Infitine Space

[owl]

Drrocket:

Cosmology is based on general relativity. So the ONLY notion of curvature or of flatness that is germane to cosmology is that which comes from Riemannian geometry.

 

Spoken like a true dogmatist. Not all cosmology is based on GR. And "curved spacetime" as a central concept is still a hot debate among ontologists (whom of course you despise, to your discredit.) It would broaden your horizons to study those papers on spacetime compiled by Deiks and all those references provided by Ross.

 

 

You have two choices: 1). Learn and understand the concepts on which the theory is built. 2) Continue to babble incoherently making inane, irrelevant and nonsensical comments.

 

Please review Ross's comments on the difference between concepts and "the math." I understand the concepts just fine, thank you.

 

Regarding your recent and continuing use of insults rather than rational argument, I have some sound psychological advise. Use "I statements" rather than "you statements." For instance it is perfectly legitimate to say that my comments sound inane, irrelevant, nonsensical, and like incoherent babble to you. It is quite another to say that all of the above is objectively or absolutely true, as if you have the only handle on reality and can legitimately judge everyone else accordingly. But maybe you are too full of yourself and your inflated sense of authority to know the difference.

 

Science discussion need not be so personal and insulting as you make it. But as long as you harbor such a nasty opinion of all things philosophy-of-science, there can be no respectful conversation with you.

 

I haven't done the math myself, but I seem to remember that if you consider the bending of light around a massive object as due to the rest mass of the photon, you end up with bending which is half of that predicted by GR and curved space/time. Which happens to be half of what was actually observed by Eddington during the eclipse of 1919.

 

So GR is accurate, newtonian gravitational attraction of the photon's rest mass is not !!!

Please tell me why you think "curved spacetime" (as an actual entity, a malleable medium) is essential to the predictive power of GR.

[md65536]

Spoken like a true dogmatist. Not all cosmology is based on GR. And "curved spacetime" as a central concept is still a hot debate among ontologists (whom of course you despise, to your discredit.) It would broaden your horizons to study those papers on spacetime compiled by Deiks and all those references provided by Ross.

owl, you are a fool.

You are a pigeon, crapping on the chessboard that is this forum.

 

Since you don't understand analogy, I don't expect you to understand metaphor, so I apologize for my inaccurate insult.

 

Philosophy of science is fine and it has its place, but you are using it to discredit GR.

This is a Relativity forum, not a philosophy forum; hence the pigeon analogy and now metaphor.

 

If you can prove that GR is wrong using philosophy in a way that is generally accepted, then those philosophical arguments are relevant here.

But around here, GR is generally accepted science that has not been refuted in any accepted way, regardless of any "hot debate".

 

You have a LONG WAY to go to disprove GR using philosophical arguments. Until it is generally accepted, THOSE ARGUMENTS DO NOT BELONG HERE.

 

If you wish to try to refute GR using arguments that are not already accepted science, do it in the speculations forum.

 

 

 

You have two choices: 1). Learn and understand the concepts on which the theory is built. 2) Continue to babble incoherently making inane, irrelevant and nonsensical comments..

There's another choice: 3) Stop posting.

 

I'm a fool myself. But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard to number 3.

Edited May 20, 2011 by md65536

[Iggy]

I don't expect you to understand metaphor... But I'm trying, Ringo. I'm trying real hard

 

He he. Ringo = pigeon. Diner = chessboard. Ringo tries to crap all over the diner, but ends up having the good sense to leave when his lunch is handed to him. It works on so many levels. Mad props

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I think this thread has reached the end of its natural lifetime.

 

owl, please do not derail threads in the mainstream science forums with your own speculation when it is clear you are not willing to learn what the currently accepted science actually predicts.

 

And to everyone involved: Personal attacks are not acceptable, no matter how pigeon-like your opponent.