Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #458524

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

From	Volney <volney@volney.invalid>
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	2018-05-20 10:31 -0400
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<pds0sh$m2f$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <2a22214a-12b9-4db5-b958-484f5d22358a@googlegroups.com> <pdq9ug$5kq$1@dont-email.me> <316a5e8f-e838-48ab-8838-ac0c5f6b2212@googlegroups.com> <pdqbkv$hdt$1@dont-email.me> <149d6e44-77e8-4a4a-b98a-3e6d9045e0d1@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 5/20/2018 9:04 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 7:23:13 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>> On 5/19/2018 7:13 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 6:54:09 PM UTC-4, Volney wrote:
>>>> On 5/19/2018 6:10 PM, kenseto wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, May 19, 2018 at 3:16:43 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> Well, Ken, you’ve finally turned the corner into madness. You, the educated
>>>>>> and certified chemical engineer, have come to the conclusion that education
>>>>>> is worthless and that one should avoid reading and education in favor of
>>>>>> thinking for yourself.
>>>>>
>>>>> No moron, I believe that the past concept for gravity is wrong.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, you have come to the conclusion that education about
>>>> gravity is worthless and that you should avoid reading and education
>>>> about gravity...
>>>
>>> No idiot....Newton’s explanation of gravity is wrong. He think that gravity a composed of a single force...namely the CP force. He didn’t realize that without the CF force no orbiting motion is feasible.
>>
>> In other words, you have come to the conclusion that education about
>> gravity is worthless and that you should avoid reading and education
>> about gravity.
> 
> That’s your conclusion.....not mine.

So do you actually believe we should all be studying and learning about 
current gravitational theories? You don't seem to have done this 
yourself since you write stuff that is not part of Newtonian gravitation.
> 
>> Because you have decided Newton was wrong.
> 
> Newton is not God so he can be wrong.

Irrelevant, nobody claimed that Newton was never wrong or is God. All we 
are talking about is his specific mathematical proof about only a single 
force being necessary for stable orbits.

> He visualized that gravity is a single force like the EM force.

More than "visualized" it, he created a mathematical proof of that.

> It is not. It is a composite force as I described in the following link:
> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015gravity.pdf

Newton had a mathematical proof. You only have a claim. To show Newton 
wrong you'd need to show a mistake in his proof or do something to 
discredit all of mathematics and its basis of math proofs.
> 
>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> That’s why I proposed a new concept for gravity
>>>>
>>>> ...in favor of thinking for yourself.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, a REAL scientist with a potential new concept for gravity
>>>> would want to learn as much as possible about existing beliefs about
>>>> gravity. He would want to learn whether the new concept conflicts with
>>>> known facts/measurements of gravity, to see if the concept has been
>>>> proposed before (and if so, what happened with it) and especially,
>>>> whether a test can be devised that would produce different results from
>>>> the existing model if the new concept was correct than if it was false.
>>
>> No comment?

Still no comment?

Thread

csiph-web