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 16 Jul 2010 10:37 On Jul 15, 11:45 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > you have to undertsnad that > completely empty space is **much bigger in volume than > occupies space !! > and that empty space includes in it > NOTHING > no porperties at all!! Sorry, Porat, but this last statement here is observationally wrong. You seem to want to insist that this MUST be true, by declaration or definition. As I told you, we do not get to make those kinds of declarations.
From: ben6993 on 16 Jul 2010 10:49 On Jul 16, 3:37 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 15, 11:45 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > you have to undertsnad that > > completely empty space is **much bigger in volume than > > occupies space !! > > and that empty space includes in it > > NOTHING > > no porperties at all!! > > Sorry, Porat, but this last statement here is observationally wrong. > You seem to want to insist that this MUST be true, by declaration or > definition. > As I told you, we do not get to make those kinds of declarations. Hi Porat. To know that a given volume was completely empty would imply that you knew everything that could possibly be in it, and that you have excluded all possibilities. That would imply that you had an infinite knowledge of all that could be 'not nothing'. Exotic particles, dark matter, dark energy, if they exist, and other things not yet suspected. How would you know that a volume that appears to you to look empty actually has nothing in it?
From: mpc755 on 16 Jul 2010 11:10 On Jul 16, 10:49 am, ben6993 <ben6...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 16, 3:37 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jul 15, 11:45 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > you have to undertsnad that > > > completely empty space is **much bigger in volume than > > > occupies space !! > > > and that empty space includes in it > > > NOTHING > > > no porperties at all!! > > > Sorry, Porat, but this last statement here is observationally wrong. > > You seem to want to insist that this MUST be true, by declaration or > > definition. > > As I told you, we do not get to make those kinds of declarations. > > Hi Porat. To know that a given volume was completely empty would > imply that you knew everything that could possibly be in it, and that > you have excluded all possibilities. That would imply that you had an > infinite knowledge of all that could be 'not nothing'. Exotic > particles, dark matter, dark energy, if they exist, and other things > not yet suspected. How would you know that a volume that appears to > you to look empty actually has nothing in it? Experimental evidence suggest a vacuum consists of dark matter. The double slit experiment is evidence of a moving particle having an associated dark matter displacement wave.
From: PD on 16 Jul 2010 11:27 On Jul 16, 10:10 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Experimental evidence suggest a vacuum consists of dark matter. The > double slit experiment is evidence of a moving particle having an > associated dark matter displacement wave. In a desperate bid for attention, Michael Cavedon, taking a break from his software job, decides to rename his aether, which he later renamed maehter, now to "dark matter", since that seems to a more current buzzword. There's always someone at a party that inserts himself between people having a conversation, saying "What are you all talking about? Hey, I know all about that! Let me tell you..." Then the people who were there roll their eyes and turn their backs, blending back in to the crowd. Hey Mike, feeling lonely?
From: mpc755 on 16 Jul 2010 11:34
On Jul 16, 11:27 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 16, 10:10 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Experimental evidence suggest a vacuum consists of dark matter. The > > double slit experiment is evidence of a moving particle having an > > associated dark matter displacement wave. > > In a desperate bid for attention, Michael Cavedon, taking a break from > his software job, decides to rename his aether, which he later renamed > maehter, now to "dark matter", since that seems to a more current > buzzword. > > There's always someone at a party that inserts himself between people > having a conversation, saying "What are you all talking about? Hey, I > know all about that! Let me tell you..." Then the people who were > there roll their eyes and turn their backs, blending back in to the > crowd. Hey Mike, feeling lonely? O' wise one, share your wisdom for all to see. 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. Explain what occurs physically in nature to cause gravity. Dark Matter Displacement explains what occurs physically in nature in all of the above. Dark matter is displaced by matter. Dark matter is not at rest when displaced. Displaced dark matter exerts pressure towards the matter. A moving particle has an associated dark matter displacement wave. Physical effects caused by matter converting to dark matter is energy. Mass is conserved. The future does not determine the past in the physics of nature. Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. |