Quote:
Originally Posted by Robh
Alex,
I read your view on push gravity with some interest. It has taken me a while to go over the basis of the theory from other sources.
I've gathered the conclusions of some experts about the theory ...
Maxwell thought that the theory required an enormous expenditure of external power, violating the law of conservation of energy.
Poincare concluded that there were inherent problems with drag and heating in all the Le Sage models. The Earth would basically vaporize.
A flux of neutrinos are mass penetrating but would not be isotropic, as stars are the main sources. The suggestion that the neutrino or a particle like it would work in a quantum field theory of gravitation was disproved by Feynman.
Gravitational shielding in Le Sage's model is a violation of the equivalence principle used in general relativity. Poincare basically stated that Le Sage's model and general relativity were incompatible.
So, my question is what is it about the current model of the Universe that makes this model look at all valid? If general relativity is holding up to scrutiny, you would have to abandon this model.
Regards, Rob.
|
Thank you Rob for taking the time to familarise yourself with the concept of push gravity
.
For the sake of showing I can argue convincingly when all others are of the opposite view I will answer your questions
... but please understand the best authority I can offer for my position is that I am always right
..so why should I be wrong when it comes to providing the theory of everything
...
Prof Maxwell is entitled to think about the matter whichever way he wishes however I do not think he would have taken the time to really do any sums as it seems as if his reply was dismissive ... of course there is massive energy involved I expect however as I said...the probability of matter interacting with the flow is finite whereas the flow for our purpose could well be considered "infinite"... again I ask how empty is space... once we saw it so but it is not..there are billions..er trillions of particles flying around..why should they contain no energy or opportunity of interaction with "matter"... I feel it is easy to wonder if all these particles transmit any force and easier to conclude that there is a resultant pressure of space.
I feel the Pioneer craft are demonstrating that they are experiencing this pressure (or in their case drag)...before they broke thru the heliospere I said (predicted if you will) that they would slow..NASA thought otherwise..well they appear to have slowed... NASA are perplexed and various ideas have been put forward why they are slowing..leaking fuel etc... but they are behaving upon my morosophic view because space is the way I see it... full of stuff that makes a real presence more so way out there.
I never have been one to bow down simply because someone says they know the answers..History tells us that folk can hold ideas for centuries and yet when their civilation dies and is examined by those who follow the followers can look and wonder how they could stay on the wrong track for so long... AND as presumptuious as it is I say our current ideas on gravity can never be united with all the other forces... I dont know how Maxwell could reason any laws are violated if he did not consider the matter at lenght and with some sums to justify his position...Now it is all right for me to be so casual but not him... A scientis no matter how high up there must not fall victim to off the cuff comment and I believe in that instance he has simply made an off the cuff comment... I hasten to add this is my opinion ..he has his I have mine.
Poinclare raises drag and I say the Pioneer are demonstrating the drag...and the heat we find in the center of our planet is indeed the heat remnat from our particles giving up energy on the way thru..so as to have less energy on their exit providing the imbalance between stuff coming down and stuff going up..our gravity is the imbalance in the flow that has lost energy (thru the planet) and the flow that has not encounted any great degree of matter as it passes thru the atmosphere etc to reach the surface.
Why should the Earth vaporise...particularly when no one bothered to provide sums in evidence (not that I can but if they want to play the game that way folk like me can point out the inadequacy of their approach which I say, in the absence of futher evisence as to what was said and what experiments etc were offerred as back up..) but that is my view on what I know..and I dont know everything
..who does
Feynman was a great scientist, (he is another of my heros as is Dr A which folk may not know.) but he can prove all he likes but given he is more interested in staying within the conventional world od science I ask what other direction would he take... and I dont know how anyone can think they know the answers and on the basis of their current knowledge say they can establish this or that to be right or wrong... look at the nimbers that are play the complexities and ask is any human really capable of getting it right...apart from me of course
I do not think anything must be set in stone ..look at how things and views change on matters one could say will never alter... however I will look carefully at what he said when I get back into this stuff... I am not focused on gravity these days.
I dont know why folk think that approaching gravity via the notion that a man in a lift can offer the key to understanding... why should this be so..seems that man thinks a little too highly offself to think the theory of everything can be born from such a strange observation that a man in a lift and measurement of the foirces at play will give a view on how it will be "all over"... I see it like working out what a horse can do by comparing it with other forms of transport... I have never found the 11 field equations which if I did physics would be the first thing you do I expect but suspect that T got into GR from the formula for acceleration due to the lift comparrison... I dont know and long to find out one day... still I say this I do not think the principle of equivalance is really a scientific approach to the matter... I think the great man himself called it a mind exercise which indicated to me that appraoch has little input from observation but came from the imagination...not that that is a bad thing as I say that is exactly what I am doing... and in fact I draw from reasonable observations to feed my imagination.
Why select the push model over the current model ... well firstly the most compeling reason is...because I never back a losser
In the Push Gravity Universe I can unite the forces...gravity with electricity... gravity with the atomic forces... in my view of course with no evidence etc but I do reckon it sounds reasonable.
The elves and sprites are visual evidence of the flow as it 'runs" into our Earth... the particles of the flow manifest as electrical disturbances.. they are "overflow" and a cloud interferes with the flow to get lightning in the same way a wire in a genny interferes with the flow to produce an electric current... magnetism is flow forced upon an alternative route because of interference (as with the Earths magnetic field) .... momentum again flow trapped by a moving object...
anywyas I can offer a relationship at this casual level as to how everything fits together... again my view.. I dont care if folk cant see it or if they think I am off the mark as it is my idea my opinion...
I dont see a problem in fitting GR into push gravity...the flow is what causes the space time grid to "bend" and I have no difficulty in making the two good friends
Thanks again for your interest
gravity is the most exciting subject one can consider as it is the machine that drives everything.
I hope my post is readable I have no time to re read it
have a great day
alex
... I am sorry I though I had convinced you of the merit of the push universe and now you say you are still unconvinced
.
... I am only trying to point out an approach that I really believes has merit... if it has none it will die and things like the Pioneer craft behaviour will be put down to other matters... I dont anyone has put forward time dialation for the Pioneer for example and I would have thought if GR rules (or is that special relativity?)it could well explain the matter...after all what we see may be the time dialoation? thing at play..and that will suit GR.
