Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #459967

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	2018-05-31 19:51 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pepjnm$1p2k$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(13 earlier) <0b1d4824-53c6-422e-a2e3-f425701a350c@googlegroups.com> <pekkft$1b92$1@gioia.aioe.org> <126cd536-2c8b-4fe9-8b1e-78666a18de37@googlegroups.com> <d4a35bf1-62d5-4d15-9ea4-0e37f92af218@googlegroups.com> <e4bd93a6-c319-40bd-a2d3-671334a29c96@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 31, 2018 at 1:47:58 PM UTC-4, Edward Prochak wrote:
>> On Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 10:49:22 AM UTC-4, kenseto wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, May 29, 2018 at 6:33:38 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>> []
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> No I am saying that the EM attractive gravitational force causes the
>>>>> centripetal acceleration. That in combination with the repulsive effect
>>>>> force exists between the interacting objects causes the stable orbiting motion.
>>>> 
>>>> Newton’s second law says that any acceleration is due to a (net) force in
>>>> the direction of the acceleration and given by F=ma. 
>>> 
>>> That doesn’t say that there is a centripetal or centrifugal force.
>>> It says that CP or CF accelerations are caused by one of the
>>> fundamental forces. Specifically the CP acceleration is caused
>>> by the attractive force of gravity and gravity is a combination
>>> of an attractive EM force in combination with the repulsive
>>> effect of the interacting objects are confined to follow
>>> the divergent structure of theE-matrix.
>> 
>> ken, you keep proclaiming this like repetition is truth,
>> but you have provided zero evidence. In fact you have provided
>> zero testable predictions. I asked you before, put your
>> equations to the test and make the calculations.
> 
> You never provide any calculations to what you said....in fact you
> admitted that you don’t do math. I have a theory based on the existence
> of absolute motion in a structured aether called the E-matrix. I proposed
> new experiments to detect absolute motion and did example calculations.
> in the following link:
> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2015experiment.pdf
> 
>> 
>> If you cannot even calculate the lunar orbit with your theory
>> then you haven’t even gotten past step ONE.
> 
> You do calculations with your theory then I will do my calculations.

Ken the calculations of standard physics theories are splattered all over
the place, though they are not reproduced here because Usenet is not a
textbook. You haven’t managed to read anything where the standard
calculations have ALREADY been done, but other people have. 

On the other hand, the ONLY calculations from your theory are the ones you
produce and you haven’t produced any. 

So the statement still stands: calculations from standard physics are
ALREADY done, calculations from your theory are NOT done at all. 

> 
>> 
>> Ed
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Thus this says that if there is a centripetal acceleration (an acceleration
>>>> toward the center), then there is a centripetal force (a force toward the
>>>> center). 
>>> 
>>> No, it is the attractive force of gravity between the interacting
>>> objects causes the centripetal acceleration.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If you’d like to say that, because you have the benefit of having never
>>>> once studied physics, you know that Newton’s laws are all wrong, then you
>>>> are free to entertain that lunacy. Not one soul will pay any serious
>>>> attention to you except to mock you for it. 
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Your move. Use those loose nuts. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> In the case of the so called centripetal force (centripetal acceleration)
>>>>>>>>>>> is derived from the attractive gravity force. Buoyancy is a form of
>>>>>>>>>>> gravity force and spring exerts is a form of EM force.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Those are wrong. Bzzzt. 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Assertion is not a valid argument.
>>>>>>>>> Buzz....you are full of shit.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>> 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

(Thread has 933 articles, showing 500 — browse group in flat view)

csiph-web