Question for FE

Question for FE, there are a lot of conflicting beliefs on this forum so I would just like to ask:  Do FE'ers agree with Einstein's General Relativity, more specifically, that bodies with mass warp space time?

Yes.

Thank you.  My next question is does FE believe that other planets are orbiting the sun as a result of the warped spacetime caused by the suns mass?  Same questions with moons that we observe orbiting other planets such as Jupiter, does everybody agree this is due to Jupiter mass warping spacetime thereby causing object to gravitate towards it?

Yes.

What?  You've never observed it.  How can you believe in it and yet still believe the earth is a dinner plate?

no offense to Moon squirter, but I would like my question answered first.

Thank you.  My next question is does FE believe that other planets are orbiting the sun as a result of the warped spacetime caused by the suns mass?  Same questions with moons that we observe orbiting other planets such as Jupiter, does everybody agree this is due to Jupiter mass warping spacetime thereby causing object to gravitate towards it?

I can't speak for everybody, but I certainly agree with that.

Then here is my confusion, if mass bends spacetime, as you agreed, then why doesn't the mass of the earth do the same thing.  The FAQ states that the earth is not like the other planets, we are special, and earth is accelerating upwards at 1g, which admittedly would cause the same affect as gravity from our perspective.  However, since earth has mass (right?), and you agree that bodies with mass warp space time, then how can you say that earth does not in your FAQ?  Or do I have the whole thing wrong.  If so, please educate me.

Dark Energy acts as an anti-gravitational field that conveniently counters the gravitational field generated by the mass of the FE.

Then here is my confusion, if mass bends spacetime, as you agreed, then why doesn't the mass of the earth do the same thing.  The FAQ states that the earth is not like the other planets, we are special, and earth is accelerating upwards at 1g, which admittedly would cause the same affect as gravity from our perspective.  However, since earth has mass (right?), and you agree that bodies with mass warp space time, then how can you say that earth does not in your FAQ?  Or do I have the whole thing wrong.  If so, please educate me.

Not all FEers agree with everything written in the FAQ.

I take it you are one of these FE'ers that do not agree with what is stated in the FAQ.  So you believe that we gravitate towards the earth because of the spacetime warping caused by the earth's mass?  Second, do you agree or disagree with the size and shape of the earth given in the FAQ, or do you believe in the infinite disk theory like Tom Bishop.

I take it you are one of these FE'ers that do not agree with what is stated in the FAQ.  So you believe that we gravitate towards the earth because of the spacetime warping caused by the earth's mass?  Second, do you agree or disagree with the size and shape of the earth given in the FAQ, or do you believe in the infinite disk theory like Tom Bishop.

I believe that at least part of the Earth's gravitation is caused by its mass, though it may be accelerating too. I don't know which theory of the Earth's size and shape is correct; they are both valid possibilities.

Not all FEers agree with everything written in the FAQ.

Hence, making the FAQ that much more in need of being updated.

The earth's gravitation is indiscernible. The combined effect of this negligible gravitation and the earth's acceleration account for "gravity".

If the sun 32 miles in diameter has enough gravity to form a sphere, why not the earth, being so much larger and presumably more massive.

because size has nothing to do with mass/energy.

because size has nothing to do with mass/energy.

Actually, it does.  All other things being equal, bigger things are more massive than smaller things.

In the RE model, I'm pretty sure if you take something with the mass of the earth and squeeze it into a 32 mile diameter sphere, it would be a black hole.  I hate math, but I'm sure there is a cone head on here who could calculate that.

Anyhow, the moon is made of rock, and its gravitational pull is enough to force it into a sphere shape, I presume you agree with this since you agree that it would since you agree with GE.  The earth is made of rock too.  I would say they have a similar enough density, however the earth is many many times larger in the FE model.  So why isn't earth flattened into a sphere?

In the RE model, I'm pretty sure if you take something with the mass of the earth and squeeze it into a 32 mile diameter sphere, it would be a black hole. 

More like a couple of solar masses, but I wouldn't want to find out the hard way in either case.

In the RE model, I'm pretty sure if you take something with the mass of the earth and squeeze it into a 32 mile diameter sphere, it would be a black hole.  I hate math, but I'm sure there is a cone head on here who could calculate that.

I love all the "physicists" on here that make these bizarre claims without having any idea of whether it's true or not. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that it would not.

Anyhow, the moon is made of rock, and its gravitational pull is enough to force it into a sphere shape, I presume you agree with this since you agree that it would since you agree with GE.  The earth is made of rock too.  I would say they have a similar enough density, however the earth is many many times larger in the FE model.  So why isn't earth flattened into a sphere?

I'm not sure how we could possibly know what the moon is really made of. It seems to me that celestial bodies may be formed of something utterly unlike the earth. And even if it were made of rock, how on earth could you presume to know it's density?
Assumption+Assumption+Assumption =! Fact

Quote from: ragnarr on October 16, 2008, 07:54:32 PM

In the RE model, I'm pretty sure if you take something with the mass of the earth and squeeze it into a 32 mile diameter sphere, it would be a black hole.  I hate math, but I'm sure there is a cone head on here who could calculate that.

I love all the "physicists" on here that make these bizarre claims without having any idea of whether it's true or not. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that it would not.

LOL. The Earth would need to be squeezed down a lot smaller than that to become a black hole, if we take the Round Earth mass for granted. The Schwarzchild radius of an object is given by 2Gm/c²; using the mass of the Round Earth in this equation tells us that the Earth would need to be squeezed down to less than nine millimetres across before it would become a black hole.

Conversely, rearranging the equation to solve for mass tells us that a black hole 32 miles across has a mass of 3.47 * 10³¹ kg, or more than 17 times the mass of the RE Sun.

Quote from: ragnarr on October 16, 2008, 07:54:32 PM

In the RE model, I'm pretty sure if you take something with the mass of the earth and squeeze it into a 32 mile diameter sphere, it would be a black hole.  I hate math, but I'm sure there is a cone head on here who could calculate that.

I love all the "physicists" on here that make these bizarre claims without having any idea of whether it's true or not. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that it would not.

Quote

Anyhow, the moon is made of rock, and its gravitational pull is enough to force it into a sphere shape, I presume you agree with this since you agree that it would since you agree with GE.  The earth is made of rock too.  I would say they have a similar enough density, however the earth is many many times larger in the FE model.  So why isn't earth flattened into a sphere?

I'm not sure how we could possibly know what the moon is really made of. It seems to me that celestial bodies may be formed of something utterly unlike the earth. And even if it were made of rock, how on earth could you presume to know it's density?
Assumption+Assumption+Assumption =! Fact

We have seen how meteors striking the earths surface make a crater, we know they are made of stone or metal, we observe that the same objects make similar craters on the moon, does that not tell us something about its composition and density?

I have never claimed to be a physicist. That is why I asked if somebody could make that calculation.

It'd be great if you were using the terms you use correctly.

Appeal to ignorance: Since we don't know what the celestial bodies are made of, nor are we going to try and find out, I can spout whatever cock-a-hoop nonsense comes into my mind. Or, the usual patter is "Prove me wrong." "Have you, yourself, yes you, actually been inside a volcano?" "We don't have the equipment to measure the radius of the earth" "Have you seen an electron?"

And so on and so forth.

FE'ers are desperate for people to know as little as them.

But anyway, it doesn't need to be like that, feel free to use the Dark Energy equations to calculate the mass of the earth, and other bodies.

Didn't we use Einstein's equations to get the mass of the sun.  Seems like I heard this in a physics lecture that once we knew how fast the earth moved around the sun and what the distance between the two were, we knew the mass of the sun.  Point is, couldn't we use the same equation to come up with the mass of the moon?  Of course this is all Real Earth Physics, right?  I don't pretend to know that much, I am trying to learn though.  I've recently fallen hard for ITunes U.

Of course this is all Real Earth Physics, right?

Not true from this topic.  OBL agrees that mass causes the space time curvature which gives us the effect of gravitation.  The earth has mass, therefore the earth's mass causes gravitation.

Quote from: C-Ray on October 17, 2008, 09:32:32 AM

Didn't we use Einstein's equations to get the mass of the sun?

Probably, but that's Einstein (or more probably Newton). Which doesn't apply to the FE. (The FE gets it's force externally, and is unable to generate its own "gravity".)

Herzsprung-Russell is another way:

http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~soper/Stars/hrmass.html

So does FE refute all the findings from the last couple hundred years?

Here is his answer: 

I believe that at least part of the Earth's gravitation is caused by its mass, though it may be accelerating too. I don't know which theory of the Earth's size and shape is correct; they are both valid possibilities.

If the suns gravitation is strong enough to have an effect on all the planets, then why doesn't it suck all of us up too?  Also, can we not calculate the suns mass by Einsteins field equations?