Ordinary man's attempt to explain GR

[ACG52]

Mass/Matter can affect neither Space nor Time. Space & Time do not interact with anything in this Universe. Matter is the only thing that has the ability to interact and interacts with itself/other Matter. Matter cannot interact with Space other than just occupying it, because there is nothing in Space with which Matter can interact. It is vacuous. Space & Time do not have the ability to interact with anything, in this Universe.

 

 

Given that the predictions of GR have been verified to extreme degrees of accuracy, I'd have to say that your above assertion is false.

[StringJunky]

Given that the predictions of GR have been verified to extreme degrees of accuracy, I'd have to say that your above assertion is false.

 

You are wasting your time...his mouth is open and his brain is switched off. This thread wants locking...one should only go round the block so many times.

[Anilkumar]

Hello ACG52,

 

Nice to have you back again.

 

Thank you.

 

Given that the predictions of GR have been verified to extreme degrees of accuracy, I'd have to say that your above assertion is false.

Sorry for the delay in replying. It takes me time to convert my thoughts into appropriate words.

 

The accuracy of the predictions is not a proof to say that Mass curves Space-time.

 

The accuracy is due to the reason that;

 

The Riemann geometry measures the curvature i.e. the alteration in the path of motion of Matter in the Gravitational field and that curvature or alteration in path is due to the FORCE applied on Matter, and that Curvature is proportional to the FORCE. Hence, the accuracy of the Riemann geometry lies in the fact that, it measures the effects of that FORCE manifested in terms of the Curvature accurately.

 

There is no need to assume that space-time is curved. It is not necessary. It is irrational, scientifically illegitimate, wrong, to say that Space & Time get curved by Matter. Because we have established beyond doubt that Space & Time cannot get curved.

 

The Method 4 in Post#155 on page-8, which establishes that

 

FORCE and Curvature are proportional; and

 

the explanation given in the Attachment in Post#158 on page-8, which proves that

 

Light only bends when a force is applied on it and merely the accelerating frame is incapable of bringing a bend in the path of the Light; and

 

the Methods 1, 2, 3 in Post#155 on page-8, which prove that

 

Space & Time cannot be curved;

 

are Solid Proofs that Gravity is not space-time curvature but is a FORCE and space-time cannot be curved.

 

I request you to kindly take a look at the proofs & evidences given in the Attachment and the Methods 1, 2, 3, & 4 if you are actually sincere in discussing this issue.

 

The FORCE which is the cause of the Curvature in the paths of motion, has been eliminated unnecessarily and the onus of that Curvature has been laden on Space & Time, which are incapable of, doing any physical activity or taking part in any physical activity, so incapable of providing that curvature.

 

GR measures the effects of that FORCE, which are manifested in the form of Curvature of the Paths. It cannot and does not explain or describe that FORCE. It can only measure that Force & its effects by describing its manifested Curvature in the paths of motion. It is not a tool to explain or describe that FORCE and nor is it a tool that explains Space or Time. Therefore, it is not right, if on the basis of GR Space or Time are declared Notions or that they get curved.

 

By the available information regarding Space & Time, it is absolutely clear that they are not Notions and the space-time does not get curved.

 

The space-time curvature hypothesis is contradicted both ways, even if Space & Time are considered as Notions or that they are considered what they really are. It is negated both ways. This is another solid proof that the hypothesis is wrong.

 

. . . your above assertion . . .

They are not my assertions. [Who am I to assert?]. They are logical findings. They won't let me believe in the space-time curvature hypothesis. Neither should you.

 

 

 

----------------------* * * * ***** * * * *

 

 

 

You are wasting your time . . .

 

Are you on the Science discussion forum?

 

Don't you know that discussing & deciding, to know what is Science & what is not, is never a waste of time? By doing that, one is serving Knowledge & Humanity.

 

. . . his mouth is open and his brain is switched off. . .

 

Whose?

Time shall tell.

 

. . . This thread wants locking . . .

 

You are capable of only doing that.

 

A person, who is incapable of reasoning, picks up the Gun and shuts up the other's mouth.

 

You have shown your dictatorial capability, elsewhere in another thread too, where you were talking of restricting the Speculation forum.

 

You must know,

 

Humanity has purged all dictators, whenever they emerged.

 

. . . one should only go round the block so many times.

 

You forget. I have gone round the block, the equal number of times, telling why & how you are wrong.

 

----------------------* * * * ***** * * * *

 

StringJunky

 

Your attitude, shows your disregard for the Logical, Falsifiable, Evidential proofs available. I have regards for the fact that GR is successful in predicting. And I am trying to give reasons as to why, despite its accurate predictions, the assumed space-time curvature hypothesis is wrong. But you haven't given yet, one reason why the arguments placed by me are wrong. Yes, the GR is accurate in predicting, but that does not nullify one single bit of, the scientific information available regarding Space & Time, which is sufficient to prove that space-time does not have the ability to curve. I will prove it here that the accuracy of GR in predictions is not a proof that space-time curves, because there is solid evidence to prove that the space-time cannot get Curved.

 

Despite the proofs, one's sticking to the illogical hypothesis of space-time curvature for the wrong reasons; that the accuracy of the results of predictions of GR is a proof for the space-time curvature hypothesis [even though the accuracy of GR is independent of the space-time curvature hypothesis], or that it is widely accepted, or that it is endorsed from the high podium, or that it is there since a long time, or due to hesitation to go against prevalent beliefs; show that one's approach is un-scientific, political, sycophantic, credulous and cowardly. Do you have any explanation to show that the Methods in Post#155 and the Attachment in Post#158 [which you have not read] are wrong? No, you do not have any.

Edited August 24, 2012 by Anilkumar

[Anilkumar]

I feel these two discussions, here & here, are relevant to this discussion.

Thank you.

Edited October 12, 2012 by Anilkumar