Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #523241
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. |
| Date | 2015-09-26 08:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <d6mrkjF44esU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <mtmpc4$12i$1@speranza.aioe.org> <d6hfq4Fo6gcU1@mid.individual.net> <mu138l$rq4$3@speranza.aioe.org> <d6j46oF6pnaU1@mid.individual.net> <s11Nx.75824$eB4.45309@fx11.iad> |
Cross-posted to 2 groups.
Am 25.09.2015 03:01, schrieb benj: .. >> The distance is measured in run-length of light, e.g. in light-years. >> >> Now light is (in relativity terms) 'light-like', while mass/matter is >> timelike. >> >> The opposite of timelike is spacelike. >> >> But space is NOT spacelike (even if this sound that way), since we use >> light to measure distance (hence space). >> >> But what actually is 'spacelike' then? >> >> If we had a connection into that realm, this would look like a static >> field, since such a connection would have no time-component. And that is >> what 'static' means. >> >> Now we could do a trick and let a wave oscillate from timelike to >> spacelike (and back). >> >> How would that look like? >> >> It would be a tiny mass, surrounded by a spherical shell of a static >> field. That spherical shell is more or less the same wave, but of >> opposite sign. And it has no mass (since mass is timelike). >> >> how does this look like? >> >> Well, actually the description seems to fit to an atom. >> . > > > Will you stop trying to think and just BELIEVE fer crissake? > > Science isn't about thinking it's about believing what your betters tell > you. > This may actually be the case and 'science' is a actually a 'church'. These believers have their high-priests, that drip wisdom into their brains (until this is well flooded with wisdom). Unfortunately I do not know, since I'm not a member. Physics is more or less a hobby and my latest profession was to run a gallery. So I do not know anybody to believe in personally, hence have to think myself. And now I have found something and like those high-priest to have a look at my findings. They gracefully bent down and whisper into my ears, that I shall f*** off. So I leave my 'book' as it is and only occasionally mention it: https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 TH > Space time is simple. Warps in space-time cause gravity! Just like warps > in space-temperature cause global warming. Anyone can understand that! >
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Why does “curved space-time” cause gravity?: A better answer. Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 07:54 -0500
Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-09-19 06:01 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Rock Brentwood <federation2005@netzero.com> - 2015-09-28 17:38 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 01:24 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 01:26 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-20 09:20 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-20 17:11 +0000
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-23 04:18 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-24 07:25 +0200
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Jimmie Wynne <jimmwyn@metermap.org> - 2015-09-24 15:01 +0000
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-24 22:19 +0200
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 21:01 -0400
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-09-26 08:17 +0200
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. xxein1@att.net - 2015-09-26 13:04 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 22:43 -0700
that, that is gOOd noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-25 13:09 -0700
Re: that, that is gOOd "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 00:46 -0700
Re: that, that is gOOd noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-26 17:10 -0700
Re: that, that is gOOd noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 19:50 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-24 10:17 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-28 14:32 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-29 11:33 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 02:12 -0700
Re: Why does "curved space-time" cause gravity?: A better answer. "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 09:34 -0700
** yours noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2015-09-30 18:49 -0700
csiph-web