less "pull" towards the center
the closer to the center you put it. THE SUM
RESULT being:

The Sun is undergoing the pressure it's
undergoing at its core NOT because of
"gravitational pressures" but due to some
other mechanism--And that mechanism...
a velocity pressing towards center(s) ever
since the beginning of time, is explained
here:

 http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com
http://islamisbad.com


 "Give it up. Dude:
  We are monkeys."

   Oh, yeah. Sorry.

"Eat our feces, dude."



.

>
> There is NO MECHANISM in a gas/plasma
> ball (large enough for 1,300,000 Earths
> to fit in it) for the outer shell mass to
> transmit enough cumulative pressures
> to the core ... since gravity is actually
> declining the closer one gets to the core:
>

Gravity doesn't actually necessarily decrease as you get closer to the 
centre. This has been pointed out to you several times. It is zero at the 
centre, as you say.

Pressure however is at its maximum in the centre. It is caused by the 
"weight" of the Sun's mass bearing down on its centre. While bits of the Sun 
at the very centre have no "weight", all the rest of the Sun does.

You will note that gravity and pressure and very different things. Gravity 
is most usually defined as a "force"  with units of mass x length x 
time^(-2), pressure is a force per unit area with units of mass x 
length^(-1) x time^(-2).

Later when you learn the "ideal gas law" and some basic calculus, you will 
be able to model the pressure inside the Sun at various depths by assuming 
it is comprised of an ideal gas and it is in thermal equilibrium. This will 
give you a better feel for what is going on.

HTH

On Oct 26, 12:08 am, "Peter Webb"
 wrote:
> > There is NO MECHANISM in a gas/plasma
> > ball (large enough for 1,300,000 Earths
> > to fit in it) for the outer shell mass to
> > transmit enough cumulative pressures
> > to the core ... since gravity is actually
> > declining the closer one gets to the core:
>
> Gravity doesn't actually necessarily decrease as you get closer to the
> centre. This has been pointed out to you several times. It is zero at the
> centre, as you say.
>
> Pressure however is at its maximum in the centre. It is caused by the
> "weight" of the Sun's mass bearing down on its centre. While bits of the Sun
> at the very centre have no "weight", all the rest of the Sun does.
>
> You will note that gravity and pressure and very different things. Gravity
> is most usually defined as a "force"  with units of mass x length x
> time^(-2), pressure is a force per unit area with units of mass x
> length^(-1) x time^(-2).
>
> Later when you learn the "ideal gas law" and some basic calculus, you will
> be able to model the pressure inside the Sun at various depths by assuming
> it is comprised of an ideal gas and it is in thermal equilibrium. This will
> give you a better feel for what is going on.
>
> HTH

Monkeys, sir: Monkeys!

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

.

On Oct 26, 1:51 am, BradGuth
 wrote:
> Gravity Force Inside a Spherical Shell
> (is always zero)

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/Mechanics/sphshell2.html#wtls

> So, how thick is the shell or
> gaseous outer wall of our sun?

If the universe operated as described
by classical laws of gravity (e.g. via
your mythical graviton) then probably
the Sun would look like a big frozen
planet (along with every other star).
The "shell" might simply descend in
density to a least dense center, that's all.

Fortunately the universe doesn't look
inside the craniums of men to learn
how it's permitted to work (or not):

Eventually men LEARN the Earth isn't flat.
That the universe does not revolve around
their itty bitty planet. And that the reason
why gravitational anomalies suffuse the
universe everywhere they look is NOT
because "God likes lo create complex
puzzles with wandering planets, and
gravitational forces that don't act on the
parts of a mass just on the whole of it"
BUT because they have yet to fully grasp
(understand) exactly how perfectly simple
the workings of the universe really are.

You can learn a bit of it by traveling to:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

You will have to shut your mind to the bunk
more primitive monkeys than you have come
up with throughout theis ascent from more
primitive ages... to our howling day. But it
can be done (by most monkeys, if not all).

Good luck!

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com




.

On Oct 29, 7:59 pm, "Peter Webb" wrote:
> "Aardvark"  wrote in message
>
> > If the universe operated as described
> > by classical laws of gravity (e.g. via
> > your mythical graviton) then probably
> > the Sun would look like a big frozen
> > planet (along with every other star).
> > The "shell" might simply descend in
> > density to a least dense center, that's all.
>
> The Sun is a fluid.
>
> On earth, more dense objects sink in fluids,
> and less dense objects float.
> But you believe that on the Sun, the highest
> density matter floats on top of
> less dense matter?

You're not thinking straight:

I do not claim that the universe works
in any way differently from how we
know it works.

I do  know that if gravity were producing
"the effects of gravity," then the universe
could NOT work the way we know it works
(from the way gravity should work if it were
to work according to its own laws).

ERGO my scenario of a "less dense core"
for the Sun... if the universe worked according
to the laws of gavity.

The Sun does not actually have a less
dense core BECAUSE (see Newton's laws
of motion) since the beginning of the
universe everything in it has been
accelerating towards ITS CENTER(s).

NOTE: Not towards "a" center because
the sum total of its matter IS its center.
THERE is no other matter in the universe
than matter---I know this simplicity
is hard for monkeys to grasp. And I have
great sympathy for you, believe me.
But eventually you will all understand it;
just as you now understand that the math
that proved Ptolemy's earh-centered notion
didn't really prove anything except perhaps
the over-cleverness of us monkeys.

In affect, the universe is acting like
THE MOTHER OF ALL BLACK HOLES
with every "bit of matter in it" being
its "point of infinite density" (the very
obviously misnamed "singularity").

EVERYTHING about us is telling us
this is the case, but we are not yet
prepared (as a monkey society) to see it
(only I can see it--others may see it as
well, or perhaps blurrily, sooner or later).

THAT is why denser (the more mass, given
the same space) stuff "moves" toward center
with "greater weight" (more impetus) than
less massive matter (and why nearly mass-
less particles like the photon seen to shoot
about AT AN ALMOST INCREDIBLY CONSTANT
SPEED regardless of where in the universe
they are). And without knowing each other.

And why, the photon, after it slows down
while passing through a denser medium
suddenly re-speeds up after it hits a less
dense medium, and WITHOUT having to fire
any after-burners!

It's all explained from several different angles
at:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

and in a plain/simple English language
which even a six year old can follow.

See if you can,

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

.