Orobouros

I am so bored of these standard comments, does nobody take an effort to think for themselves anymore ? I'll be leaving now, sad to see that even the younger generation gets trapped in this dogmatic non-progress attitude. Call me a crank, i will ware the title proudly, as someone who goes against the grain. I wish you future wisdom, and goodbye.

The idea does not have to be contradictory to Einsteins theories. In fact they talk of one and the same phenomenon in my oppinion : Gravity particles pushing towards the core of the objekt concentrically is what causes the curvature. The above discribed analogic image of the ball in water (given no earth gravity) is the same as a 3D-spacetime image. The concept has beenput forward many times in the past : An interesting read : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage's_theory_of_gravitation#Recent_activity Other authors in the wiki article : (I'd like to buy the book by Matthew Arwards) : Recent activity[edit source | editbeta]The re-examination of Le Sage's theory in the 19th century identified several closely interconnected problems with the theory. These relate to excessive heating, frictional drag, shielding, and gravitational aberration. The recognition of these problems, in conjunction with a general shift away from mechanical based theories, resulted in a progressive loss of interest in Le Sage’s theory. Ultimately in the 20th century Le Sage’s theory was eclipsed by Einstein’s theory of general relativity. In 1965 Richard Feynman examined the Fatio/Lesage mechanism, primarily as an example of an attempt to explain a "complicated" physical law (in this case, Newton's inverse-square law of gravity) in terms of simpler primitive operations without the use of complex mathematics, and also as an example of a failed theory. He notes that the mechanism of "bouncing particles" reproduces the inverse-square force law and that "the strangeness of the mathematical relation will be very much reduced", but then remarks that the scheme "does not work", because of the drag it predicts would be experienced by moving bodies, "so that is the end of that theory".[59][60] Although it is not regarded as a viable theory within the mainstream scientific community, there are occasional attempts to re-habilitate the theory outside the mainstream, including those of Radzievskii and Kagalnikova (1960),[61]Shneiderov (1961),[62] Buonomano and Engels (1976),[63] Adamut (1982),[64] Jaakkola (1996),[65]Tom Van Flandern (1999),[66] and Edwards (2007)[67] A variety of Le Sage models and related topics are discussed in Edwards, et al.[68] Correct link : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Sage's_theory_of_gravitation Somehow the link won't get in correctly, sorry >> just google on " pushing gravitiy ", and go to the wiki article on Le Sage

Yes

@sceptic 1 : A possible contribution to what you are saying, with the earth as example, could be my following idea. ( speculation, (but interesting?) ) : The earth does not pull objects towards it's core, it is force-particles pushing the object towards the earth's core. Why ? Because there is no such thing as 'pulling particles', particles can only push things, plain and simple. So what happens is that in the 'force-steady' atmosphere, the earth is an objekt disturbing this statusquo. Like a ball in water experiencing force from the water all around equally. (If gravity of the earth were excluded) So if a smaller object get's near theearth, it will experience forces towards the earth-centre, force-particles PUSHING it towards the ball-centre, not the ball pulling in the objekt. So the power of the gravity does not come from within the earth, but from the field around it.

Recent professional studies (*) have shown that autism may be linked to a shortage of connections of the corpus callosum, as the communication bridge between L and R hemispere. This makes good sense if you know something about autism and the corpus callosum in the brain. (*) Autism and the corpus callosum : research / links : http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21489396 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23054201 http://sfari.org/news-and-opinion/ne...ts-into-autism Remark : Building on that i had the following idea (an idea, imagining the future, not scientific proof of course) : Some time in the future, science and technology would be able to enhance this corpus callosum to make us wiser. Wisdom as weighing balancedly between the the left and right brain halves to make a better judgement, more pro-group^instead of pro-individual. So not just to improve the life of autists. Elaborating on that it struck me that this might also happen naturally in our evolution to come. From survival of the fittest, to the current survival of the most intelligent (accompanied with the known additions in the brain), towards survival of the most wise (accompanied by adaptations of the corpus callosum) in the generations to come. As wise decisions are desperately needed to put today's world on the right track towards a coherent future, a necessity for the continuation of our species in the log run. If i were to be called a crank for such an idea, then i would were that title proudly,),).