Gravity is a property of mass - not a property of space !!
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: I was wrong
Next: Prog to transform world lines?
From: PD on 14 Jul 2010 15:21 On Jul 14, 1:16 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 14, 5:41 pm, P any !!!) > > > > > > > > and magnetic fields > > > so > > > > Mr PD i was asking about the **net space!** > > > i was not asking about the 'visitors' there > > > as if i would ask > > > what are the properties of that room as an empty room > > > and you wi ltell me > > > there are tables chairs computers etc etc !! > > > Sorry, but the analogy is not quite right. A room has walls and a > > floor that are properties of the room itself. It would be foolish to > > say that an empty room cannot even have walls or a floor, or it would > > not be completely empty. The room is not a room without floor or wall. > > Emptying the room of furniture still leaves it with the properties of > > walls and floor. > > > > take even your answer which you said: > > > electric fields > > > or magnetic fields > > > are those fields part of the empty space ?? > > > Yes, the field is part of space. Space is NOT just an empty container > > for everything else that has properties. > > > > are there not places in that space in which > > > THERE ***ARE NOT *** ELECTRIC OR MAGNETIC FIELDS ??!! > > > There are certainly places where the field has value zero, but a field > > extends through all space. I'll give you an example. If you take two > > positively charged ping-pong balls, this will create a static electric > > field, a property of space, EVERYWHERE throughout the region around > > the ping-pong balls. There will be a point on a line between the ping- > > pong balls, though, where the value of the electric field is zero. > > This doesn't mean that this point of space is any more "empty" than a > > place where the electric field is not zero. > > > It's similar to a case of a ball being tossed straight up in the air. > > It has nonzero momentum at every point of the flight. At the top of > > the flight, the ball still has momentum, but it has zero value. It > > simply isn't true that the ball *loses* momentum for an instant at the > > top of the flight. Momentum is a property of the ball throughout the > > flight, even at the very top. > > > > ARE THERE NOT LOCATIONS IN WHICH > > > THERE IS NO MASS AT ALL ?? > > > even not 'relativistic mass '' (:-) > > > 2 > > > > and to my question about two mass in space > > > that are very far away > > > you said > > > even so 'each of them curves space!!!' > > > if a single mass curves space > > > why does it move in a strait line ??!! > > > Because it curves the space in the region AROUND it. The path in the > > ==============================-------------------- > can you prove that idiotic hand waving?? > just prove it !! Theories are not proven. They are tested, quantitative prediction against experimental measurement. One does not have to PROVE a conceptual model first. One entertains a conceptual model (no matter how stupid or crazy you think it is), and then develops it into quantitative predictions that can be tested. Then you test them. If you didn't know this is how science works, then we have to focus on that first. > that while a single mass is moving in space > space is curving it from all sides !! We test it the same way we'd answer the same question about the electric field around a single charge. You'll note that freshman physics texts DO talk about the electric field around single charges. > my claim is that > it srrounds it from all sides > by a soft blanket of 3 centimeter thick !! > > that is the kind of science that your > unlimited impertinence can produce !! > > arnt you ashamed ???!!! > ashamed even by your own criteria > about what is physics science !!! > btw > if you like to steal soemmthing from me > better do it properly > in my circlon mopdel that i present at the appndix of my book > i show it sort of > the Circlon surround the secondary mass > in an unsymmetrical way > that i wonder of you understood it proprerly > > yet the difference is that in my model > itr is done by a particle a massive one > that moves naturally in a closed circle > (NOT BY YOUR IDIOTIC SPACE !!) Well, you call it "your idiotic space," but that model DOES make QUANTITATIVE predictions that work very well. Your circlon idea does nothing of the kind. > if not disturbed on its way by another circlon etc etc > but that is mysuggested model > and thatis why i presented it only at my appandix!! > as a ""suggestion not as a theory given my GOD > and i assert it explicitly as not proven > as youi do it !! > because i am not a pompous crook as you are !! > and you crook call your private suggetion or other idiotic suggsetion > as > if your intention is to make me sick about discussing with you > you will get it soon !! > > "basic knowlwdge known to a secondary school boy''' > > no fucken demagogy as yourself will convice > an adult ** honest* serious scientists !! > Y.Porat > --------------------- > ..- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: PD on 14 Jul 2010 18:06 On Jul 14, 10:20 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 14, 11:13 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 14, 10:54 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:25 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 14, 10:21 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 12:53 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 2:38 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 7:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 11, 4:19 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is a property of mass!! > > > > > > > > > > > it is *not* a property of space! > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is not a property. It is an interaction. It involves matter's > > > > > > > > > > and energy's interaction with spacetime, and spacetime's interaction > > > > > > > > > > with matter and energy. > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > Bravo > > > > > > > > > you make some advance > > > > > > > > > even if inspired by me (:-) > > > > > > > > > There is no recent advance here. I've just told you what's been > > > > > > > > understood since 1915, and which you would be able to find for > > > > > > > > yourself just by reading a book. > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > i have a little question for you PD > > > > > > > > > > if you say 'an interaction' > > > > > > > > > so it is an interaction between > > > > > > > > > two physical entities > > > > > > > > > Yes, between matter and spacetime. > > > > > > > > > > yet i order to understand that INTERACTION between those 2 > > > > > > > > > entities > > > > > > > > > we have to know to scratch > > > > > > > > > the properties of those two actors > > > > > > > > > am i right ??? > > > > > > > > > if so > > > > > > > > > whqt are the properties of that > > > > > > > > > mysterious space that can > > > > > > > > > curve a motion that would otherwise > > > > > > > > > move in a straight line > > > > > > > > > I've already listed properties in another post for you. Did you read > > > > > > > > that? > > > > > > > > > > 2 > > > > > > > > > for example > > > > > > > > > out earth moved in a circle around the sun > > > > > > > > > and all that happens in space > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > **if that sun was not there** > > > > > > > > > our earth move in a strigfgt line isn t that so ?? > > > > > > > > > so ??? > > > > > > > > > what made our earth to move i a circle > > > > > > > > > is it space ??? > > > > > > > > > or is it the - > > > > > > > > > sun > > > > > > > > > and earths masses ?? > > > > > > > > > The sun affects the curvature of spacetime in the vicinity of the > > > > > > > > Earth (and everywhere else), and the Earth responds to the curvature > > > > > > > > of spacetime where it is at. The same is true vice-versa. > > > > > > > > The sun displaces dark matter and the Earth responds to the > > > > > > > displacement of dark matter where it is at. > > > > > > > Well, YOU say the sun displaces dark matter. Physicists are probably > > > > > > talking about something different than what you're talking about then. > > > > > > You can not explain how spacetime curves but does not move because you > > > > > have no idea what occurs physically in nature. > > > > > Well, you can say it's because of that, but your mistaken about that > > > > "because" as much as you are about the others. > > > > I DO NOT (not "can not") explain to you how spacetime curves but does > > > > not move, because you are an insufferable jerk with severe emotional > > > > problems. > > > > You do not, because you can not, explain how spactime curves but does > > > not move because the statement 'spacetime curves' has nothing to do > > > with the physics of nature. > > > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. > > > > > Now, I'd be happy to have you assert that my motivations are not at > > > > all what I think my motivations are, and that you have the unique, God- > > > > blessed insight to see my motivations better than I do. This will > > > > firmly establish your mental slide, and you will have the opportunity > > > > to prepare for the day your company lets you go as a liability. > > > So, thank you for firmly establishing your mental slide, and > > embellishing it with your compulsive response pattern of cut-and-paste > > repetition. > > > PD > > It is evident you are unable to explain what occurs physically in > nature to cause spacetime to curve. > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. Well, as I said, how detached you are from reality is your problem. How do you keep a job?
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 18:48 On Jul 14, 6:06 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 14, 10:20 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 11:13 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 14, 9:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 10:54 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:25 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 10:21 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 12:53 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 2:38 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 7:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 11, 4:19 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is a property of mass!! > > > > > > > > > > > > it is *not* a property of space! > > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is not a property. It is an interaction. It involves matter's > > > > > > > > > > > and energy's interaction with spacetime, and spacetime's interaction > > > > > > > > > > > with matter and energy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > Bravo > > > > > > > > > > you make some advance > > > > > > > > > > even if inspired by me (:-) > > > > > > > > > > There is no recent advance here. I've just told you what's been > > > > > > > > > understood since 1915, and which you would be able to find for > > > > > > > > > yourself just by reading a book. > > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > i have a little question for you PD > > > > > > > > > > > if you say 'an interaction' > > > > > > > > > > so it is an interaction between > > > > > > > > > > two physical entities > > > > > > > > > > Yes, between matter and spacetime. > > > > > > > > > > > yet i order to understand that INTERACTION between those 2 > > > > > > > > > > entities > > > > > > > > > > we have to know to scratch > > > > > > > > > > the properties of those two actors > > > > > > > > > > am i right ??? > > > > > > > > > > if so > > > > > > > > > > whqt are the properties of that > > > > > > > > > > mysterious space that can > > > > > > > > > > curve a motion that would otherwise > > > > > > > > > > move in a straight line > > > > > > > > > > I've already listed properties in another post for you. Did you read > > > > > > > > > that? > > > > > > > > > > > 2 > > > > > > > > > > for example > > > > > > > > > > out earth moved in a circle around the sun > > > > > > > > > > and all that happens in space > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > **if that sun was not there** > > > > > > > > > > our earth move in a strigfgt line isn t that so ?? > > > > > > > > > > so ??? > > > > > > > > > > what made our earth to move i a circle > > > > > > > > > > is it space ??? > > > > > > > > > > or is it the - > > > > > > > > > > sun > > > > > > > > > > and earths masses ?? > > > > > > > > > > The sun affects the curvature of spacetime in the vicinity of the > > > > > > > > > Earth (and everywhere else), and the Earth responds to the curvature > > > > > > > > > of spacetime where it is at. The same is true vice-versa. > > > > > > > > > The sun displaces dark matter and the Earth responds to the > > > > > > > > displacement of dark matter where it is at. > > > > > > > > Well, YOU say the sun displaces dark matter. Physicists are probably > > > > > > > talking about something different than what you're talking about then. > > > > > > > You can not explain how spacetime curves but does not move because you > > > > > > have no idea what occurs physically in nature. > > > > > > Well, you can say it's because of that, but your mistaken about that > > > > > "because" as much as you are about the others. > > > > > I DO NOT (not "can not") explain to you how spacetime curves but does > > > > > not move, because you are an insufferable jerk with severe emotional > > > > > problems. > > > > > You do not, because you can not, explain how spactime curves but does > > > > not move because the statement 'spacetime curves' has nothing to do > > > > with the physics of nature. > > > > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. > > > > > > Now, I'd be happy to have you assert that my motivations are not at > > > > > all what I think my motivations are, and that you have the unique, God- > > > > > blessed insight to see my motivations better than I do. This will > > > > > firmly establish your mental slide, and you will have the opportunity > > > > > to prepare for the day your company lets you go as a liability. > > > > So, thank you for firmly establishing your mental slide, and > > > embellishing it with your compulsive response pattern of cut-and-paste > > > repetition. > > > > PD > > > It is evident you are unable to explain what occurs physically in > > nature to cause spacetime to curve. > > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. > > Well, as I said, how detached you are from reality is your problem. > > How do you keep a job? It is evident you are unable to explain what occurs physically in nature to cause spacetime to curve. Dark matter is displaced by matter. Dark matter is not at rest when displaced. Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter is gravity. A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave.
From: Y.Porat on 14 Jul 2010 21:23 On Jul 14, 9:21 pm, PD > > > > that are very far away > > > > you said > > > > even so 'each of them curves space!!!' > > > > if a single mass curves space > > > > why does it move in a strait line ??!! > > > > Because it curves the space in the region AROUND it. The path in the > > > ==============================-------------------- > > can you prove that idiotic hand waving?? > > just prove it !! > > Theories are not proven. They are tested, quantitative prediction > against experimental measurement. > One does not have to PROVE a conceptual model first. > One entertains a conceptual model (no matter how stupid or crazy you > think it is), and then develops it into quantitative predictions that > can be tested. Then you test them. > If you didn't know this is how science works, then we have to focus on > that first. > > > that while a single mass is moving in space > > space is curving it from all sides !! > > We test it the same way we'd answer the same question about the > electric field around a single charge. > You'll note that freshman physics texts DO talk about the electric > field around single charges. > > > > > my claim is that > > it srrounds it from all sides > > by a soft blanket of 3 centimeter thick !! > > > that is the kind of science that your > > unlimited impertinence can produce !! > > > arnt you ashamed ???!!! > > ashamed even by your own criteria > > about what is physics science !!! > > btw > > if you like to steal soemmthing from me > > better do it properly > > in my circlon mopdel that i present at the appndix of my book > > i show it sort of > > the Circlon surround the secondary mass > > in an unsymmetrical way > > that i wonder of you understood it proprerly > > > yet the difference is that in my model > > itr is done by a particle a massive one > > that moves naturally in a closed circle > > (NOT BY YOUR IDIOTIC SPACE !!) > > Well, you call it "your idiotic space," but that model DOES make > QUANTITATIVE predictions that work very well. Your circlon idea does > nothing of the kind. ================================= -------------------- cheating again !!! you are very good in philosophic ball bogglings but we need pratical* specific* understanding and knowledge !! you can make **some* again some**quantitive predictions but then you confront a situation in which YOUR FUCKEN THEORY CANOT ANSWER !! because you are fiddling with data to fit it to theory by experimental TRIAL AND ERROR but your undertsanding of the real reasons why it works ((WORKS PARTIALLY !!) IS WRONG !! GR DOES NOT WORK FOR MICROCOSM NO MATTER WHAT ARE YOUR FUCKEN EXCUSES FOR IT GR COULD **NOT** UNIFY ALL FORCES UNDER ONE(umbrella ) FORCE SYSTEM all other atraction forces are based on FORCE AGENTS that are mediating by constant movement between particles and that is why ***Gravitons** were introduced into science and rightly so !!! and not the **religious ** curved space for instance what are the means of curved space to interact (comunicate) with the mass in it ?? 2 if you say that a single mass moving in space is surrounded by sort of covering space if so how can it move in a STRAIGHT LINE while it is surrounded by covering curved space ?? 3 how can space ''know '' what is the qauntity of mass in it and to 'curve accordingly what are the means of comunication (interactions) between mass and the space around it ??? do you have there witches on brooms from 500 years ago ??? you see the problem (no chance!! for a religious man ..!! that probably*** makes his living from that religion !!.no much differnce from 500 years ago ...) IT IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO GUESS IN good PHYSICS YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND and know THAT MATTER TO SCRATCH or else it comes a day while you are in a dead end as with unifying all forces !! forces for a real physicst (not a fuckn mathematician ) are not done by **holy ghosts** but with FORCE AGENTS MOVING AND MEDIATING BETWEEN MASSES Einstein could not know it 100 years ago !! had he known it as we know it today he would through idiots parrots like you to the garbage of science !! Y.Porat -----------------------------
From: mpc755 on 15 Jul 2010 01:06
On Jul 14, 6:06 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 14, 10:20 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 11:13 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 14, 9:58 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 14, 10:54 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:25 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 10:21 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:35 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 12:53 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 2:38 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 7:45 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 11, 4:19 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is a property of mass!! > > > > > > > > > > > > it is *not* a property of space! > > > > > > > > > > > > Gravity is not a property. It is an interaction. It involves matter's > > > > > > > > > > > and energy's interaction with spacetime, and spacetime's interaction > > > > > > > > > > > with matter and energy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > Bravo > > > > > > > > > > you make some advance > > > > > > > > > > even if inspired by me (:-) > > > > > > > > > > There is no recent advance here. I've just told you what's been > > > > > > > > > understood since 1915, and which you would be able to find for > > > > > > > > > yourself just by reading a book. > > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > i have a little question for you PD > > > > > > > > > > > if you say 'an interaction' > > > > > > > > > > so it is an interaction between > > > > > > > > > > two physical entities > > > > > > > > > > Yes, between matter and spacetime. > > > > > > > > > > > yet i order to understand that INTERACTION between those 2 > > > > > > > > > > entities > > > > > > > > > > we have to know to scratch > > > > > > > > > > the properties of those two actors > > > > > > > > > > am i right ??? > > > > > > > > > > if so > > > > > > > > > > whqt are the properties of that > > > > > > > > > > mysterious space that can > > > > > > > > > > curve a motion that would otherwise > > > > > > > > > > move in a straight line > > > > > > > > > > I've already listed properties in another post for you. Did you read > > > > > > > > > that? > > > > > > > > > > > 2 > > > > > > > > > > for example > > > > > > > > > > out earth moved in a circle around the sun > > > > > > > > > > and all that happens in space > > > > > > > > > > now > > > > > > > > > > **if that sun was not there** > > > > > > > > > > our earth move in a strigfgt line isn t that so ?? > > > > > > > > > > so ??? > > > > > > > > > > what made our earth to move i a circle > > > > > > > > > > is it space ??? > > > > > > > > > > or is it the - > > > > > > > > > > sun > > > > > > > > > > and earths masses ?? > > > > > > > > > > The sun affects the curvature of spacetime in the vicinity of the > > > > > > > > > Earth (and everywhere else), and the Earth responds to the curvature > > > > > > > > > of spacetime where it is at. The same is true vice-versa. > > > > > > > > > The sun displaces dark matter and the Earth responds to the > > > > > > > > displacement of dark matter where it is at. > > > > > > > > Well, YOU say the sun displaces dark matter. Physicists are probably > > > > > > > talking about something different than what you're talking about then. > > > > > > > You can not explain how spacetime curves but does not move because you > > > > > > have no idea what occurs physically in nature. > > > > > > Well, you can say it's because of that, but your mistaken about that > > > > > "because" as much as you are about the others. > > > > > I DO NOT (not "can not") explain to you how spacetime curves but does > > > > > not move, because you are an insufferable jerk with severe emotional > > > > > problems. > > > > > You do not, because you can not, explain how spactime curves but does > > > > not move because the statement 'spacetime curves' has nothing to do > > > > with the physics of nature. > > > > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. > > > > > > Now, I'd be happy to have you assert that my motivations are not at > > > > > all what I think my motivations are, and that you have the unique, God- > > > > > blessed insight to see my motivations better than I do. This will > > > > > firmly establish your mental slide, and you will have the opportunity > > > > > to prepare for the day your company lets you go as a liability. > > > > So, thank you for firmly establishing your mental slide, and > > > embellishing it with your compulsive response pattern of cut-and-paste > > > repetition. > > > > PD > > > It is evident you are unable to explain what occurs physically in > > nature to cause spacetime to curve. > > > Dark matter is displaced by matter. > > Well, as I said, how detached you are from reality is your problem. > > How do you keep a job? Explain what occurs physically in nature to cause spacetime to curve but not move. Explain what occurs physically in nature which allows a C-60 molecule to enter, travel through, and exit multiple slits simultaneously without losing momentum. Explain what occurs physically in nature when mass converts to energy. Explain what occurs physically in nature which allows the future to determine the past. Oh yeah, that's right, you can't. Dark Matter Displacement explains what occurs physically in nature in all of the above. Dark matter is displaced by matter. A moving C-60 molecule has an associated dark matter displacement wave. Energy is the physical effect caused by matter converting to dark matter. The future does not determine the past in the physics of nature. |