Here's The Thing About Dark Energy and Gravity...

I seriously doubt that there is a universal force acting upon the Earth alone and nothing else in the universe.

Dark energy acts on everything in the universe not shielded by the DEF.

Quote from: The Flood on March 12, 2009, 11:48:44 AM

I seriously doubt that there is a universal force acting upon the Earth alone and nothing else in the universe.

Dark energy acts on everything in the universe not shielded by the DEF.

Roundy, I don't suppose that it would be possible for you to make and post a quick scale drawing of the FE, sun, moon and the celestial bodies showing the relationship between the dark energy and the DEF?  It would make things so much more clear to some of us dense RE'ers.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on March 12, 2009, 12:09:52 PM

Quote from: The Flood on March 12, 2009, 11:48:44 AM

I seriously doubt that there is a universal force acting upon the Earth alone and nothing else in the universe.

Dark energy acts on everything in the universe not shielded by the DEF.

Roundy, I don't suppose that it would be possible for you to make and post a quick scale drawing of the FE, sun, moon and the celestial bodies showing the relationship between the dark energy and the DEF?  It would make things so much more clear to some of us dense RE'ers.

I'll see if I can make something up but to be honest I'm no good with drawings.  I'd be surprised if someone hasn't done this already, anyway.

Quote from: markjo on March 12, 2009, 12:33:26 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on March 12, 2009, 12:09:52 PM

Quote from: The Flood on March 12, 2009, 11:48:44 AM

I seriously doubt that there is a universal force acting upon the Earth alone and nothing else in the universe.

Dark energy acts on everything in the universe not shielded by the DEF.

Roundy, I don't suppose that it would be possible for you to make and post a quick scale drawing of the FE, sun, moon and the celestial bodies showing the relationship between the dark energy and the DEF?  It would make things so much more clear to some of us dense RE'ers.

I'll see if I can make something up but to be honest I'm no good with drawings.  I'd be surprised if someone hasn't done this already, anyway.

I've made several requests in the past, but no FE'er has ever produced one.

Quote from: MotherNature on March 12, 2009, 01:28:06 AM

I don't think you realise.

I'm trying to establish why you think this particle exists. What is the reasoning based on your deduction?

I've explained this already.

Quote

I'm trying to ascertain whether you've just made up 'your' version of the graviton.

Of course I did, to explain the apparent attraction of the heavenly bodies.

Quote

In simpler terms, I want to know where it comes from and why you think it comes from there. I also want to know what you think it does.

Well, I would imagine it's a direct result of the origin of the universe, but I can't say for sure.  I think it causes objects to warp spacetime around them to a degree relative to the object's mass.

I want to know what past observations/theories you have used to come to the conclusions of a 'graviton' that disintegrates in the atmosphere.

The current scientific understanding of the graviton is extremly theoretical because of the infinities involved within the quantum mechanics. It becomes nonrenormalisable.

If your 'graviton' is produced and you say it bends space time then to all intents and purposes it is a form of a tensor field (vector/scaler field) which is why I'm confused as to your reasoning that it is able to interact with the atoms in the atmosphere and disapear.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on March 12, 2009, 11:12:20 AM

Quote from: MotherNature on March 12, 2009, 01:28:06 AM

I don't think you realise.

I'm trying to establish why you think this particle exists. What is the reasoning based on your deduction?

I've explained this already.

Quote

I'm trying to ascertain whether you've just made up 'your' version of the graviton.

Of course I did, to explain the apparent attraction of the heavenly bodies.

Quote

In simpler terms, I want to know where it comes from and why you think it comes from there. I also want to know what you think it does.

Well, I would imagine it's a direct result of the origin of the universe, but I can't say for sure.  I think it causes objects to warp spacetime around them to a degree relative to the object's mass.

I want to know what past observations/theories you have used to come to the conclusions of a 'graviton' that disintegrates in the atmosphere.

I said that was a guess when I first proposed it.  But I guess they don't necessarily have to be.  It's not like anybody's ever tested a meteor for gravitons; they very well may still contain them.

What tests should we carry out? Seriously, i'm above average at particle physics, tell me what properties your graviton has. Infact low energy graviton searches is, not quite a hobby, but an interest slightly off my day to day work.

From the looks of this thread, here's the basic template of the FE argument:

1: RE: "If the earth is flat, then why (question A)?"
2: FE: "Because, (answer B)."
3: RE: "Why do you believe (answer B) to be true?"
4: FE: "Because, since the earth is flat, (answer B) must be true."
5. goto line 1

I always thought that it was impossible for a human to create a perfect circle...but I've been proven wrong by every FE that I've spoken to...

From the looks of this thread, here's the basic template of the FE argument:

1: RE: "If the earth is flat, then why (question A)?"
2: FE: "Because, (answer B)."
3: RE: "Why do you believe (answer B) to be true?"
4: FE: "Because, since the earth is flat, (answer B) must be true."
5. goto line 1

I always thought that it was impossible for a human to create a perfect circle...but I've been proven wrong by every FE that I've spoken to...

Except that we're not using (answer B) as evidence that the Earth is flat.  We're using the fact that the Earth is flat as evidence of (answer B).  The fact that the Earth is flat is supported by its own evidence.  So there's nothing circular about our arguments.