Bufofrog

That is one of the most absurd things I have read one this forum. Congratulations?

I speculate this thread will be closed, my evidence is forthcoming.

Gee, what a great source! They have a lot of great information on aliens, the pharaohs flying in planes and bigfoot.

And the members have pointed out your idea wouldn't work, so the size of the stones is irrelevant.

The big bang is about the beginning of the universe, are you suggesting that black holes go back in time? Stellar black holes don't exist until a star collapses so how could they be part of a singularity from the beginning of the universe? That doesn't make sense to me. If there are any I would be flabbergasted.

First of all let me state for the record that loath your font. You can't eat electricity. On the other hand we regularly eat material that have charges, such as Na+ and Cl-.

Oh, yes I do think that is far fetched. History and archeology. Seriously? We far more advanced.

No, energy does not give mass to a photon. You are making a lot of unsupported claims.

That seems reasonable, I don't see any way to test the idea but I don't think that is a big concern for your belief. The creationist that believe that T. rex, Adam and Eve sat around together eating plants is when the creation idea runs completely off the rails.

It seems like your experiment was to act like an anti-science troll and see if you are treated like an anti-science troll. The outcome was easily predictable IMO.

It is much more than a possibility, it is a theory that matches observation. Newtons theory of gravity is not false, the theory that has limited applicability compared to GR, it is certainly not false.

It seems that you are missing the point, theories are the highest level of confidence in science. There is no 'proven' explanations of phenomena in science.

What is that suppose to show, besides b does not equal b?

Do you now also realize that your statement that "every theory violates physical laws" is wrong.

My comment was directed at J.Merrill's question, which was why does mass warp space. IMO physics tries to answer how and philosophy would try to answer why.

So now you see that your comment was not correct, so that's good. This more general statement you made is also obviously incorrect.

That is incorrect. When a positron and an electron meet they are annihilated and 2 photons result from this annihilation. The matter is destroyed. A energetic photon can be converted into matter/anti-matter pair when in comes in close proximity to the nucleus of an atom, in other words matter is created.

That is not what the first law says. You can create and destroy matter, it happens all the time. That of course does not violate the first law of thermodynamics.

Proof is not really the realm of science. Theories are never proven, they are only supported by the evidence

That's fine, but most physicist agree with me.

The answer is, that is not a physics question, that is a philosophy question. Just like the question, "why does a positive charge attract a negative charge" is a philosophy question.

Warped spacetime IS gravity.

The fact that the mass is gone that was warping spactime.

That is correct. The light leaving the gravity well of a star is red shifted. If the star is moving towards us then that red shifted light will be blue shifted. No, it is not false. Not sure what you are trying to say here. According to the bible light was not omnipresent, but since we are in the physics section I have no idea why this would come up in the discussion. This is incorrect. If photons were pure energy (whatever that could be) then they would have no other properties, such as spin, frequency and momentum.

Light leaving the earth is very slightly red shifted due to the gravity of earth.