Cold Core Model of Earth's Structure

[stereologist]

Cold-Co, that isn't what Boerseun is saying. He is not stating that gravity works in alll works, but rather that it can if there are objects there to cause attraction.

Are the files you are talking about too big to attach to an email?

[Cold-co]

Stereologist:
All I am saying is there are objects in earth's crust that must be attracted by horizontal gravity, just as Boerseun claims. That horizontal gravity exists is evident in the Cavendish balance the device used to determine the gravitational constant. The Cavendish balance does not operate in the vertical, but instead operates in a plane perpendicular to the vertical gravitational vector. Hence. a large deposit of heavy ore will cause a pertabation in any gravity vector.

My server will not allow the transmission of the amount of data that a CD can accomodate. So, I'm sorry it isn't possible to do it in the manner you suggest. Don't worry I'm not going to start bombarding you with unwanted ads or blow your cover.

[stereologist]

The Cavendish balance measures gravity, not a separate entity, i.e. horizontal gravity. The fact that one vector points down towards the center of the earth does not mean that there are not other vectors points towards other nearby objects. The existence one vector does not say anything about the other vectors does it? For example, suppose we put a Cavendish balance in a 0 gravity location. Does this mean that the attraction seen by the Cavendish balance is no longer what you call horizontal gravity? Does it become regular gravity?

[Boerseun]

Cold-co, I don't think you understand the implications of what I'm saying.

If you descend in an elevator to, say, a hundred kilometers deep, then surely you'll be gravitationally attracted to the hundred-km thick layer of rock and stone in front of you. Sure. But you will also be gravitationally attracted to the 100km thick layer behind you, to the left and the right of you. All these vectors will cancel out. The only gravitational pull you will experience, will be the resultant of all gravity sources having any sort of impact on you. In other words, the mass to the left, right, in front and behind you might as well be ignored, you won't experience it. You will only fall towards the center of the Earth, experiencing the gravitational pull of a globe underneath your feet, shrinking as you go deeper until you reach the core, where you will be essentially weightless. Because even right at the very core, the total mass of the Earth is all around you - which means gravitational pull will be the sum total of the mass of the Earth in all directions, perfectly canceling out.

Counter-intuitively, this is not to say that the pressure at the core is zero - indeed, that will be the zone of highest pressure. Because all the layers from the core to the surface are being attracted to the core, and supporting those layers above it, which are all pressing down, because the sum total of the gravitational pull they all experience, is downwards, towards a globe of a radius determined by the particular layer's depth.

This globe we're discussing isn't a sort of a gravity "Faraday cage", where gravity is magically made to disappear under the surface. All we're saying, is that because of the shape of the Earth, all mass above, to the front, the left and the right of any particular object inside the Earth can be ignored - they all cancel out (if the Earth was a cube, it would've been a totally different story).All that matters, is the gravitational pull beneath your feet - because there is no other gravity source to cancel that out. That will merely be the resultant of all possible gravity sources you experience.

[Cold-co]

Boerseum and Stereologist:
You keep dancing around the problem. I contend, as both of you do, there are horizontal vectors of gravity, but the difference lies in the fact that gravity is an elastic force, hence it cannot be cancelled by another elastic force. It is still present and pulling the orb together. You will not feel its effects because it is of equal value all around you, even as you progress into the earth.
When earth tries to flatten from a rotational induced outward force, she must overcome both the effect of vertical gravity and the packing effect of the horizontal component of gravity. In that situation the horizontal component does not cancel or balance out as you contend. It must also be overcome before earth will flatten.
Now, I have trigonometrically calculated the ever present strength of horizontal gravity. I request that you review my calculations. You can then judge for yourselves whether horizontal gravity poses another check to earth's flattening and whether it too should be considered in the flattening equation.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by stereologist

Cold-Co, that isn't what Boerseun is saying. He is not stating that gravity works in alll works, but rather that it can if there are objects there to cause attraction....

stereo, please be more careful with your spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc. The two sentences above are almost indecipherable. I can, with effort, translate what *I* would have meant if *I* had written them, but I am not sure at all what *you* meant by them.

On a different note, let's talk about "horizontal gravity".

Somebody is splitting hairs here, and the hair is missing. There is NO distinction between vertical gravity and horizontal gravity. The force of gravity between any two mass particles is along the straight line connecting the two particles. That line could be horizontal or vertical (to the Earth's surface, say), or anything in between. The magnitude of the force does not change in any way.

Now, are there gravitational forces which are "horizontal" in the sense that they exhibit a force that has a horizontal component? The answer is yes, of course yes. The Eiffel Tower is affecting a gravitational force on me, and that force has a significant horizontal component -- because the Eiffel Tower is to the East of me, not directly beneath me.

BTW, if you don't understand horizontal and vertical components of a force, you better go to Wikipedia and find out fast.

Is this horizontal force on me from the Eiffel Tower anything special or different from the vertical force I feel on my butt as I sit in this chair? No. No. A thousand times, No.

Is this horizontal force due to some special nature of the mass tugging on me? No. Or to some special nature of ME? No. Gravity works in all directions equally. It works in all directions. Period.

The force of gravity is a force. I never thought I would have to explain this, but given the way this thread is going, it's necessary. It's a force. It's a "pull" on the mass of one object caused by the mass of another object.

Yes, the force of gravity is "bidirectional"! Dammit, ALL forces are "bidirectional". Hello! Newton's Laws of Motion: "For every reaction (force) there is an equal but opposite reaction (counter-force)." If my finger pushes against a can of Coca-Cola with a force of 1 pound, then the can is also pushing against my finger with a force of 1 pound. There are no "naked" ("unidirectional") forces in the Universe.

When two opposite but equal forces cancel each other out at a point, there is no "residue" left over. They cancel out. Zero remains. When lots of opposite but equal forces act over the surface of a non-zero volume, like the Coke can, then the contents do not "feel" a force, they "feel" pressure.

A force caused by gravity is basically indistinguishable from any other force, in terms of HOW it affects matter, and HOW the matter behaves as a result. There are "elastic" objects -- there are no "elastic" forces. A force is a pull or push. Period. And a pull equals a -push. Period.

Given a spherical Earth (not true but close enough), then anywhere on its surface, the sum total of ALL vertical and horizontal forces from gravity will be a single vertical force toward the center of the Earth (your "weight"). All horizontal gravitational components will cancel out.

These canceled-out horizontal gravitational components are truly cancelled-out. They do not create a "negative pressure" or a "residue force" or a "bidirectional stretching factor" or a "mortistat gradient" or an "elastic conundrum" or an "inertial fotticyte" or anything else.

[Pyrotex]

Originally Posted by Cold-co

...If you are interested in reviewing the mathematics behind my claim that all orbs experience horizontal gravitational attraction ....

Cold-co,
correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't you say you were doing these calculations in an Excel spreadsheet? I cannot imagine your spreadsheet being greater than 2 Mbytes, but I guess it could be.

Why don't you PLOT the data? Then you can copy the plot, paste it into a Word document and certainly either post it or attach it to a PM to any of us.

That would kill two birds with one stone.

[stereologist]

stereo, please be more careful with your spelling, grammar, sentence structure, etc. The two sentences above are almost indecipherable. I can, with effort, translate what *I* would have meant if *I* had written them, but I am not sure at all what *you* meant by them.

Sorry. Bad typing is my norm. Should have proofread.

[maddog]

To all,

I am in complete agreement with contributions of a sphere above me are "canceled out".
Believe me, I had to work this out one of the *star'd Homework problems for my freshman
physics class and it was a bear. I was very thorough in my proof to work out for a sphere
that any horizontal component of gravity is canceled out due to symmetry.

The only thing I can add is the Earth is "not quite" spherical. The deviation in any horizontal
component has got to be less than 3 orders of magnitude lower down, so is negligible.

maddog

[Cold-co]

For All:
I'm in complete agreement with the concept of vertical gravity deminishing as you progress into the earth, that's not the problem. Where the problem lies is in your concept that all horizontal forces cancel out. Due to the nature of matter, those forces are still present. They are balanced, but they are still there and actively pulling. Only when you try to disturb that balance must the strength of their pulls be considered. Since current thinking believes these pulls cancel out, your textbooks do not address these pulls. If you cannot conceive of a latent force being present in matter, a force that hold matter together in the manner put forth by Newton in his universal gravitational equation, then all the arguments I have put forth are mute.

Bulldog:
Go to the site that Charlie O gave you the routing for; step throught the whole PowerPoint presentation, there you will find the schematic and resultant forces displayed.