Gravity is a property of mass - not a property of space !! [Physics]

Prev: number of Coulomb Interactions as 231! as the largest number in physics Chapt 19 #222 Atom Totality
Next: Calculating the spectra and intensity of Helium, Lithium and Beryllium using only Rydberg-like formulas

From: Y.Porat on 15 Jul 2010 02:47

On Jul 15, 7:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.

-----------------
if you will say that
dark matter is a massive particle
that moves naturally in a curved line
not because of curved space time
I WILL BE WITH YOU (:-)!!
btw
i dont agree with you and PD
about dark mater ao any physical entity that
fuills completely space withitself
that is physics stupidity
if spca was ful of it without any empty space
beside it
THAT ENTIRY WHOULD NOT BE ABLE
TO MOVE A FRACTION OF A MOVEMENT

free or any movement cannot be done
without some empty space to move into it!!
it cannot move into the other physical entity** like
itself ** !!
no need to be a genius
(in a big understatement.... )--
in order of understanding it !!!
and if so
empty space has no properties at all
except hosting mass
(or relativistic mass if youlike 'relativistic mass'
which is another physics stupidity (:-))

ATB
Y.Porat
-------------------------
Y.Porat
-------------------

From: mpc755 on 15 Jul 2010 08:36

On Jul 15, 2:47 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 15, 7:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 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.
>
> -----------------
> if you will say that
> dark matter is a massive particle
> that moves naturally in a curved line
> not because of curved space time
> I WILL BE WITH YOU (:-)!!
> btw

It is not known if dark matter consists of particles or not. Einstein
insists it can not be known if the ether consists of separate movable
particles.

'Ether and the Theory of Relativity by Albert Einstein'
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html

"Think of waves on the surface of water. Here we can describe two
entirely different things. Either we may observe how the undulatory
surface forming the boundary between water and air alters in the
course of time; or else-with the help of small floats, for instance -
we can observe how the position of the separate particles of water
alters in the course of time. If the existence of such floats for
tracking the motion of the particles of a fluid were a fundamental
impossibility in physics - if, in fact nothing else whatever were
observable than the shape of the space occupied by the water as it
varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water
consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise
it as a medium."

Dark matter does not move with matter. Dark matter is displaced by
matter. If you roll a bowling ball down a ramp through a tank of water
then the water does not move with the bowling ball. The water is
displaced by the bowling ball. The water 'displaces back' against the
bowling ball. The water applies pressure towards the bowling ball.

Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity.

> i dont agree with you and PD
> about dark mater ao any physical entity that
> fuills completely space withitself
> that is physics stupidity
> if spca was ful of it without any empty space
> beside it
> THAT ENTIRY WHOULD NOT BE ABLE
> TO MOVE A FRACTION OF A MOVEMENT
>

'On the super-fluid property of the relativistic physical vacuum
medium and the inertial motion of particles'
http://arxiv.org/ftp/gr-qc/papers/0701/0701155.pdf

"Abstract: The similarity between the energy spectra of relativistic
particles and that of quasi-particles in super-conductivity BCS theory
makes us conjecture that the relativistic physical vacuum medium as
the ground state of the background field is a super fluid medium, and
the rest mass of a relativistic particle is like the energy gap of a
quasi-particle. This conjecture is strongly supported by the results
of our following investigation: a particle moving through the vacuum
medium at a speed less than the speed of light in vacuum, though
interacting with the vacuum medium, never feels friction force and
thus undergoes a frictionless and inertial motion."

A particle in the super fluid medium displaces the super fluid medium,
whether the particle is at rest with respect to the super fluid
medium, or not. A moving particle creates a displacement wave in the
super fluid medium.

A particle in dark matter displaces the dark matter, whether the
particle is at rest with respect to the dark matter, or not. The
particle could be an individual nucleus. A moving particle creates a
displacement wave in the dark matter.

Dark matter is displaced by an individual nucleus. When discussing
gravity as the pressure associated with the dark matter displaced by
matter, what is being discussed is the dark matter being displaced by
each and every nucleus which is the matter which is the object.

> free or any movement cannot be done
> without some empty space to move into it!!
> it cannot move into the other physical entity** like
> itself ** !!
> no need to be a genius
> (in a big understatement.... )--
> in order of understanding it !!!
> and if so
> empty space has no properties at all
> except hosting mass
> (or relativistic mass if youlike 'relativistic mass'
> which is another physics stupidity (:-))
>

How do you explain the following?

'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_featur...

"Astronomers using NASAs Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark matter, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."

The above is evidence of dark matter displaced by matter.
The above is evidence of the correctness of Dark Matter Displacement.

> ATB
> Y.Porat
> -------------------------
> Y.Porat
> -------------------

From: Y.Porat on 15 Jul 2010 11:04

On Jul 15, 2:36 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 15, 2:47 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jul 15, 7:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > 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)gm > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water
> consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise
> it as a medium."
>
> Dark matter does not move with matter. Dark matter is displaced by
> matter. If you roll a bowling ball down a ramp through a tank of water
> then the water does not move with the bowling ball. The ...
>
> read more »
==============

did you understand that
in order to have any movement
(including your water ripples)

there must be some COMPLETELY EMPTY SPACE
TO ENABLE THAT MOVEMENT ??

Y.Porat
----------------------

From: mpc755 on 15 Jul 2010 11:23

On Jul 15, 11:04 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 15, 2:36 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jul 15, 2:47 am, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 15, 7:06 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > 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)gm > varies in time, we should have no ground for the assumption that water
> > consists of movable particles. But all the same we could characterise
> > it as a medium."
>
> > Dark matter does not move with matter. Dark matter is displaced by
> > matter. If you roll a bowling ball down a ramp through a tank of water
> > then the water does not move with the bowling ball. The ...
>
> > read more »
>
> ==============
>
> did you understand that
> in order to have any movement
> (including your water ripples)
>
> there must be some COMPLETELY EMPTY SPACE
> TO ENABLE THAT MOVEMENT ??
>

Just the opposite. In order for there to be ripples, there must be
material.

How do you explain the following if space is a void?

'Hubble Finds Ghostly Ring of Dark Matter'
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/hubble/news/dark_matter_ring_feature.html

"Astronomers using NASAs Hubble Space Telescope got a first-hand view
of how dark matter behaves during a titanic collision between two
galaxy clusters. The wreck created a ripple of dark matter, which is
somewhat similar to a ripple formed in a pond when a rock hits the
water."

The above is evidence of dark matter displaced by matter.
The above is evidence of the correctness of Dark Matter Displacement.

From: PD on 15 Jul 2010 13:09

On Jul 14, 8:23 pm, "Y.Porat" <y.y.po...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 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. What I see is that you need to read a basic book on the concepts
of general relativity and gravitation, so that you will have these
questions answered.

>
> (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
> ------------------------------ Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -