Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #459060

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	2018-05-24 13:22 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pe6e9p$1l65$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(16 earlier) <d9214250-85da-4e3f-887d-08d2ba9346a0@googlegroups.com> <pe3qnd$1amg$1@gioia.aioe.org> <9dc2e0c0-a3e2-473b-bf15-14a13bff11be@googlegroups.com> <pe4mgu$tsk$1@gioia.aioe.org> <e71fe2cf-9b7c-4b6c-8030-1712115e57ba@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 at 5:30:10 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> 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. 
> 
> You told me that the centrifuge is based on the CP force and that’s absolutely wrong.
> 
>> 
>>> the centrifuge does not based of the centripetal force.
>> 
>> And that’s wrong. 
> 
> Moron, the centrifuge based on a force that throws material away from the
> center of rotation. 

No it is not. That is how you THINK it works, but it is not how it really
works. Your imagination is not reality. If you want to find out how
something works, get out of your own head. Your imagination does not
produce correct answers. 

> The CP force causes materiall to move toward the center of rotation. 
> 
>> Your introductory textbook explains it. 
> 
> If the text book explains that the centrifuge is based on the CP force
> then it is wrong. I suspect that you don’t unstained what you read.

Hard to misunderstand it when it is so plainly written. You’ve never read
how it works. 

> 
>> 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. 
> 
> I said that you are wrong. You are a woodworker you don’t understand what you read.
> 
>> 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 didn’t ask. I merely pointed out that you made wrong assertions that is
> completely wrong on the operation of the centrifuge.

Sorry Ken, but the designers of centrifuges are the experts on how they
work.  NOT YOU. 

> 
> 



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

Thread

csiph-web