bucket foundation — inverse omegabucket.foundation

gravity

that detects, Yes, I can, or a meter. But the fact is that meters that detect things, usually people think in terms of electric meters. When electric meters detect electric phenomena, magnetometers detect magnetic phenomena, you don't detect a gravitational field with an electric meter or gravity or a magnetometer. You need to detect fields of the appropriate kind.
Concept
gravity
Score
6 · rule · must
Status
candidate — not yet promoted to canon

Corpus evidence — top 10 passages

Most-relevant passages from the entire indexed corpus (67,286 paragraph chunks across YouTube transcripts, PubMed, arXiv, archive.org, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, OpenAlex, and more) ranked by semantic similarity (bge-small-en-v1.5).

  1. 01 · _intake0.983

    > that detects, Yes, I can, or a meter. But the fact is that meters that detect things, usually people think in terms of electric meters. When electric meters detect electric phenomena, magnetometers detect magnetic phenomena, you don't detect a gravitational field with an electric meter or gravity or a magnetometer. You need to detect fields of the appropriate kind.

    _intake/claims-allbranch/curated-low/gravity/005-that-detects-yes-i-can-or-a-meter.md

  2. 02 · yt0.713

    This is well known but I'm not sure people have really thought about how significant that is. And the other thing is in the case I just gave you I mean the kind of standard thing you do is you say oh this device whatever it is it's a position oper it's a position measuring device so I know which operator to use blah blah blah blah. But you'd say, "But look, um, I'm sending some particles at this other physical object. I call it a screen. I call it a position measuring device, but who cares what I call it? It's it's a bunch of atoms, right? It's it's got a physical structure. Surely, a proper t

    yt/VbXEc9vpeIM-what-we-ve-gotten-wrong-about-quantum-physics-world-science-/transcript.txt

  3. 03 · blog0.712

    Still, we can know a priori , that is, independent of any empirical evidence, that “ S is a meter long at \(t_0\)” is true in the actual world given that we know how the reference of “one meter” is fixed by a description that refers to the length of S in the actual world . If empirical evidence plays any role, it is only insofar as we need it to know that there really is a stick, S , that was designated as the meter at some particular time and place. A second candidate for being a contingent proposition that is knowable a priori comes from John Turri. He claims that the proposition, “The most

    blog/plato-stanford-edu/a-priori-justification-and-knowledge.md

  4. 04 · _intake0.707

    We detect magnetic fields everywhere, even in the “empty” depths of intergalactic space too. Magnetic fields cannot exist without causative electric currents. We learned this from Faraday and Ampere experiments. From many other experiments, we’ve learned life is more affected by magnetic fields than it is by electric fields.

    _intake/kruse-blog-corpus/articles/monopoles-make-time.md

  5. 05 · archive0.706

    There are several treatises in which electrical and magnetic phenomena are described in a popular way. These, however, are not what is wanted by those wrho have been brought face to face with quantities to be measured, and whose minds do not rest satisfied with lecture-room experiments.

    archive/electricandmagne01maxwrich/electricandmagne01maxwrich_djvu.txt

  6. 06 · yt0.704

    The measured particle is in a given s- place and time. And so, this is something that puzzled the physicists. How is it possible for an act of measurement to collapse this probability wave and give a definite position to particles which have no definite positions before the act of measurement. And believe it or not physicists have been kicking this so-called measurement problem around for a good 100 years, almost. More like 90. For about 90 years, they've been speculating on this with no actual uh solution in sight. The weirdest ideas are presented by them uh in order to resolve this conundrum

    yt/8NWHGX53agc-dr-wolfgang-smith-renowned-physicist-on-vertical-causation-i/transcript.txt

  7. 07 · yt0.703

    How can that  be in that equation? Because if you go to   a moving system, shouldn't it be C plus  V where V is the moving system, right? So Einstein looked at Maxwell's theory. In  a sense, you can see Einstein took Maxwell's   theory very seriously. Okay? And taking  Maxwell's theory, the theory very seriously,   he was prompted to change the idea of space and  time, or even the separate existence of something   like space and something of time. There's only  spacetime. So it's a very simple idea. It's very   mod

    yt/Bnh-UNrxYZg-frederic-schuller-the-physicist-who-derived-gravity-from-ele/transcript.txt

  8. 08 · archive0.703

    most important of these phenomena, to shew how they may be subjected to measurement, and to trace the mathematical connexions of the quantities measured. Having thus obtained the data for a mathematical theory of electromagnetism, and having shewn how this theory may be applied to the calculation of phe nomena, I shall endeavour to place in as clear a light as I can the relations between the mathematical form of this theory and that of the fundamental science of Dynamics, in order that we may be in some degree prepared to determine the kind of dynamical pheno mena among which we are to look fo

    archive/electricandmagne01maxwrich/electricandmagne01maxwrich_djvu.txt

  9. 09 · archive0.698

    The physicist draws a sharp line between things which he can in some way detect by the evidence of his senses and things which lie beyond that evidence. There is no denial of a "something" beyond the range of his senses and his sensed instruments, but what may be there is conjectural and, therefore, inadmissible as scientific data of a reliable nature. In other words, material evidence which lies within the narrow limits of man's sense-range is the only admissible evidence to science. But what about that vast range which will not respond to our sensed bodies and sensed instruments?

    archive/the-universal-one-1926-walter-russell/TheUniversalOne1926WalterRussell_djvu.txt

  10. 10 · yt0.697

    A body accelerating without any force… I can say Newton is wrong or I can say maybe there's a new force between that body and this body, and that will turn out to be the electrical force. Electrical force occurs whenever you take something, you take a cat and you take a piece of amber or you rub it, you do various things, then you put them next to other things and they're attracted or repelled, and you discover you're charging things, and that's how electricity was discovered. But you don't have to have a cat; if you have a buffalo, you can take it with a buffalo, it still works. Then, you got

    yt/9vLSx1Iv06U-4-newton-s-laws-cont-and-inclined-planes/transcript.txt

Curation checklist

  • ☐ Verify excerpt against source recording
  • ☐ Tag tier (axiom · law · principle · primary derivation · observation)
  • ☐ Cross-cite to ≥1 primary source (PubMed / arXiv / archive.org)
  • ☐ Promote to bucket-canon/02-physics/