Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #459006

Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity?

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics.relativity
Subject	Re: Why does gravity have to be transmitted through particles when gravity isn't a force in general relativity?
Date	2018-05-23 21:30 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pe4mgu$tsk$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <cdd7f68a-5c02-4fb3-bf75-da52a623a8d1@googlegroups.com> <pe172g$tok$1@gioia.aioe.org> <d9214250-85da-4e3f-887d-08d2ba9346a0@googlegroups.com> <pe3qnd$1amg$1@gioia.aioe.org> <9dc2e0c0-a3e2-473b-bf15-14a13bff11be@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 9:35:45 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, May 22, 2018 at 9:48:05 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2018 at 6:28:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2018 at 1:40:02 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/21/18 9:09 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2018 at 9:33:27 AM UTC-4, rotchm wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, May 21, 2018 at 9:01:54 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Moron, in a gravitational field a force is needed to
>>>>>>>>>>> maintain orbiting motion.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, just a radial force suffices and the proof is simple.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> No just a radial force will not be able to maintain a stable orbit. You
>>>>>>>>> need a tangential effect to counteract the radial CP force to
>>>>>>>>> maintain a stable orbit.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You're groping around for words that won't get shot down.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> You do need tangential motion.
>>>>>>>> Tangential motion requires no force  .
>>>>>>>> There is therefore no tangential force.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hey moron,curved tangential motion requires a force to maintain. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> No it doesn’t. Angular momentum is conserved without the application of a
>>>>>> tangential force. Stop dancing. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Gee you are so fucking stupid even for a woodworker. 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> There is no such thing as centrifugal force. Every reference on the 
>>>>>>>> planet makes it clear that this is a fictitious force. And it doesn't 
>>>>>>>> matter what your intuition says.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Moron, the CF force has effect on physical processes so it is not
>>>>>>> fictitious. For example: the centrifuge use the CF forestial motion e to
>>>>>>> separate liquids of different densities or separate solid from liquid. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That’s the centripetal force that does that separation. There is no
>>>>>> centrifugal force. You’ve never learned how a centrifuge really works. 
>>>>> 
>>>>> So the heavier solid knows to move away from the center of the spin
>>>>> because of the centripetal force? 
>>>> 
>>>> Yes! If you had studied physics, for example, you would know what makes
>>>> things float in a fluid: buoyancy force, caused by differential in fluid
>>>> pressure. In a centrifuge, this buoyancy force is centripetal and the
>>>> differentiation is magnified. 
>>> 
>>> So you don’t know the meaning of the centripetal force.....right? 
>> 
>> Ken, stop it. This is your childish tactic to get someone to tell you an
>> answer when you don’t want to look it up in your physics book. 
> 
> I am serious. You don’t know the meaning of the CP force....

I’ve already told you twice in this thread. 

> the centrifuge does not based of the centripetal force.

And that’s wrong. Your introductory textbook explains it. It does
absolutely no good to ask why it’s called a centrifuge, then be told where
to find out how a centrifuge works, and then just claim that that’s wrong. 
If you’re not going to believe anything explained in introductory physics,
then 1) don’t bother asking, 2) give up on doing physics. 

> 
> 
>> I have
>> ALREADY told you what centripetal force means in this thread. Either you
>> weren’t paying attention or you can’t remember what people told you
>> yesterday. Can you look back at past posts to find out where I told you
>> (twice) what centripetal force means? Are you completely incompetent? 
>> 
>>> Also, if only CP force is real why did they name the device centrifuge?
>> 
>> The same reason they say astronauts are weightless in the Space Station
>> when they aren’t weightless at all. Conventional language is sloppy. 
>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> I don’t think so. I think you are just making up stuff as you go along. 
>>>> 
>>>> Not at all! All this is gone over in introductory physics and you even have
>>>> a book on it! Look at how much you’ve missed by not reading!!
>> 
>> Read! What reason not to?
>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> It appears that it is pointless and a waste of time talking to you. Good-bye. 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If you just say that what is needed for a stable orbit is a centripetal 
>>>>>>>> force like gravity, plus tangential motion, and THAT'S IT, then you'd 
>>>>>>>> have the right answer.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Why would I say that when I know that’s wrong? 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Well, you’re saying high school basics physics is wrong. And you never
>>>>>> learned basic high school physics. So who would believe you?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Besides curved tangential motion requires a force to maintain. Gee you are so stupid.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> No tangential force, no centrifugal force.
>>>>>>>> Just a centripetal force and tangential motion. Period.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> So you argument is all assertions.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> No, just basic physics you never learned. (And now you’re too feeble to
>>>>>> learn it)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Thread

csiph-web