Image: Jon Krause
In Brief
- Science 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on.
- Proponents say these “open access” practices make scientific progress more collaborative and therefore more productive.
- Critics say scientists who put preliminary findings online risk having others copy or exploit the work to gain credit or even patents.
- Despite pros and cons, Science 2.0 sites are beginning to proliferate; one notable example is the OpenWetWare project started by biological engineers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Editor's Note: This article was originally an "Edit This" column which sought reader feedback before print publication, for the original version of the story please click here.
More In This Article
-
Overview
Science 2.0: Great New Tool, or Great Risk?
-
Overview
Discuss This Article
The first generation of World Wide Web capabilities rapidly transformed retailing and information search. More recent attributes such as blogging, tagging and social networking, dubbed Web 2.0, have just as quickly expanded people’s ability not just to consume online information but to publish it, edit it and collaborate about it—forcing such old-line institutions as journalism, marketing and even politicking to adopt whole new ways of thinking and operating.
Science could be next. A small but growing number of researchers (and not just the younger ones) have begun to carry out their work via the wide-open tools of Web 2.0. And although their efforts are still too scattered to be called a movement—yet—their experiences to date suggest that this kind of Web-based “Science 2.0” is not only more collegial than traditional science but considerably more productive.
This article was originally published with the title Science 2.0.
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
27 Comments
Add CommentIf genuine scientific information is available for pay only, then only pseudoscience is available for laypeople with serious questions (but limited budgets). I have run into this problem again and again. There is a strongly-supported anti-intellectualist movement; scientists best wake up and smell it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe availability of instant collaboration, in literally seconds, for researchers around the globe is one of the greatest accomplishments of modern times and is still just in its infancy. Moving towards Open Access will only further breakthroughs and understanding to any research. Our group has seen a rise of over 200% in just the past year for the data sharing and dissemination application we develop, Tranche. The Tranche Project is a free and open source file sharing tool that enables collections of computers to easily share and cite scientific data sets. Designed and built with scientists and researchers in mind, Tranche solves the data sharing problem in a secure and scalable fashion. Scientific tools and data sets are helpful for validating published work, designing software algorithms, aiding current research, and much more.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWe are advocates of scientific data sharing and are glad to see an article regarding this trend. For more information: http://tranche.proteomecommons.org
--
Edited by markgj at 04/22/2008 12:37 PM
I think you're still missing the point on "scooping". It's not likely that someone is going to steal your actual data and publish it. The issue is that by exposing your work in a preliminary stage, you may not have made the intellectual leap toward fully understanding the implications of your results. Showing it to others may lead to their making that leap, and correctly receiving the credit for doing so. It's nice in that science will move forward faster, not so nice in that something you would have eventually figured out is now credited to someone else. The great historical example is Rosalind Franklin. Her preliminary data was shown to Watson and Crick. They made the intellectual leap that she hadn't yet reached. They won the Nobel Prize and have been celebrated as some of the great minds of the century. She is now known as "the dark lady of DNA" and is a cautionary example. As I said in the comments on the first article, I worked in a lab where it took us a few years to work out the actual cause of death in a transgenic mouse mutant. That result got us on the cover of Nature. If we had released all the data before understanding it, perhaps someone else would have been on that cover.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe other big issue here is that none of the technologies mentioned are in widespread, mainstream use. Some will certainly be picked up, most are going to fall by the wayside. There's far too much Web 2.0 for the sake of Web 2.0 going on. We're just reaching a point where we're seeing some useful critical analysis of the tools, getting beyond the hype and the cheerleading.
It was only a matter of time. It's not entirely clear to me how or when science became delineated from the public but I am hopeful Science 2.0 will mark a reunion of sorts between science and the public.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIs there a method for organizing all the information orginating in the general scientific community for example that going to web 2.0. I suggest that a method somewhat similar to the US Post Office zip code system might be useful. I have some more suggestions about this. My Email address is gillishjg@aol.com. Please put the phrase 2.0 in the subject line of any email to me.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRespectfully, HerbSPGR
I find it curious that you are discussing "Open Access Science". Open to those who can afford to pay to read your articles! At a time that science is under attack by the proponents of ID and other movements, it is difficult to keep up with real scientific activity. We are teased with previews, then told to pay up if we want to read the actual discoveries or research. Science is falling behind, specially in colleges, but the "bean counters" will rule!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn the May issue of Scientific American, 'wilbanks' is quoted as saying, "You don't get points for making a statement first in science unless you can prove that statement."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually, you do. Even in mathematics, where proof is the sine qua non, we have the still unproved Riemann Hypothesis and the only recently confirmed Poincare Conjecture. I can also cite an example from my own experience. More than forty years ago I conjectured that, in addition to the 5 Platonic solids, the 13 Archimedean solids, and the infinite families of Kepler prisms and antiprisms, there are just 92 other convex polyhedra with regular faces. This was later verified by Viktor Zalgaller and others, but the nonuniform regular-faced polyhedra are now universally known as the "Johnson solids."
One point the article fails to make is that web publishing is so much more conducive to multimedia communication. Those of us studying dynamical systems are at a disadvantage publishing our work in static, paper journals because the most interesting aspects of our work--the movies--are relegated to "supplementary materials". Someone needs to create a peer-reviewed online journal that integrates video, audio, graphics, and text.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAt its inception, the net was created to facilitate communication in the technical -- and military -- world. Then, the net rapidly became the medium of commerce and archived information. The young have since expanded its function to encompass social interaction. And once again, but on a larger fractal, the net is morphing back to its roots, the dispersal of technical "developmental" information. Face Book for scientists.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHumans have always operated in clans. The net makes the informational boundaries of the clan disappear. Interestingly, the first word after "Scientific American" on its home page -- on either axis -- is "community".
We are assuming the positive aspects of the Borg Collective. It is essential that negative aspects such as "group think" not be given equal power. The tools have changed immensely in recent decades; human nature has changed not a wit in recent millennia.
Walker Sloan
The key to facilitating global medical research will no doubt occur through Web 2.0 technologies and the use of Semantic Web medical ontologies.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI've worked around publishing for over 30 years. It is always a mistake to publish anything that has not been peer reviewed, edited and proof-checked. Regardless of any risks of theft or tampering, never publish until you are certain your work will stand scrutiny.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFor crying out loud, it is a great tool, that is how knowledge spreads, why would one want to hide the results, be fair, be democratic, want a better world, that is democracy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisoops I forgot, even on the net you still must say the source of your findings, people will cry foul if you take their ideas and claim they are yours, there are courts, copyright infingements are not a worry, your name will be on the research and you will get credit for your work, let the knowledge be easily accessible.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisstand up to scrutiny yes, but peer review, what if your peers refuse to review it because they don't know you, they don't like the sound of your name, and what if its because you have gone into a field they didn't a new field explaining phenomenon that was not explained before, obviously then you will never get published in a journal, you are not part of "them", and they want to keep it like that. That is the beauty of the internet, work must stand up to scrutiny, but peer review, people want to have a claim in anything, what if they are not quoted because they couldn't be quoted because they had not bothered to delve into that discipline, then out you go, I know one professor who laughed at a fellow collegue saying what wonderful stuff, but it will be known when you die, simply you are not one of us, whatever the reason, race, ethnicity, that is the reality of academia and the peer review process.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAlways Africa!!!!!!! Where else can I post this?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMODERN HUMANS DID NOT START THEIR LIFE IN AFRICA.
Evidence points to early presence of humans in continents other than Africa. Even the present study, based on bones and DNA comparisons, did not consider all facts, especially facts derived from study of language origin or the testimony from oil reserves.
Bones We should first of all notice that Egyptology reveals serious efforts in Africa as far as conservation of corpes is concerned. This explains why the fossil record in Africa can mislead modern interpreters. It is also noteworthy that bones, though solid in appearance, have a spongelike structure. When exposed to variation of temparature over long time periods, the thousands of tiny holes in the bone structure can give way to the physical process of widening. Thus, bones used for study have been slightly, but steadily deformed over the ages.
DNA To achieve a comprehensive study, DNA vertical comparison (DNA from people that lived in early years of human history and DNA from people that live today) should be completed by DNA horizontal comparison (DNA from contemporaries living in different climatic regions). In that line of reasoning, it is interesting to notice that an individual from northern Europe can be genetically closer to an individual from west Africa than to another individual from northern Europe. DNA being a criteria at individuals level, cannot be used to explain the alleged evolution of species.
Language Scholars studying origin of languages strongly point to the plains of Shinear (Middle East) as the common origin of human languages.
Oil reserves It is known fact that crude oil is the product of compression and heating of ancient organic materials over extended time periods. Therefore, Asia coming first as far as oil reserves are concerned shows that most ancient presence of life can be traced in Asia.
To conclude, I claim human life started on earth when the planet was but one continent. Later on, the earth was basically divided in just 2 totally separated areas: the Americas and the rest (leaving aside isles). Movements from Africa to Asia, then to Europe have always been possible through continental ways. The American Indian found themselves on the other side when the earth was divided (see the historical account of the Bible in the Book of Genesis, chapter 10, verse 25). Thus, these are the only humans that could be naturally isolated.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOff hand it seems the solution to this problem is easy -
1- If you believe in the betterment of all man kind no matter who brings it about then Science 2.0 is the way to go.
2. If you would like credit for what you have done then keep your mouth shut and never goto Science 2.0 because some low life will steal it from you.
D.A. Green
Niche@hotmail.com
So here's my question: this article was commented on pre-publication. But is Sci Am ready to join Web 2.0? Does Sci Am insist that the authors of stories read these message boards? Respond? Moderate? Move the discussion forward? Should they?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI regularly see ideas for research directions posted on these boards (some by me) -- anyone actually taking these up?
It is important to recognize the significant security requirements that we must comply with in pharma and healthcare. These requirements distinguish between what we know of as Web 2.0 and Science 2.0. Much of Web 2.0 is available on the public Internet, much of Science 2.0 will evolve on the private Intranet. It is only after implementing specific security policies for access and auditing as well as to ensure HIPPA compliance that Science 2.0 tools can be successfully deployed. We have preferred tools with sophisticated built in security policies like Movable Type and Jumper Networks that meet industry standard requirements.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is important to recognize the significant security requirements that we must comply with in pharma and healthcare. These requirements distinguish between what we know of as Web 2.0 and Science 2.0. Much of Web 2.0 is available on the public Internet, much of Science 2.0 will evolve on the private Intranet. It is only after implementing specific security policies for access and auditing as well as to ensure HIPPA compliance that Science 2.0 tools can be successfully deployed. We have preferred tools with sophisticated built in security policies like Movable Type and Jumper Networks that meet industry standard requirements.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFrom a position of absolutely no knowledge: I think this sounds brilliant. Remember how skeptical everyone was about Wikipedia. Admittedly <a href="http://www.site-de-bingo.fr
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this">bingo en ligne</a> this is different, but the Web was designed for the free exchange of ideas in research, and I reckon that's what it will do best.
At Orwik. (visit us at orwik.com or orwik.blogspot.com) we've started an effort to build an open access web portal for scientific research. Through an online collaboration, analysis and publication engine we aim to provide a virtual laboratory environment where they can share their research from conception to finished product. We are building the next generation scientific platform that aims to unify researchers in academia as well as enable transparency and availability in scientific data.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNaive reviewers are best. Peer reviewers get worse over time, and feedback accelerates the deterioration.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thishttp://www.sciencenews.org/index/generic/activity/view/id/47477/title/Peer_review_No_improvement_with_practice
The focus of ommercialization has always been on revenue, profit and survival within the competition. Commercialization within a market is necessary but totally unacceptable in the science. Even though we tend to compete for project grands we should not completely loose track of the nature of science. The society of 21st centry includes outlier who go over the top regardless of ethics and out of any respect for their peers. No wonder that Science 2.0 is also effected. However, it will contribute to the improvement of the global research portfolio in a very unexpected way.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTo all critics and pessimists: watch and learn!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf negative gravity of the earth and high gravity in space-
A revisit to Newtons law of Universal gravitation.
M. Kesavamani, M. V. R. Krishna Rao, R. M. C. Prasad,
V. Vidyasagar, C. Ramachandran,
214, Star Shelter Apartments, Saidabad Colony,
Hyderabad- 500 059, A. P., India.
E. mail: manikesava@rediffmail.com
ABSTRACT
Considerable confusion and debate exists in the literature on the subject of gravity right from the geophysical definition of the gravity field to standardization of gravity reduction and corrections as well as geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the gravity anomaly . A common belief is that the gravity field decreases with height just because the distance factor is in the denominator of the equation of the Newtons law of Universal gravitation. Contrary to this idea, the physicists deal with high gravity fields in space and the geophysicists with negative gravity field for mass distribution on the surface of the earth. The physicists and the geophysicists use the scalar gravity to compute the energy and gravity field for theoretical models respectively. We analyze and present here our perception of the Newtons law of Universal gravitation and show that gravity increases with height.
The Newtons law of Universal gravitation states that the mutual force of attraction between two point masses M and m is proportional to the product of masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance Z between them. Then, k as the constant of proportionality, the gravitational force
[F = k m M/ Z2]&. (A)
But, in practice in a more general form, the gravitational attraction (F) exerted by M of the earth on m, is [F =- G m M/(R) 2 R] --- (B)
Here, R is a unit vector in the direction of increase of coordinate of radius of earth R, which directs away from the centre of reference at the mass M. The negative sign in the equation indicates that the force F acts in the opposite direction, towards the attracting mass M of the earth and G, the constant of universal gravitation. Thus, there are two equations, one with minus sign and the other with positive sign, for the Newton law of universal gravitation to compute the gravity field.
A cursory glance at the equations reveals that the gravity decreases as the distance increases because the distance factor is in the denominator. However, the negative sign in equation (B) results in a negative gravitational force away from mass M, as if the smaller mass m attracts mass M. It suggests that a similar large mirror image mass as that of M should exist at the same distance in the opposite direction (invisible mass above the surface of the earth?). However, the force F, masses M and m cannot be negative. Therefore, only the distance factor R can be negative. However, what we deal in practice is negative gravity field of the earth, which decreases with height. Now let us examine what this negative gravity field actually means.
Analyzing the Newtons law of universal gravitation for a general case when M=m, the forces of attraction will be in opposite direction and the effect of the mutual attraction of the two masses is maximum at the mid point of the two masses. The effect of each mass on the other reduces as the distance increases away from the mid point of the masses. The forces vary inversely with the square of the distance from the mid point. When M is larger than m, the force of attraction is always towards the mass M because it attracts mass m. The mass M by virtue of its size exerts its influence over a large distance as compared to the mass m. Hence, the distance at which the maximum force occurs shifts away from the large mass towards the small mass. We can better visualize if we consider another mass Q smaller than that of M and m located between the two the mass then, Q experiences force of attraction of mass M or mass m depending upon its location and size. It is at this point of intersection, the acceleration due to gravity changes its direction towards the attracting masses. The mutual attraction between two bodies results only due the interaction of the excess and deficit masses of the two bodies respectively.
However, here, we consider two unequal masses and discuss about attraction of mass M on m. It is unidirectional in the case of two unequal masses. Therefore, it follows that the direction of force and the distance measurement are positive in the same direction towards the attracting mass M. We can measure the distance between the two masses from any direction, as it is a square term in the denominator. Therefore, it is apparent that the difference between the two equations is only the reckoning of the distance factor. In addition, gravity field is a vector quantity and the direction of force and measurement are in the same direction towards the attracting mass. This is implicit in the Newtons law of universal gravitation, but requires a more correct mathematical expression for the words inversely proportional . Therefore, we emphasize that the gravity increases as the height increases. The equation without minus sign actually indicates the gravity field vector. Differentiating the gravity force with distance vector results in the change in signature in opposite direction.
Therefore, we show that this negative gravity with height is actually a mirror image of the gravity field of the earth obtained from the Newtons law without the minus sign and is proportional to vertical gradient of gravity field vector as a change in sign as that observed in equation with minus sign. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity, which indicates the density of the body, decreases and the gravity increases with height. Therefore in space at the intersection of planets and galaxies high gravity fields occur. In addition, gravity decreases to zero towards the centre of the earth. The magnetic field also requires similar understanding.
INTRODUCTION: There has been considerable confusion and debate on the subjects right from the geophysical definition of the gravity field (Hualin Zeng and Tianfeng Wan, 2004) to standardization of gravity reduction and corrections (LaFehr, 1991; William Hinze et.,al, 2005) as well as geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the gravity anomaly (Hackney and Featherstone, 2003). Of some concern is that the practical realization of gravity anomaly remains open to question despite being the subject of many investigators.
That the gravity field decreases with height is so much ingrained in the minds of the scholars and students of science, it would be difficult to erase and convince with contrary ideas. In physics the field of a force is often more important than the absolute magnitude of the force. In geophysical applications, we are concerned with accelerations rather than forces. Classical theoretical gravity interpretation and modern Bouguer gravity anomaly interpretation differ and use the Newtons law of Universal gravitation equation with positive and negative signs respectively. The Physicists deal with high gravity black holes in space and the Geophysicists with negative gravity field for mass distribution on the surface of the earth. In spite of, extensive theoretical work in gravity interpretation, the concept of gravity anomaly, is still an enigma. If gravity anomaly reveals the density, it should be proportional to vertical gradient of gravity. On the other hand, if it represents the gravity field, it cannot indicate the density. We analyze and present here our perception of the Newtons law of Universal gravitation and show that gravity increases with height.
Our perception of Newtons law of universal gravitation: The Newtons law of Universal gravitation states that the mutual force of attraction between two point masses M and m is proportional to the product of masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance Z between them. Then, k as the constant of proportionality, the gravitational force
[F = k Mm/ Z2]&. (A)
However, in practice in a more general form, the gravitational attraction (F) exerted by M of the earth on m (William Lowrie, 1997), presumably for bodies away from earth, is [F =- Gm M/(R) 2 R] --- (1)
where, R is a unit vector in the direction of increase of coordinate of radius of earth R, which directs away from the centre of reference at the mass M. The negative sign in the equation indicates that the force F acts in the opposite direction, towards the attracting mass M of the earth and G, the constant of universal gravitation. Also in geophysical applications, we are concerned in accelerations rather than forces.
Converting the force into acceleration, the force (William Lowrie, 1997) Is
F= mass (m) X acceleration (a)
So, [(F=m*a) or (F= m*g)]&. (2)
Here g is the acceleration due to gravity. The negative sign in equation (1) and distance measurement as that from M results in a negative gravitational force away from mass M, as if the smaller mass m attracts mass M. It suggests that a similar large mirror image mass as that of M should exist at the same distance in the opposite direction (invisible mass above the surface of the earth?). . However, what we deal in practice is negative gravity field of the earth, which decreases with height. Now let us examine what this negative gravity field actually means by converting the force into acceleration. Now, let us consider a general case. When M=m, the forces of attraction will be in opposite direction and the effect of the mutual attraction of the two masses is maximum at the mid point of the two masses. The effect of each mass on the other reduces as the distance increases away from the mid point of the masses. The forces vary inversely with the square of the distance from the mid point. When M is larger than m, the force of attraction is always towards the mass M because it attracts mass m. The mass M by virtue of its size exerts its influence over a large distance as compared to the mass m. Hence, the distance at which the maximum force occurs shifts away from the large mass towards the small mass. Another mass Q smaller than M and m, placed between the two the mass, Q experiences force of attraction of mass M or mass m depending upon its location and size.
However, here, we consider two unequal masses and discuss about attraction of mass M on m. Therefore, it is unidirectional in the cases of two unequal masses. Therefore, it follows that the direction of force and the distance measurement are positive in the same direction towards the attracting mass M. We can measure the distance between the two masses from any direction, as it is a square term in the denominator. However, it is the object of mass m, which is affected due to the attraction of mass M a vector and hence important for the direction of measurement of distance and force. Therefore, both are in the same direction towards mass M. Here g is the acceleration due to gravity of the earth M. If we replace m by unit mass, from equations (1) and (2) we have
[g=- G M/R2 ]& (3) which indicates that the gravity field decreases with height.
The Newtons second law of motion states that the rate of change of momentum is proportional to the force acting upon it and takes place in the direction of the force. It is here the problem lies, which somehow escaped the attention of the doyens of physicists. Following the notation and the negative sign used in equation (1) The acceleration caused by attraction of mass M on mass m should be [(-F) =ma].
So, [(-F) =mg]. ----- (4)
From equations (1) and (4) we have,
[g= G M/(R)2]--- (5) which results in the gravitational acceleration of the earth and the distance are in the same direction towards mass M, as that obtained in equation (A). As force of attraction, acting on the unit mass is always towards the attracting mass and R is a square term in the denominator the gravity field remains the same irrespective of the measurement of distance as height or depth. Comparing equations (3) and (5), we observe only a change in sign that is a mirror image. Now, let us analyze, what actually the negative gravity field indicates.
Then what does the negative gravity field indicate?
Now differentiating equation (5) with respect to R, we get
[Dg/dR=dg/dz= (-2GM)/(R)3]......... (6) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the direction of force of attraction of mass M, if z represents depth.
Now differentiating equation (3), we get
[dg/dR= 2GM/(R)3]... (7) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the opposite direction of attraction or in the direction of distance measurement. As the distance factor is reckoned from the centre of earth in equation (3) R should be replaced (R) in equation (7), which gives the same equation as that of (6) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the direction of the force of attraction. The change in the sign is evident when the vertical gradient of gravity is calculated. Therefore, equations (3) and (5) are mirror images and indicate the vertical gradient of gravity and the gravity field respectively. The vertical gradient of gravity is proportional to twice the product of masses and inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the attracting mass. The Vertical gradient of gravity, which is a mirror reflection of g, integrated with respect to height gives the acceleration due to gravity.
Therefore, the negative sign in equation (1) symbolizes a figurative expression that the forces are in opposite direction. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity decreases and the gravity field increases with height.
Potential energy and work: Assuming that F is constant through the short distance of the fall of an object, the work expended is (-F) h. This is the potential energy of an object in space before its fall. If the constant force F moves through a small distance dr in the same direction as the force the work done is [dW= F dr]
Therefore, the change in the potential energy (dE) is
[dE=dW= F dr]&. (8)
The gravitational potential is the potential energy of a unit mass in a field of gravitational attraction. If the potential is U, the potential energy of a mass m in a gravitational field is equal to mU. Thus, a change in potential energy [dE=mU].
Equation (8) becomes m dU= F.dr and by use of equation (4)
[m dU=m g dr].
Thus [g= (dU/dr) R]. & (9)
Equating equations (8) and (9) [dU/dr = - G M/ R2], the solution of which is
[U= G M/R]& (10)
CONCLUSION: The negative gravity with height is actually a mirror image of the gravity field of the earth obtained from the Newtons law with the positive sign and is proportional to vertical gradient of gravity field vector as a change in sign as that observed in equation with minus sign. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity, which indicates the density of the body, decreases and the gravity increases with height. Therefore in space at the intersection of planets and galaxies high gravity fields occur. In addition, gravity decreases to zero towards the centre of the earth. The magnetic field also requires similar understanding.
The absolute gravity measurements by Pendulums or by free fall method in one form or other indicate the distance related to height. Therefore, the measured value based on distance reckoned as height is proportional to the vertical gradient of gravity. This is the reason the hitherto calculated absolute value of the gravity is large at the poles of the earth as compared to that at equator. In addition, it leads to the conclusion that the object of attraction has zero potential energy in space. Besides, the gravity anomalies become negative and are proportional to vertical gradient of gravity (Kesavamani, 2001, 2002, Kesavamani et.al. 2005, 2006, 2007). These negative gravity anomalies indicate the density of the body or the negative density contrast there by, indicating the Himalayan heights as negative and ocean depths as positive gravity anomalies.
Therefore, maximum gravity occurs at the mutual attraction of masses in space and decreases towards the centre of masses. We can therefore have two data sets indicating the absolute gravity as well as its vertical gradient of gravity at different station elevations by change in sign in the Newtons law of Universal gravitation. The magnetic field also needs similar attention.
REFERENCES:
Hualin Zeng and Tianfeng Wan, 2004. Clarification of the geophysical definition of a gravity field. Geophysics, Vol. no 5(Sept-Oct 2004), pp 1252-1254.
Kesavamani, M. 2001 Bouguer anomalies over the continents and oceans-Notes Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind., 58 466-467(2001)
Kesavamani, M.2002 Bouguer anomalies over the continents and oceans Correspondence, Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 60, (2002)
Kesavamani, M., Ramachandran, C., Krishna Rao, M.V.R., Prasad, R.M.C., Venkateswarlu, M. 2005 The Concept of gravity and magnetic anomalies. Notes. Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 66 511(2005)
Kesavamani, M., Ramachandran, C., Prasad, R.M.C., Krishna Rao, M.V.R., Reduction of gravity and magnetic data.2005 Notes. Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 66, 644. (2005).
Kesavamani, M.,Ramachandran,C,.,Krishna Rao, M. V. R., Prasad, R. M.C.,
Ram Mohan. P. K. The fallacy of Bouguer anomaly in Geophysical exploration and the new concept of the theory of gravity anomaly. Abs.46.Third International Seminar and Exhibition on Exploration Geophysics, AEG, (2006), Hyderabad, India.
M.Kesavamani, V.Vidyasagar, M.V.R.Krishna Rao, R.M.C Prasad, P.K.Rammohan. 2007. Does the gravity increase with the height?. June 2007. GSI SR News Vol.24(1&2)
LaFehr. T.R., 1991. Standardization in gravity reduction. Geophysics, Vol. 56, No.8, pp.1170-1178, 7 figures.
William Hinze, Carlos Aiken, John Brozena,Bernard Coakley,David Dater, Guy Flenagan, Rene Forsberg, Thomas Hildenbrand, G., Randy Keller, James Kellogg, Robert Kucks, Xiong Li, Andre Mainville, Robert Morin, Mark Pikington, Donald Plouff, Dhananjay Ravat, Daniel Roman, James Urrutia-Fucugauchi, Mark Vernneau, Michael Webring, and Daniel Winester., 2005. New standards for reducing gravity data: The north Americal gravity data base. Geophysics, Vol. 70, no.4 (July-August2005) pp 125-132, 1 table
William Lowrie. Fundamentals of Geophysics, Cambridge University Press, UK (1997)
THIS PAPER WAS PRESENTED AT THE ANNUAL SEMINAR ON EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICS, AEG, INDIA. FEB.2009
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOf negative gravity of the earth and high gravity in space-
A revisit to Newton’s law of Universal gravitation.
M. Kesavamani, M. V. R. Krishna Rao, R. M. C. Prasad,
V. Vidyasagar, C. Ramachandran,
214, Star Shelter Apartments, Saidabad Colony,
Hyderabad- 500 059, A. P., India.
E. mail: manikesava@rediffmail.com
ABSTRACT
Considerable confusion and debate exists in the literature on the subject of gravity right from the geophysical definition of the gravity field to standardization of gravity reduction and corrections as well as geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the “gravity anomaly”. A common belief is that the gravity field decreases with height just because the distance factor is in the denominator of the equation of the Newton’s law of Universal gravitation. Contrary to this idea, the physicists deal with high gravity fields in space and the geophysicists with negative gravity field for mass distribution on the surface of the earth. The physicists and the geophysicists use the scalar gravity to compute the energy and gravity field for theoretical models respectively. We analyze and present here our perception of the Newton’s law of Universal gravitation and show that gravity increases with height.
The Newton’s law of Universal gravitation states that the mutual force of attraction between two point masses M and m is proportional to the product of masses and “inversely proportional” to the square of the distance Z between them. Then, k as the constant of proportionality, the gravitational force
[F = k m M/ Z2]…. (A)
But, in practice in a more general form, the gravitational attraction (F) exerted by M of the earth on m, is [F =- G m M/(R) 2 R] --- (B)
Here, R is a unit vector in the direction of increase of coordinate of radius of earth R, which directs away from the centre of reference at the mass M. The negative sign in the equation indicates that the force F acts in the opposite direction, towards the attracting mass M of the earth and G, the constant of universal gravitation. Thus, there are two equations, one with minus sign and the other with positive sign, for the Newton’ law of universal gravitation to compute the gravity field.
A cursory glance at the equations reveals that the gravity decreases as the distance increases because the distance factor is in the denominator. However, the negative sign in equation (B) results in a negative gravitational force away from mass M, as if the smaller mass m attracts mass M. It suggests that a similar large mirror image mass as that of M should exist at the same distance in the opposite direction (invisible mass above the surface of the earth?). However, the force F, masses M and m cannot be negative. Therefore, only the distance factor R can be negative. However, what we deal in practice is negative gravity field of the earth, which decreases with height. Now let us examine what this negative gravity field actually means.
Analyzing the Newton’s law of universal gravitation for a general case when M=m, the forces of attraction will be in opposite direction and the effect of the mutual attraction of the two masses is maximum at the mid point of the two masses. The effect of each mass on the other reduces as the distance increases away from the mid point of the masses. The forces vary inversely with the square of the distance from the mid point. When M is larger than m, the force of attraction is always towards the mass M because it attracts mass m. The mass M by virtue of its size exerts its influence over a large distance as compared to the mass m. Hence, the distance at which the maximum force occurs shifts away from the large mass towards the small mass. We can better visualize if we consider another mass Q smaller than that of M and m located between the two the mass then, Q experiences force of attraction of mass M or mass m depending upon its location and size. It is at this point of intersection, the acceleration due to gravity changes its direction towards the attracting masses. The mutual attraction between two bodies results only due the interaction of the excess and deficit masses of the two bodies respectively.
However, here, we consider two unequal masses and discuss about attraction of mass M on m. It is unidirectional in the case of two unequal masses. Therefore, it follows that the direction of force and the distance measurement are positive in the same direction towards the attracting mass M. We can measure the distance between the two masses from any direction, as it is a square term in the denominator. Therefore, it is apparent that the difference between the two equations is only the reckoning of the distance factor. In addition, gravity field is a vector quantity and the direction of force and measurement are in the same direction towards the attracting mass. This is implicit in the Newton’s law of universal gravitation, but requires a more correct mathematical expression for the words “inversely proportional”. Therefore, we emphasize that the gravity increases as the height increases. The equation without minus sign actually indicates the gravity field vector. Differentiating the gravity force with distance vector results in the change in signature in opposite direction.
Therefore, we show that this negative gravity with height is actually a mirror image of the gravity field of the earth obtained from the Newton’s law without the minus sign and is proportional to vertical gradient of gravity field vector as a change in sign as that observed in equation with minus sign. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity, which indicates the density of the body, decreases and the gravity increases with height. Therefore in space at the intersection of planets and galaxies high gravity fields occur. In addition, gravity decreases to zero towards the centre of the earth. The magnetic field also requires similar understanding.
INTRODUCTION: There has been considerable confusion and debate on the subjects right from the geophysical definition of the gravity field (Hualin Zeng and Tianfeng Wan, 2004) to standardization of gravity reduction and corrections (LaFehr, 1991; William Hinze et.,al, 2005) as well as geodetic versus geophysical perspectives of the “gravity anomaly ” (Hackney and Featherstone, 2003). Of some concern is that the practical realization of gravity anomaly remains open to question despite being the subject of many investigators.
That the gravity field decreases with height is so much ingrained in the minds of the scholars and students of science, it would be difficult to erase and convince with contrary ideas. In physics the field of a force is often more important than the absolute magnitude of the force. In geophysical applications, we are concerned with accelerations rather than forces. Classical theoretical gravity interpretation and modern Bouguer gravity anomaly interpretation differ and use the Newton’s law of Universal gravitation equation with positive and negative signs respectively. The Physicists deal with high gravity black holes in space and the Geophysicists with negative gravity field for mass distribution on the surface of the earth. In spite of, extensive theoretical work in gravity interpretation, the concept of gravity anomaly, is still an enigma. If gravity anomaly reveals the density, it should be proportional to vertical gradient of gravity. On the other hand, if it represents the gravity field, it cannot indicate the density. We analyze and present here our perception of the Newton’s law of Universal gravitation and show that gravity increases with height.
Our perception of Newton’s law of universal gravitation: The Newton’s law of Universal gravitation states that the mutual force of attraction between two point masses M and m is proportional to the product of masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance Z between them. Then, k as the constant of proportionality, the gravitational force
[F = k Mm/ Z2]…. (A)
However, in practice in a more general form, the gravitational attraction (F) exerted by M of the earth on m (William Lowrie, 1997), presumably for bodies away from earth, is [F =- Gm M/(R) 2 R] --- (1)
where, R is a unit vector in the direction of increase of coordinate of radius of earth R, which directs away from the centre of reference at the mass M. The negative sign in the equation indicates that the force F acts in the opposite direction, towards the attracting mass M of the earth and G, the constant of universal gravitation. Also in geophysical applications, we are concerned in accelerations rather than forces.
Converting the force into acceleration, the force (William Lowrie, 1997) Is
F= mass (m) X acceleration (a)
So, [(F=m*a) or (F= m*g)]…. (2)
Here g is the acceleration due to gravity. The negative sign in equation (1) and distance measurement as that from M results in a negative gravitational force away from mass M, as if the smaller mass m attracts mass M. It suggests that a similar large mirror image mass as that of M should exist at the same distance in the opposite direction (invisible mass above the surface of the earth?). . However, what we deal in practice is negative gravity field of the earth, which decreases with height. Now let us examine what this negative gravity field actually means by converting the force into acceleration. Now, let us consider a general case. When M=m, the forces of attraction will be in opposite direction and the effect of the mutual attraction of the two masses is maximum at the mid point of the two masses. The effect of each mass on the other reduces as the distance increases away from the mid point of the masses. The forces vary inversely with the square of the distance from the mid point. When M is larger than m, the force of attraction is always towards the mass M because it attracts mass m. The mass M by virtue of its size exerts its influence over a large distance as compared to the mass m. Hence, the distance at which the maximum force occurs shifts away from the large mass towards the small mass. Another mass Q smaller than M and m, placed between the two the mass, Q experiences force of attraction of mass M or mass m depending upon its location and size.
However, here, we consider two unequal masses and discuss about attraction of mass M on m. Therefore, it is unidirectional in the cases of two unequal masses. Therefore, it follows that the direction of force and the distance measurement are positive in the same direction towards the attracting mass M. We can measure the distance between the two masses from any direction, as it is a square term in the denominator. However, it is the object of mass m, which is affected due to the attraction of mass M a vector and hence important for the direction of measurement of distance and force. Therefore, both are in the same direction towards mass M. Here g is the acceleration due to gravity of the earth M. If we replace m by unit mass, from equations (1) and (2) we have
[g=- G M/R2 ]… (3) which indicates that the gravity field decreases with height.
The Newton’s second law of motion states that the rate of change of momentum is proportional to the force acting upon it and takes place in the direction of the force. It is here the problem lies, which somehow escaped the attention of the doyens of physicists. Following the notation and the negative sign used in equation (1) The acceleration caused by attraction of mass M on mass m should be [(-F) =ma].
So, [(-F) =mg]. ----- (4)
From equations (1) and (4) we have,
[g= G M/(R)2]--- (5) which results in the gravitational acceleration of the earth and the distance are in the same direction towards mass M, as that obtained in equation (A). As force of attraction, acting on the unit mass is always towards the attracting mass and R is a square term in the denominator the gravity field remains the same irrespective of the measurement of distance as height or depth. Comparing equations (3) and (5), we observe only a change in sign that is a mirror image. Now, let us analyze, what actually the negative gravity field indicates.
Then what does the negative gravity field indicate?
Now differentiating equation (5) with respect to R, we get
[Dg/dR=dg/dz= (-2GM)/(R)3]......... (6) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the direction of force of attraction of mass M, if z represents depth.
Now differentiating equation (3), we get
[dg/dR= 2GM/(R)3]... (7) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the opposite direction of attraction or in the direction of distance measurement. As the distance factor is reckoned from the centre of earth in equation (3) R should be replaced (–R) in equation (7), which gives the same equation as that of (6) that gives the vertical gradient of gravity in the direction of the force of attraction. The change in the sign is evident when the vertical gradient of gravity is calculated. Therefore, equations (3) and (5) are mirror images and indicate the vertical gradient of gravity and the gravity field respectively. The vertical gradient of gravity is proportional to twice the product of masses and inversely proportional to the cube of the distance from the attracting mass. The Vertical gradient of gravity, which is a mirror reflection of ‘g’, integrated with respect to height gives the acceleration due to gravity.
Therefore, the negative sign in equation (1) symbolizes a figurative expression that the forces are in opposite direction. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity decreases and the gravity field increases with height.
Potential energy and work: Assuming that F is constant through the short distance of the fall of an object, the work expended is (-F) h. This is the potential energy of an object in space before its fall. If the constant force F moves through a small distance dr in the same direction as the force the work done is [dW= F dr]
Therefore, the change in the potential energy (dE) is
[dE=dW= F dr]…. (8)
The gravitational potential is the potential energy of a unit mass in a field of gravitational attraction. If the potential is U, the potential energy of a mass m in a gravitational field is equal to mU. Thus, a change in potential energy [dE=mU].
Equation (8) becomes m dU= F.dr and by use of equation (4)
[m dU=m g dr].
Thus [g= (dU/dr) R]. … (9)
Equating equations (8) and (9) [dU/dr = - G M/ R2], the solution of which is
[U= G M/R]… (10)
CONCLUSION: The negative gravity with height is actually a mirror image of the gravity field of the earth obtained from the Newton’s law with the positive sign and is proportional to vertical gradient of gravity field vector as a change in sign as that observed in equation with minus sign. Consequently, the vertical gradient of gravity, which indicates the density of the body, decreases and the gravity increases with height. Therefore in space at the intersection of planets and galaxies high gravity fields occur. In addition, gravity decreases to zero towards the centre of the earth. The magnetic field also requires similar understanding.
The absolute gravity measurements by Pendulums or by free fall method in one form or other indicate the distance related to height. Therefore, the measured value based on distance reckoned as height is proportional to the vertical gradient of gravity. This is the reason the hitherto calculated absolute value of the gravity is large at the poles of the earth as compared to that at equator. In addition, it leads to the conclusion that the object of attraction has zero potential energy in space. Besides, the gravity anomalies become negative and are proportional to vertical gradient of gravity (Kesavamani, 2001, 2002, Kesavamani et.al. 2005, 2006, 2007). These negative gravity anomalies indicate the density of the body or the negative density contrast there by, indicating the Himalayan heights as negative and ocean depths as positive gravity anomalies.
Therefore, maximum gravity occurs at the mutual attraction of masses in space and decreases towards the centre of masses. We can therefore have two data sets indicating the absolute gravity as well as its vertical gradient of gravity at different station elevations by change in sign in the Newton’s law of Universal gravitation. The magnetic field also needs similar attention.
REFERENCES:
Hualin Zeng and Tianfeng Wan, 2004. Clarification of the geophysical definition of a gravity field. Geophysics, Vol. no 5(Sept-Oct 2004), pp 1252-1254.
Kesavamani, M. 2001 Bouguer anomalies over the continents and oceans-Notes Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind., 58 466-467(2001)
Kesavamani, M.2002 Bouguer anomalies over the continents and oceans Correspondence, Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 60, (2002)
Kesavamani, M., Ramachandran, C., Krishna Rao, M.V.R., Prasad, R.M.C., Venkateswarlu, M. 2005 The Concept of gravity and magnetic anomalies. Notes. Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 66 511(2005)
Kesavamani, M., Ramachandran, C., Prasad, R.M.C., Krishna Rao, M.V.R., Reduction of gravity and magnetic data.2005 Notes. Jour. Geol. Soc. Ind. 66, 644. (2005).
Kesavamani, M.,Ramachandran,C,.,Krishna Rao, M. V. R., Prasad, R. M.C.,
Ram Mohan. P. K. The fallacy of Bouguer anomaly in Geophysical exploration and the new concept of the theory of gravity anomaly. Abs.46.Third International Seminar and Exhibition on Exploration Geophysics, AEG, (2006), Hyderabad, India.
M.Kesavamani, V.Vidyasagar, M.V.R.Krishna Rao, R.M.C Prasad, P.K.Rammohan. 2007. Does the gravity increase with the height?. June 2007. GSI SR News Vol.24(1&2)
LaFehr. T.R., 1991. Standardization in gravity reduction. Geophysics, Vol. 56, No.8, pp.1170-1178, 7 figures.
William Hinze, Carlos Aiken, John Brozena,Bernard Coakley,David Dater, Guy Flenagan, Rene Forsberg, Thomas Hildenbrand, G., Randy Keller, James Kellogg, Robert Kucks, Xiong Li, Andre Mainville, Robert Morin, Mark Pikington, Donald Plouff, Dhananjay Ravat, Daniel Roman, James Urrutia-Fucugauchi, Mark Vernneau, Michael Webring, and Daniel Winester., 2005. New standards for reducing gravity data: The north Americal gravity data base. Geophysics, Vol. 70, no.4 (July-August2005) pp 125-132, 1 table
William Lowrie. Fundamentals of Geophysics, Cambridge University Press, UK (1997)
THIS PAPER WAS PRESENTED AT THE ANNUAL SEMINAR ON EXPLORATION GEOPHYSICS, AEG, INDIA. FEB.2009
MOVE THE DISCUSSION FORWARD PLEASE
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSCIENTIFIC AMERICAN IS THE
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisJOURNAL THAT TRIES TO COVER THE WHOLE DOMAIN OF HUMAN SCIENTIFIC ACTIVITY.IT IS A LINK THAT CONNECTS ORDINARY MAN WITH HIGHBROWS IN THE FIELD OF SCIENCE.HOWEVER THERE SHOULD BE PROVISION TO PRESERVE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT.