Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #408202 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-02-07 20:10 +1100 |
| Last post | 2017-02-09 05:43 -0800 |
| Articles | 1 on this page of 41 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-07 20:10 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-07 13:35 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-08 12:27 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Python <python@python.invalid> - 2017-02-08 02:35 +0100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-08 04:00 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:43 -0600
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-07 05:45 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 14:50 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-07 16:53 -0600
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-09 05:40 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-08 12:30 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 08:44 -0600
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-09 05:41 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2017-02-08 10:55 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 11:14 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 13:23 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? alsor@interia.pl - 2017-02-08 17:39 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-08 17:54 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-08 21:40 +0100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-09 20:01 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-09 13:03 +0100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-10 17:47 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-10 09:31 -0600
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-11 12:32 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-02-10 19:08 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2017-02-10 22:37 -0600
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-12 08:38 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-10 18:06 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-11 12:33 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-11 06:16 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-12 08:42 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-12 06:07 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-13 20:31 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-13 16:31 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-14 08:45 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-02-14 02:42 +0000
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2017-02-14 20:44 +0100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-02-14 12:23 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? "HGW... DSc." <hgw@....> - 2017-02-19 11:50 +1100
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2017-02-18 21:08 -0800
Re: Why Should Gravitational Mass Equal Inertial Mass? John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> - 2017-02-09 05:43 -0800
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
| From | John Heath <heathjohn2@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-02-09 05:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <a885c3ce-ca0e-4e46-b112-460a4833b841@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #408202 |
On Tuesday, February 7, 2017 at 4:10:47 AM UTC-5, HGW... DSc. wrote: > Newton showed that a feather fell to the ground in the same time as a > lump of lead and concluded that gravitational mass must be equal to > inertial mass. (It didn't actually show that at all) > That might be OK for gravity but consider the electrostatic equivalent. > A proton would fall towards a negatively charged object with twice the > acceleration as an ionized H atom. > We know that Einstein's gravitation theory differs from Newton's in that > a factor of two appears in much of the maths.(It was only added after he > feared that experimental evidence proved his original equations wrong). > > If it was ever shown that this 'two factor' did actually exist (a very > unlikely scenario), that would only suggest that light's inertial mass > was NOT equal to its gravitational mass. It behaves in gravity like the > proton does in an electric field. The negative electron cloud around hydrogen can be written off as the way a vacuum reacts to a positive proton. From a theoretical position what you are saying could be true. I would add that matter and anti matter would tend to be kept apart as a net positive and negative charge changing the shape of space would cancel out dissolving gravity. If a galaxy were 50 percent matter / anti matter then it would have to be a type SBa classification according to the Hobble tuning fork standard. The B in SBa means bar shaped center with two arms. If these arms were matter / anti matter then there would be a odd increase in gravity on the outside as the two arms separate. As it turns out we live in a type SBa galaxy and the outside is turning too fast suggesting too much gravity. Current theory says it is caused by dark matter. Using a Coulomb force for gravity with a matter / anti matter galaxy avoids the need for this mysterious dark matter. One prediction that comes from this is a neutron star would not be possible as there would not be a net proton positive charge to cause gravity.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 3 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web