Question about gravity
in [Relativity]
|
From: BURT on 17 Mar 2010 16:59 On Mar 17, 12:31 pm, Urion <blackman_...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 17, 5:13 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > If quanta is responsible for the gravity associated with the Earth > > then the light from the Sun is interacting with quanta. > > If light interacting with some sort of "aether" is the cause of > gravity then why is there gravity when there is no sun? It's always > night on half the planet. This makes me believe that gravity is really > not related to light. Light propagates through Einstein's gravity continuum. Slowing down to a slower C and gaining energy by Gamma for the strength of gravity. When light is out of gravity it has fundamental energy level. Mitch Raemsch
From: mpc755 on 17 Mar 2010 17:51 On Mar 17, 3:31 pm, Urion <blackman_...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 17, 5:13 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > If quanta is responsible for the gravity associated with the Earth > > then the light from the Sun is interacting with quanta. > > If light interacting with some sort of "aether" is the cause of > gravity Light interacting with some sort of 'aether' has nothing to do with gravity. The pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive objects is gravity. The poster I was responding to has finally made it to the step of understand something physical causes gravity. The poster is a QM true believer so it must be excused if the best step the poster can offer is 'quanta is responsible' for gravity. The point I was trying to make, which you completely misinterpreted, is if quanta is responsible for gravity then whatever you want to consider the quanta to physically exist as in order for it to be responsible for gravity, light from the sun is physically propagating in quanta. Once you get quanta is responsible for gravity and light propagates in quanta responsible for gravity you are just QM'ing aether. There is nothing fundamentally incorrect with QM'ing aether and if that is what QMrs need to do in order to understand aether and the propagation of light. 'We' need to start somewhere with those who choose to believe in absurd nonsense such as a 'wave function probability' is physical and geometry is responsible for gravity. You have to understand, QMrs believe math causes physical behaviors in nature. 'They' have placed the cart before the horse. They are so screwed up in what they think is occurring in nature they actually believe mathematical constructs are the reason for observed physical behaviors in nature. How screwed up is that? It gets so bad that for all of the QMrs on this forum only one has answered my thought experiment consisting of a moving C-60 molecule and the double slit experiment and the only answer proposed by QMrs so far is the future determines the past. Physics as presently 'understood' by QMrs has nothing to do with nature. > then why is there gravity when there is no sun? It's always > night on half the planet. This makes me believe that gravity is really > not related to light.
From: PD on 17 Mar 2010 17:59 On Mar 17, 4:51 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The poster I was responding to has finally made it to the step of > understand something physical causes gravity. The poster is a QM true > believer so it must be excused if the best step the poster can offer > is 'quanta is responsible' for gravity. > > The point I was trying to make, which you completely misinterpreted, > is if quanta is responsible for gravity then whatever you want to > consider the quanta to physically exist as in order for it to be > responsible for gravity, light from the sun is physically propagating > in quanta. > This is so cute. Note he says that quanta must be physically real, but that quantum mechanics (which describes the behavior of quanta) is not about stuff that is physically real.
From: mpc755 on 17 Mar 2010 18:06 On Mar 17, 5:59 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 17, 4:51 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > The poster I was responding to has finally made it to the step of > > understand something physical causes gravity. The poster is a QM true > > believer so it must be excused if the best step the poster can offer > > is 'quanta is responsible' for gravity. > > > The point I was trying to make, which you completely misinterpreted, > > is if quanta is responsible for gravity then whatever you want to > > consider the quanta to physically exist as in order for it to be > > responsible for gravity, light from the sun is physically propagating > > in quanta. > > This is so cute. Note he says that quanta must be physically real, but > that quantum mechanics (which describes the behavior of quanta) is not > about stuff that is physically real. You're making my point. Gravity is physically real. Only in your interpretation of the absurd nonsense of QM can gravity not be physically real. If quanta is responsible for gravity then quanta is physically real and light waves from the Sun interact with the quanta responsible for the gravity associated with the Earth.
From: Esa Riihonen on 17 Mar 2010 18:42
mpc755 kirjoitti: > On Mar 17, 7:47 am, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> wrote: >> mpc755 kirjoitti: >> >> >> >> > On Mar 16, 5:46 pm, Esa Riihonen <e...(a)riihonen.net.not.invalid> >> wrote: >> >> mpc755 kirjoitti: >> >> [snip] >> >> >> >> >> >> >>> I would like the following to fit on one line. Have at it: >> >> >>> The pressure associated with the aether displaced by massive >> >>> objects >> is >> >>> gravity. >> >> >> Here: >> >> >> Gravity can somehow be explained by the science of the 19th century. >> >> > I think I'll stick with: >> >> > Gravity: Pressure associated with aether displaced by massive >> > objects. >> >> By all means please do. Now it would be interesting to see your actual >> theory in action - that would mean a rigorous logical (read >> mathematical) framework to produce some numbers to compare with actual >> measurements. If I may suggest, calculating planetary orbits (including >> Mercury) would be a good point to start. >> >> > Aether Displacement is a physical interpretation of 'curved spacetime'. > The math has already been developed. > > Pressure associated with aether displaced by a massive object is > gravity. Perhaps the connection between the mathematical machinery of the GR and this aether pressure view is obvious - but frankly I just can't see it. Could you please elaborate. Thanks, Esa(R) -- A topologist is a person who doesn't know the difference between a coffee cup and a doughnut. |