Proposed experiment for detection of absolute motion
in [Relativity]
|
From: NoEinstein on 11 Aug 2010 09:53 On Aug 7, 3:36 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Dear PD: GR "theory" (space-time... HA!) talks about a lot of things. But only yours truly has figured out that the mechanism of gravity isn't Einstein's concocted 4D metric, but simply flowing ether which exerts a mass-proportional force on all objects; and the flow can continue by virtue of the fact that the photon exchange between the attracting bodies is transporting "hobo" ether back into space between the emitted photons. NoEinstein > > On Aug 7, 12:04 pm, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > On Aug 6, 8:52 pm, Darwin123 <drosen0...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 10, 12:57 pm, GSS <gurcharn_san...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > >> "According to special theory of relativity, all motion is relative > > >> and existence of any privileged or absolute inertial frame of > > >> reference, which could be practically distinguished from all other > > >> inertial frames, is ruled out. However, we may define an absolute or > > >> universal reference frame as the one which is at rest with respect to > > >> the center of mass of the universe and assume the speed c of > > >> propagation of light to be an isotropic universal constant in that > > >> frame. > > > > There is not one unique center of mass for the entire universe. GR > > > indicates that the center of mass of the universe doesn't have to be > > > unique even in a finite universe. > > > GR considers the universe as embedded in 4-D spacetime, which is a > > sort of 4-D 'block' view of the universe. In my opinion, this faulty > > view of the universe has been created by wrongly treating the > > 'spacetime' as a physical entity, instead of recognizing it as a > > mathematical model used for simulating trajectories of particles. > > Basically our dynamic universe is embedded in a 3-D Euclidean space > > and its dynamic behavior or characteristic changes can be represented > > with the use of an independent time coordinate. The notion of center > > of mass can be associated with practically any spatial distribution of > > mass in a 3-D space. > > Actually, GR does quite a bit more than this. The point of GR is that > there IS NO fixed 4D metric, and that in fact, the metric is a > *dynamical* property. Folks in quantum gravity call this feature of GR > "background-free". The geometry is not an independent background upon > which the laws of nature play. The geometry is *governed by* the laws > of physics, which play out on a more fundamental basis. > > As for your claim that a center of mass can be associated with > practically any spatial distribution of mass, this is true only if a) > the distribution of mass is finite or b) is asymptotically zero > density. > > PD- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Autymn D. C. on 12 Aug 2010 08:04 On Aug 11, 6:29 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Aug 6, 7:37 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 7:59 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Aug 2, 5:04 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 1, 9:27 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 5:19 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 4:17 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > Dear Aut...: If I missed an important reply of yours, I'm sorry. > > > > > > > Simply copy and paste it again. NE > > > > > > > Don't write under my header, fuckwit, and go back in the thread and > > > > > > read it. > > > > > > Dear Autymn: You don't have the smarts to be making a '+new post'. > > > > > Sorry if I offend your non-intellect. NoEinstein > > > > > I made a new post not long ago, and earlier this year. Stop thwartin > > > > the thread, shyster cretin. All of your arguments are nothing. > > > > > -Aut > > > > Dear Aut....: And YOUR arguments contributing in any way the science > > > are where? NoEinstein > > > in which > How about right here on sci.physics, so the readers can see your > shallowness. I'm not your Google.
From: NoEinstein on 12 Aug 2010 21:02 On Aug 12, 8:04 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Dear Aut....: Not only can't you read and write, you can't think clearly. What in hell does "I'm not your Google mean? Ha, ha, HA! NE > > On Aug 11, 6:29 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > On Aug 6, 7:37 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > On Aug 3, 7:59 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 2, 5:04 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 1, 9:27 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 5:19 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 4:17 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dear Aut...: If I missed an important reply of yours, I'm sorry. > > > > > > > > Simply copy and paste it again. NE > > > > > > > > Don't write under my header, fuckwit, and go back in the thread and > > > > > > > read it. > > > > > > > Dear Autymn: You don't have the smarts to be making a '+new post'. > > > > > > Sorry if I offend your non-intellect. NoEinstein > > > > > > I made a new post not long ago, and earlier this year. Stop thwartin > > > > > the thread, shyster cretin. All of your arguments are nothing. > > > > > > -Aut > > > > > Dear Aut....: And YOUR arguments contributing in any way the science > > > > are where? NoEinstein > > > > in which > > How about right here on sci.physics, so the readers can see your > > shallowness. > > I'm not your Google.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: BURT on 12 Aug 2010 21:14
On Aug 12, 6:02 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > On Aug 12, 8:04 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > Dear Aut....: Not only can't you read and write, you can't think > clearly. What in hell does "I'm not your Google mean? Ha, ha, HA! > NE > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 6:29 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > On Aug 6, 7:37 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > On Aug 3, 7:59 am, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > On Aug 2, 5:04 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 1, 4:54 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Aug 1, 9:27 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 5:19 pm, NoEinstein <noeinst...(a)bellsouth.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 4:17 am, "Autymn D. C." <lysde...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Dear Aut...: If I missed an important reply of yours, I'm sorry. > > > > > > > > > Simply copy and paste it again. NE > > > > > > > > > Don't write under my header, fuckwit, and go back in the thread and > > > > > > > > read it. > > > > > > > > Dear Autymn: You don't have the smarts to be making a '+new post'. > > > > > > > Sorry if I offend your non-intellect. NoEinstein > > > > > > > I made a new post not long ago, and earlier this year. Stop thwartin > > > > > > the thread, shyster cretin. All of your arguments are nothing. > > > > > > > -Aut > > > > > > Dear Aut....: And YOUR arguments contributing in any way the science > > > > > are where? NoEinstein > > > > > in which > > > How about right here on sci.physics, so the readers can see your > > > shallowness. > > > I'm not your Google.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Are you No Einstein because you are better than him? Mitch Raemsch |