Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #459253

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	2018-05-25 17:05 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pe9fod$st6$3@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <c468ee40-a4ef-466e-9c8f-f0ff5baf7c84@googlegroups.com> <pe70od$r7a$1@gioia.aioe.org> <41f80673-fb66-4203-84ed-03ec45df1a71@googlegroups.com> <pe91jt$2gb$2@gioia.aioe.org> <9842d489-5bf6-4a8a-8d26-e266920ceb63@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
> On Friday, May 25, 2018 at 9:04:01 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 5/25/18 7:59 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>> On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 2:37:05 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Thursday, May 24, 2018 at 12:31:53 PM UTC-4, kenseto wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Moron, here’s the definition for a centrifuge:
>>>>> 
>>>>> So what?? I was not talking about a centrifuge.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm talking about the so called "centrifugal force"; there is no such
>>>>> force, as its definitions specify.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Ken Seto’s thinking is that if centrifugal force were not real, then
>>>> physicists would contact dictionary editors to remove the mention of
>>>> centrifugal force from the definition of centrifuge. And if physicists
>>>> failed to do this, then this is a deliberate attempt to confuse the public.
>>> 
>>> No moron, you claimed that the centrifugal force does not exist. The
>>> designers of the centrifuge based their design on the existence of the centrifugal force.
>> 
>> That is not a true statement. 
> 
> Assertion is not a valid argument.
> 
>> To find out what the designers of 
>> centrifuges base the design on, one must read what they wrote about 
>> their design. You have not. You have just relied on your own guesses 
>> about what they used to design them.
> 
> Why don’t you do that instead of making assertions as your argument?

I HAVE. You have not. 
Case closed. 

> 
> 
>> 
>> You should try reading.
>> 
>>> It seems that one of you is wrong. My money is on you who is
>>> wrong....failed to understand the centrifugal force.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> OR his thinking is that dictionary editors know how centrifuges work better
>>>> than physicists or centrifuge designers do, and so the dictionary is right
>>>> and physicists are wrong.
>>>> 
>>>> OR his thinking is that centrifugal force is a common sense idea that Ken
>>>> Seto understands, and so even if the entire expert community says the
>>>> centrifugal force is fictional, then Ken is right and everyone is wrong.
>>>> 
>>>> -- 
>>>> 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