Gravity is a property of mass - not a property of space !!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: I was wrong
Next: Prog to transform world lines?
From: Y.Porat on 11 Jul 2010 05:19 Gravity is a property of mass!! it is *not* a property of space! now of curved space time or other nonsense physic s alike !! peoplehave lost too muchtime on that nonsense curved space time gravity should be loked in some basic mass particle emitted from big masses he Circlon'' might be a good start !! the Circlon is a basic particle that 'moves naturally in curved or circular paths naturallt mease it is a premise ie it does not move in a curved pass because 'some forces make it move like that but = but it moves in a curved path 'because it was 'born' like that and is actually the cause of all atractin froces iow it is a premis exactly as 'curved space trime is another *premis* the photon cannot be an attraction agent because it moves in a **straight lines** and if so to be an attraction agent is against the conservation of Momentum principle (the momentum has direction ...!!) 2 another nonsense attraction particle are the W or Z AN ATTRACTION AGENT CANNOT BE BIGGER THAN ITS MOTHER PARTICLE !!! etc etc etc nonsense physics that 'modern physics'' is filled with without any one eating it without blinking an eye!! (mainly fucken mathematicians that lead us toi a dead end position !!!) Y.Porat --------------------------------------
From: Surfer on 11 Jul 2010 08:21 On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:19:42 -0700 (PDT), "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >.... > An alternative to the idea of curved space-time, is that matter chews up space, thus causing space to accelerate into matter. The downward acceleration of space past us into the earth, then causes us to feel the "force" of gravity, in the same way as how we feel pushed backward, when an accelerating vehicle causes us to accelerate relative to space. This model also explains the gravitational slowing of clocks, without the need to use GR. http://home.epix.net/~hhlindner/Writings/Space/Physics.html <Start extract> If inertial space flows into the Earth as a fluid into a sink, then it must have not only an acceleration at any given radial distance, r, but also a determinate velocity. Its velocity at the Earth's surface ought to be the sum of its total acceleration from rest at infinite distance to the Earth's surface. This velocity should be identical to Newton's escape velocity--the initial velocity that allows any object on the surface of a large mass to escape that mass's gravitational field. Thus at the Earth's surface, space should be moving radially Earthward at sqrt(2 G M/r) , or 112km/s. <snip> If, as the evidence suggests, it is velocity in physical space, not merely relative velocity, that red shifts atomic spectra and slows atomic clocks, then an atomic clock held stationary at any given height in a gravitational field should slow just as if it were moving at the escape velocity for that height. This is indeed the case. The accepted formula for the gravitational slowing of atomic clocks is: Delta_v/v = 1 - sqrt(1 - 2 G M /rc^2) Since v^2 = 2 G M/r in our model of gravitational space flow, the gravitational red shift formula is identical to that for the transverse Doppler shift: Delta_v/v = 1 - sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) Thus the expected velocity of space at a given height in a gravitational field correctly predicts the slowing of atomic clocks at that height. We have thus derived the formula for the gravitational red shift from a simple physical hypothesis and produced a physical link between the mechanical effects of gravity and its effects on atomic spectra. <End extract>
From: Surfer on 11 Jul 2010 08:39 On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 21:51:32 +0930, Surfer <no(a)spam.net> wrote: >.. at the Earth's surface, space should be moving radially >Earthward at sqrt(2 G M/r) , or 112km/s. > That should be 11.2 km/s
From: Dono. on 11 Jul 2010 11:07 On Jul 11, 5:21 am, Surfer <n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > > > This model also explains the gravitational slowing of clocks, without > the need to use GR. > > http://home.epix.net/~hhlindner/Writings/Space/Physics.html > One idiot (Peter Brown) citing another idiot (Henry Linder http://home.epix.net/%7Ehhlindner/Bio.html)
From: mpc755 on 11 Jul 2010 12:23
On Jul 11, 8:21 am, Surfer <n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jul 2010 02:19:42 -0700 (PDT), "Y.Porat" > > <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >.... > > An alternative to the idea of curved space-time, is that matter chews > up space, thus causing space to accelerate into matter. > > The downward acceleration of space past us into the earth, then causes > us to feel the "force" of gravity, in the same way as how we feel > pushed backward, when an accelerating vehicle causes us to accelerate > relative to space. > > This model also explains the gravitational slowing of clocks, without > the need to use GR. > > http://home.epix.net/~hhlindner/Writings/Space/Physics.html > > <Start extract> > > If inertial space flows into the Earth as a fluid into a sink, then it > must have not only an acceleration at any given radial distance, r, > but also a determinate velocity. Its velocity at the Earth's surface > ought to be the sum of its total acceleration from rest at infinite > distance to the Earth's surface. This velocity should be identical to > Newton's escape velocity--the initial velocity that allows any object > on the surface of a large mass to escape that mass's gravitational > field. Thus at the Earth's surface, space should be moving radially > Earthward at sqrt(2 G M/r) , or 112km/s. > > <snip> > > If, as the evidence suggests, it is velocity in physical space, not > merely relative velocity, that red shifts atomic spectra and slows > atomic clocks, then an atomic clock held stationary at any given > height in a gravitational field should slow just as if it were moving > at the escape velocity for that height. This is indeed the case. The > accepted formula for the gravitational slowing of atomic clocks is: > > Delta_v/v = 1 - sqrt(1 - 2 G M /rc^2) > > Since v^2 = 2 G M/r in our model of gravitational space flow, the > gravitational red shift formula is identical to that for the > transverse Doppler shift: > > Delta_v/v = 1 - sqrt(1 - v^2/c^2) > > Thus the expected velocity of space at a given height in a > gravitational field correctly predicts the slowing of atomic clocks at > that height. We have thus derived the formula for the gravitational > red shift from a simple physical hypothesis and produced a physical > link between the mechanical effects of gravity and its effects on > atomic spectra. > > <End extract> Dark matter displaced by matter is more correct. Space does not flow into the Earth. Matter displaces dark matter. Dark matter is not at rest when displaced and 'displaces back'. The 'displacing back' is pressure exerted by displaced dark matter. Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. You are mistaking the pressure exerted by displaced dark matter as a 'flow'. Gravitation, the 'Dark Matter' Effect and the Fine Structure Constant http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0401047 "There we see the first arguments that indicate the logical necessity for quantum behaviour, at both the spatial level and at the matter level. There space is, at one of the lowest levels, a quantumfoam system undergoing ongoing classicalisation. That model suggest that gravity is caused by matter changing the processing rate of the informational system that manifests as space, and as a consequence space effectively flows towards matter. However this is not a flow of some form of matter through space, as previously considered in the aether models or in the random particulate Le Sage kinetic theory of gravity, rather the flow is an ongoing rearrangement of the quantum-foam patterns that form space, and indeed only have a geometrical description at a coarse-grained level. Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions, and not relative to some a priori background geometrical space" What is described as "space effectively flows towards matter" is the pressure exerted by the displaced dark matter towards the matter. "Then the flow in one region is relative only to the patterns in nearby regions" is the pressure exerted by the displaced dark matter towards the matter and the pressure exerted by the displaced dark matter in nearby regions towards the matter. |