Acceleration of the Earth

For the FE'er's idea of gravity, infinite energy is a must. Your saying it is against our belief of energy, so I'm assuming you believe in a round earth? As what I have given you is a contradiction.

I see no reason why the FE must have infinite energy.  But, of course, the RE'ers get to have infinite energy, but the FE'ers are not allowed to...

where exactly do the RE'ers need infinite energy?

I think he is referring to Dark Energy, specifically how it increases the rate of expansion of of the universe.

Dark energy is an unproved theory much like the flat earth theory.

I think he is referring to Dark Energy, specifically how it increases the rate of expansion of of the universe.

specifically? why specifically? what are you actually talking about? Did i ask for an explanation on Dark Energy?

Here's the question I did ask

where exactly do the RE'ers need infinite energy?

Is it to explain the ever expanding accelerating universe? No, its not. So your response = useless.

Gravity and Dark Energy.  Two seemingly infinite sources of energy.  You RE'ers have no problem with those, but you have a big problem with the FE and its acceleration.

Gravity and Dark Energy.  Two seemingly infinite sources of energy.  You RE'ers have no problem with those, but you have a big problem with the FE and its acceleration.

Gravity comes about due to the curvature and distortion of space time.

Imagine a metal ball on a mattress. Roll another ball towards the metal ball. Provided you have the right speed, the ball will roll towards and stop at the metal ball.

The greater the mass of the metal ball, the bigger the indent it makes in the mattress, hence it will trap other faster balls rolled towards it.

Now metaphorically speaking, spacetime is the mattress and the metal ball is the Earth. Anything close to the Earth will be subjected to the distortion of spacetime. Just like the moon and well, us humans.

I'm sorry, but there is no energy here, and if you can see it here (I sure don't) please show me, and also show it's infinite.

Ok, onto dark energy... sorry to disappoint, it isn't infinite. It makes up 70% of the total energy in the universe, showing it is finite.

Gravity comes about due to the curvature and distortion of space time.

That's gravitation, to be exact.  But that does nothing to explain how the distortion happens.

Imagine a metal ball on a mattress. Roll another ball towards the metal ball. Provided you have the right speed, the ball will roll towards and stop at the metal ball.

That's nice and all, except that that example requires 'gravity' to already exist.

I'm sorry, but there is no energy here, and if you can see it here (I sure don't) please show me, and also show it's infinite.

How does mass distort space?  How does space know how and by how much to distort based on its distance from an object with mass?

Ok, onto dark energy... sorry to disappoint, it isn't infinite. It makes up 70% of the total energy in the universe, showing it is finite.

Dark Energy is theorized to operate infinitely.   That would imply infinite.

Apologies, I do mean gravitation.

Einstein has shown us that mass does in fact distort space. I have a nice little read if you're interested. It's like my example of the mattress, but more detailed.
Here it is http://www.angelfire.com/space2/wonder00/

You're saying I need gravity/gravitation to exist. Well, that is true to some extent, but gravitation is more of a by-product of mass and spacetime. Provided these two exist, well, inevitably, gravity/gravitation must exist.

Dark energy is theorized to operate infinitely? Example please!! because I'm not sure whether the logic here is correct. I can't understand this atm.

Apologies, I do mean gravitation.

Einstein has shown us that mass does in fact distort space. I have a nice little read if you're interested. It's like my example of the mattress, but more detailed.
Here it is http://www.angelfire.com/space2/wonder00/

You're saying I need gravity/gravitation to exist. Well, that is true to some extent, but gravitation is more of a by-product of mass and spacetime. Provided these two exist, well, inevitably, gravity/gravitation must exist.

Has he shown it or postulated it?

The fact that spacetime exists does not mean it is effected by mass.  The fact that mass exists does not mean it effects space time.  However, t just so happens, supposedly, that they do.

Einstein has shown us that mass does in fact distort space.

I don't remember saying it didn't.   

I have a nice little read if you're interested. It's like my example of the mattress, but more detailed.
Here it is http://www.angelfire.com/space2/wonder00/

Like I said, that's nice, but your example requires an external source of 'gravity'.  You still have not answered by question.

You're saying I need gravity/gravitation to exist. Well, that is true to some extent, but gravitation is more of a by-product of mass and spacetime.

So, again, back to my question.

Dark energy is theorized to operate infinitely? Example please!!

Dark Energy is theorized to continue increasing the rate of the metric expansion of space, which will eventually pull all matter, atoms, protons, neutrons, etc. apart.  This is known as the Big Freeze with a bit from the Big Rip. 

Its a flawed example used to explain a mathematically non-intuitive concept to lay people.

So I guess that means I don't get any answers?   

So I guess that means I don't get any answers?   

I give up... you've convinced me I'm living on a flat earth. Can't believe I've joined the dark side. Shame on you Engineer, shame on you! lol

I give up

Typical RE'er.

Typical RE'er.

I'm a debater. I'll debate anything.

Quote from: TheEngineer on December 05, 2007, 11:55:49 AM

Typical RE'er.

I'm a debater. I'll debate anything.

I"m a master debater. I'll do it all day.

I'm a troll, I'll come in here and talk about purple.

Quote from: TheEngineer on December 05, 2007, 10:51:34 AM

So I guess that means I don't get any answers?   

I give up... you've convinced me I'm living on a flat earth. Can't believe I've joined the dark side. Shame on you Engineer, shame on you! lol

Oh my god...I can't believe that because a ludicrous flat earth theory can explain one aspect of our universe that your willing to accept this entirely bull shit theory.

How the hell does the universe power this acceleration?

If the universe is accelerating in one direction and Gravity is a pseudo term given to the force we feel due to this acceleration (as it pretty much already is) how do we account for the concept of Black Holes, is this extreme pull caused by some SUPER universal acceleration occuring within the immidiate vicinity and directly towards the black hole?

I mean John surely you can't be so easily convinced, if you're truely a debater you suck pretty badly.

I don't remember anyone staying gravitation did not exist.

I never said anything about Gravitation.

Gravitation and "Gravity" are two different things. Gravity is a word coined for the acceleration force the pull towards the centre of mass. Gravitation is the term refering to the "Law of Gravitation" explaining how to masses can be pulled toward one another.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gravity

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Gravitation

Gravitation and "Gravity" are two different things. Gravity is a word coined for the acceleration force the pull towards the centre of mass. Gravitation is the term refering to the "Law of Gravitation" explaining how to masses can be pulled toward one another.

Gravity is a concept term and gravitation is a phenomenon. There's no such thing as an "acceleration force". It is either an acceleration or an force. Apparently, gravitation is an acceleration, not a force.

Gravitation and "Gravity" are two different things.

Yes, they are.

Gravity is a word coined for the acceleration force the pull towards the centre of mass.

Gravity specifically refers to the pseudo force that arises by the transformation of a non inertial frame of reference into an inertial one.

Gravitation is the term refering to the "Law of Gravitation" explaining how to masses can be pulled toward one another.

Gravitation is what keeps you on the ground.

Now that that is settled, what did that have to do with anything?

Why did you repeat exactly what I said? I have already stated my point, TheEngineer, you are the one who has failed to make yours, you simply said "I don't remember anyone staying gravitation did not exist".

I named "gravitation" an "acceleration force". I described this acceleration force as "A force due to acceleration" which is gravitation. Since gravity and gravitation are the cause of the conflict i simply renamed the terms in a descriptive manner as in the FE theory we experience an "acceleration force" which has been named gravity by RE philosophers and scientist and everyday people.

Hate to break it to you, but gravitation is not a force. 

Obviously Quarrior is still relying on that 1600s Newtonian book. Pretty much he knows nothing about modern science or general relativity.

Gravity is the "force"
Gravitation here represents the theories, I.E. Einstein's Theory of Gravitation, which he linked with his Theory of Special relativity with his "Theory of General Relativity" and also Newton's law of Universal Gravitation

Obviously Quarrior is still relying on that 1600s Newtonian book. Pretty much he knows nothing about modern science or general relativity.

And where did you presume this. I simply used the original Newtonian names, why do you think I refer to gravity as a "psuedo force"...because the psuedo Newtonian Gravity is simply caused by objects falling towards the centre of mass of heavier objects (and the heavier objects have a much slighter pull towards the lighter ones). We all know that mass creates curvature in space time, the "bowl" analogy has been used here plenty of times, or the "sinking of the centre of the matress" analogy. Objects get trapped in each others "bowls" and move closer together. But I'm sure you've all mastered Special relativity because its been tought by 12th grade science students in this forum. I'm sure you all have the flat earth society approved cereal box physics degrees.

Jut because Jack think's he's a genius physicist, I'd like him to explain to me what happens in a Black Hole? Don't give me the airy fairy Flat Earth Society answers. I mean, obviously a total understanding is impossible, not even the smartest men on Earth arn't sure yet. But General relativity does give some insight, but much of it is wrong? Why? What parts are true? Is there anything of value in other theories that might explain what happens in a black hole? Think of as a short essay. I'll give you a couple of days to write it. Not too long, just a general overview is fine. I'll even write an essay on it myself if you would like?

Quote from: Jack. on December 05, 2007, 11:18:13 PM

Obviously Quarrior is still relying on that 1600s Newtonian book. Pretty much he knows nothing about modern science or general relativity.

And where did you presume this. I simply used the original Newtonian names, why do you think I refer to gravity as a "psuedo force"...because the psuedo Newtonian Gravity is simply caused by objects falling towards the centre of mass of heavier objects (and the heavier objects have a much slighter pull towards the lighter ones).

So "gravity" is now caused by objects "falling"?  Wow.  Just wow. 

We all know that mass creates curvature in space time, the "bowl" analogy has been used here plenty of times, or the "sinking of the centre of the matress" analogy. Objects get trapped in each others "bowls" and move closer together. But I'm sure you've all mastered Special relativity because its been tought by 12th grade science students in this forum. I'm sure you all have the flat earth society approved cereal box physics degrees.

Same as above.

Jut because Jack think's he's a genius physicist, I'd like him to explain to me what happens in a Black Hole? Don't give me the airy fairy Flat Earth Society answers. I mean, obviously a total understanding is impossible, not even the smartest men on Earth arn't sure yet. But General relativity does give some insight, but much of it is wrong? Why? What parts are true? Is there anything of value in other theories that might explain what happens in a black hole? Think of as a short essay. I'll give you a couple of days to write it. Not too long, just a general overview is fine. I'll even write an essay on it myself if you would like?

I'd be much more interested in your answer.

Gravity is the "force"

Wrong.

Gravitation here represents the theories, I.E. Einstein's Theory of Gravitation, which he linked with his Theory of Special relativity with his "Theory of General Relativity" and also Newton's law of Universal Gravitation

False. Special relativity does not interpret gravity, but speed of light in inertial frames of reference. Hence, the word "special" means special observers, or observers with a special privilege (inertial frame). Hence, due to this limitation, Einstein formulated General Relativity, where it finally talks about gravitation and allows laws of physics to be the same in all frames of reference.

And where did you presume this.

Because you said gravitation (or, for commoners like you, "gravity") is a force.

I simply used the original Newtonian names, why do you think I refer to gravity as a "psuedo force"...because the psuedo Newtonian Gravity is simply caused by objects falling towards the centre of mass of heavier objects (and the heavier objects have a much slighter pull towards the lighter ones).

Uh, so gravity is caused by falling objects now?

We all know that mass creates curvature in space time, the "bowl" analogy has been used here plenty of times, or the "sinking of the centre of the matress" analogy.

So, how does mass create curvature in space time?

Objects get trapped in each others "bowls" and move closer together. But I'm sure you've all mastered Special relativity because its been tought by 12th grade science students in this forum. I'm sure you all have the flat earth society approved cereal box physics degrees.

Again, Special relativity has nothing to do with gravitation and curvature of space-time, nevermind the rubber sheet experiment.

Jut because Jack think's he's a genius physicist, I'd like him to explain to me what happens in a Black Hole?

A black hole is caused when a large number of mass (or an object with a mass greater than the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff limit) accumulated in a small region of space. The masses accelerate infinitely down the gravity well. Thus, when an object falls into a black hole, it will not escape. Inside it will experience gravitational time dilation, or slowing down of time, relative to an outside observer.

I mean, obviously a total understanding is impossible, not even the smartest men on Earth arn't sure yet.

Then why do you ask?

But General relativity does give some insight, but much of it is wrong?

Now, tell me where general relativity is wrong about black holes.

Why? What parts are true?

What parts in GR you don't think are true?

Is there anything of value in other theories that might explain what happens in a black hole?

And?

Think of as a short essay. I'll give you a couple of days to write it. Not too long, just a general overview is fine. I'll even write an essay on it myself if you would like?

Already done. Now, I want to see your essay. I'll give you a couple of days to write it.

Quote from: JohnDavidson on December 05, 2007, 10:53:22 AM

Quote from: TheEngineer on December 05, 2007, 10:51:34 AM

So I guess that means I don't get any answers?   

I give up... you've convinced me I'm living on a flat earth. Can't believe I've joined the dark side. Shame on you Engineer, shame on you! lol

Oh my god...I can't believe that because a ludicrous flat earth theory can explain one aspect of our universe that your willing to accept this entirely bull shit theory.

How the hell does the universe power this acceleration?

If the universe is accelerating in one direction and Gravity is a pseudo term given to the force we feel due to this acceleration (as it pretty much already is) how do we account for the concept of Black Holes, is this extreme pull caused by some SUPER universal acceleration occuring within the immidiate vicinity and directly towards the black hole?

I mean John surely you can't be so easily convinced, if you're truely a debater you suck pretty badly.

If you look right under the sarcasm you'll see the top of Quarrior's head.