Prev: A nomenclature puzzle about gradients, divergences and fields
Next: Newton's law of gravitational attraction
From: HVAC on 24 Oct 2009 15:10 "chazwin" <chazwyman(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:7bf7ddb0-f84d-440d-bb91-6e423e86333f(a)m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com... > > There is no gravity but the property of matter whereby it is attracted > to itself. No.
From: BradGuth on 24 Oct 2009 14:18 On Oct 24, 12:10 pm, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > "chazwin" <chazwy...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > news:7bf7ddb0-f84d-440d-bb91-6e423e86333f(a)m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > There is no gravity but the property of matter whereby it is attracted > > to itself. > > No. That was a two part reply from "chazwin" that deserves at least a two part answer. ~ BG
From: BURT on 24 Oct 2009 15:55 On Oct 24, 10:18 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 12:10 pm, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > "chazwin" <chazwy...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > >news:7bf7ddb0-f84d-440d-bb91-6e423e86333f(a)m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com.... > > > > There is no gravity but the property of matter whereby it is attracted > > > to itself. > > > No. This is backward to what Einstein said. He said that gravity was a property of space and time curvature. > > That was a two part reply from "chazwin" that deserves at least a two > part answer. > > ~ BG
From: BradGuth on 24 Oct 2009 20:06 On Oct 24, 12:55 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 10:18 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 24, 12:10 pm, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > "chazwin" <chazwy...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > >news:7bf7ddb0-f84d-440d-bb91-6e423e86333f(a)m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com.... > > > > > There is no gravity but the property of matter whereby it is attracted > > > > to itself. > > > > No. > > This is backward to what Einstein said. He said that gravity was a > property of space and time curvature. > > > > > That was a two part reply from "chazwin" that deserves at least a two > > part answer. > > > ~ BG That sounds a little better, because it's certainly not much of a force unless considering truly massive things like stars and black holes, or items that are extremely dense and close to one another that seem to represent some extra pull or binding force, though could be just the electron/positron kind of secondary interaction that we interpret as gravity. ~ BG
From: Double-A on 24 Oct 2009 20:22
On Oct 24, 5:06 pm, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Oct 24, 12:55 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 10:18 am, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Oct 24, 12:10 pm, "HVAC" <harlowcampb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > "chazwin" <chazwy...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:7bf7ddb0-f84d-440d-bb91-6e423e86333f(a)m13g2000vbf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > There is no gravity but the property of matter whereby it is attracted > > > > > to itself. > > > > > No. > > > This is backward to what Einstein said. He said that gravity was a > > property of space and time curvature. > > > > That was a two part reply from "chazwin" that deserves at least a two > > > part answer. > > > > ~ BG > > That sounds a little better, because it's certainly not much of a > force unless considering truly massive things like stars and black > holes, or items that are extremely dense and close to one another that > seem to represent some extra pull or binding force, though could be > just the electron/positron kind of secondary interaction that we > interpret as gravity. > > ~ BG Perhaps involving the exchange of photons of a frequency too high for us to detect. Double-A |