Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #462086

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	2018-06-21 22:31 +0000
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<pgh8vq$1k96$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	(15 earlier) <8d1025fa-879a-4fae-ab5c-fe84c0e0a7eb@googlegroups.com> <pgefo0$113k$1@gioia.aioe.org> <245fdcaf-0116-4c3e-aa7a-7a7f257b3a92@googlegroups.com> <pggo6m$ngi$2@gioia.aioe.org> <a3097d00-213a-4ce5-8af0-4fd94d753677@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
> On Thursday, June 21, 2018 at 1:44:57 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 5:08:20 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, June 20, 2018 at 10:26:54 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 4:48:22 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 1:59:46 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, June 18, 2018 at 11:44:55 AM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 4:23:12 PM UTC-4, Python wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> kenseto wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, June 17, 2018 at 2:14:49 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That is also wrong. Every time you open your mouth you say something in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> conflict with first year elementary physics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So say an uneducated moron woodworker.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Likely not uneducated at all, as he is absolutely right, Mr Seto.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You, on the other side, have shown that you are 100% uneducated in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the matters of basic math and physics, remember your post below, Mr
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Seto?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Newton’s calculations assumed a single attractive force of gravity and a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> circular orbit of the moon (the same radius for all locations of the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> moon). The fact that his calculations agree with observation is irrelevant. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>>> And with that “irrelevant” comment you continue to show you have NO idea
>>>>>>>>>>>> how science works. 
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Idiot....You have no idea how a single attractive force works. The source
>>>>>>>>>>> of a single attractive force can’t make objects orbit around it. 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Why, yes, Ken, it can.  Take any two objects that are just passing each
>>>>>>>>>> other with no forces acting on either one of them, and then throw a switch
>>>>>>>>>> to turn on an attractive force between them — just that one attractive
>>>>>>>>>> force — and they will now orbit each other. 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hey uneducated moron woodworker, I have a magnet and an iron ball I can’t
>>>>>>>>> make the ball orbiting the magnet. It just crash into the magnet as predicted. 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Did you make them traveling past each other as I specified, or did you just
>>>>>>>> plop them down in the table? What’s wrong with you? Can you not follow
>>>>>>>> experimental procedures???
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yes I did....the best I can do is to get half of an orbit before it crash
>>>>>>> into the magnet. It seems that you are a lying sack of shit.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Notice that you have not removed friction between the magnet and the table,
>>>>>> or between the ball and the table. What did I tell you about being careful
>>>>>> to remove friction in your experimental tests. 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Secondly, to get a circular orbit, the velocity of the ball has to be made
>>>>>> not too small and not too large. This is how the moon’s orbit w...
>>>>> 
>>>>> I don’t believe it and since It is your assertion.....why don’t you do it
>>>>> and make a video of it and show us.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The disbelief of an uneducated man such as yourself is not particularly
>>>> compelling. The difference between you and me, Ken, is that I have taken
>>>> the time and effort to educate myself somewhat, and as a result of that
>>>> education, I have come to believe some things are true. Some of that
>>>> education involves seeing well-crafted real-life demonstrations. You on the
>>>> other hand have not taken any time or effort to educate yourself. And so
>>>> all you use for deciding what to believe is your common sense and
>>>> demonstrations you put together with things from your junk drawer. 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> You made wild claim and you refused to back it up with experiment. 
>> 
>> Claims that are well documented in books and demonstrations are not wild. 
> 
> No moron, you made a wild claim that you can make a ball go orbiting
> motion around a CP force source by flipping on a switch. So go ahead and show us how.

Video demonstrations are available for this, as well as simulations.
Educate yourself. This is not a wild claim. This is basic physics you are
ignorant of. 

> 
>> 
>> Let me reiterate something to you. 
>> 1. If you choose not to study physics, that is YOUR problem and nobody
>> else’s. 
>> 2. If there is something from basic physics that you find unbelievable,
>> then this is a symptom of you being UNEDUCATED, not a symptom that it’s a
>> wild claim. 
>> 3. If there is something that is well documented that you are unfamiliar
>> with, nobody is going to do a one-on-one training for your eyes here where
>> it is convenient for you. You are expected to go to where the information
>> is, not demand that the information be brought to you here. 
>> 
>> Grow up. Stop acting like an infant and start behaving like a grown-up. 
>> 
>>> You claimed that you can make an object orbiting around a single
>>> attractive force in the lab so I call on you to make a video to support
>>> your claim. If you can produce such video then I will admit that my theory is wrong.
>>> 
>> 
>> If you won’t study physics on your own, nobody is going to take the effort
>> to convince you. Grow up. 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
> 



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

Thread

(Thread has 565 articles, showing 500 — browse group in flat view)

csiph-web