Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Just remove all assumptions of "gravity" and count on the EM forces and qualities in different frequensies and charges all over in the Universe. There you have it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Gravity vs Mass
- Thread starter Thief
- Start date
There....I feel better now.
Nope. You miss out on too much by doing that. The actual predictions based only on what is known about E&M are an MUCH worse fit to the observations than making the assumption of dark matter.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Then show us the math. Not something difficult. Explain the orbit of the Moon using Electric Universe formulas.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Of course it is! Investigating the plasma realms by using the strange laws of gravity as the norm this would automatically proves Plasma Cosmology to be nonsense as the gravity models are completely inadequate and misleading.
This was also the cause of the MOND theory where it was thought gravity to have a lesser influence. Where they in fact should have discarded an universal gravity completely.
Here is a *very* simple problem concerning E&M.
Suppose you have a static 1000 Gauss magnetic field and a charged particle at rest in that field with a charge of 10 Coulombs. What is the force on the particle due to that magnetic field?
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
This just proves to me that you have NO idea of what the EM forces can achieve in formation and motion on the cosmological scales.
Well if you have another several hundred of years to spear, you just wait dark matter to be found and explained. It will NEWER happen.
Again: R.I.P. with your dark this and that ghosts . . .
I have the best theory dealing with gravity. I use lardnetic tensular calcufuliferation
to reconcile General Relitudiness with Plasmatic Quanticular Meshulite.
I'd show the math, but that would be like teaching a squid to ride a bicycle.
to reconcile General Relitudiness with Plasmatic Quanticular Meshulite.
I'd show the math, but that would be like teaching a squid to ride a bicycle.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Do your own math on the macrocosmic scales please. Remember to count on the nuclear EM force in the galactic centers.
Heyo
Veteran Member
I know roughly how spacetime is seen in GR. My question was if we can see it from an angle that gives @Terrywoodenpic 's statement some sense.
Assume the following analogy:
First we get rid of one spacial dimension so that we can imagine the universe in three dimensions like in the bed sheet analogy. Only this time it's a giant balloon. The direction of time is radial from the point of origin. The balloon "inflates" in the direction of time. There are dimples in the balloon where masses are. The distance of a point near a mass to the point of origin is different from points with no (or rather less) mass as well as the velocity those points travel outwards. Points with extreme masses in a small area make steep dimples and the surface doesn't expand at all. (Time stands still at the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole.) Also, fast moving objects make grooves.
There are some problems I see with this analogy: Space would necessarily have a positive curvature and it would decrease over time. Time would probably flow backwards within black holes. Negative mass would probably be impossible.
But in this model gravity would be a function of time as the outward movement (in the direction of time) would determine the gravity.
Now someone with a little more skill and a lot less lazy than me has to do the maths for that model. ;-)
Last edited:
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
Thanks for saving me from the "weather" mills
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
In which direction does time goes in the balloon as the balloon inflates?
Heyo
Veteran Member
Outward. It is a spherical coordinate system, not a cartesian.
No dogma in science. You're mistaking it for religion. Scientific facts are evidence based, tested and provisional pending new information -- pretty much the opposite of dogma.I rather would say that I avoided the dogmatic indoctrination in Universities
Yes, the Theory of Gravitation is also known as General Relativity, first published 104 years ago and confirmed in countless tests. We'd have no space program or satellite technology without it.
How is one dependent on the other?
We don't know everything, so we don't know anything?
Last edited:
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Thief
Rogue Theologian
you refer to dark energy?....dark matter?
any gravity there?
can't prove it ……..can you?
Untrue.
You & I waste much of it here.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
is that the same item Albert referred to as his greatest blunder?
Thief
Rogue Theologian
