Earth's Acceleration

Tell me one thing: why is the Earth accelerating upwards?

Tell me one thing: why is the Earth accelerating upwards?

the ice wall causes it.

How does the "ice wall" cause it?

Actually, a place holder name of dark energy (sometimes, UA) has been given to the mechanism that causes the acceleration.

I'm new to this theory, and, excuse my ignorance, I just do not understand it.

Tell me one thing: why is the Earth accelerating upwards?

Short answer: the FE "scientists" don't know. There's a dark matter cosmology thread in Other Alternative Science giving a possible explanation.

The mechanism is as of now unknown, but we can observe the effects it causes.

So is this some kind of religion you guys have? Groundless theories backed by no evidence?

Religion, no.  For evidence, when I drop an object, the earth rushes up to it.

The mechanism is as of now unknown, but we can observe the effects it causes.

Isn't that how FE describes gravity too? If gravity doesn't exist because we cannot explain it to your satisfaction then this hypothesis is invalid too.

If I jump in the air I should continue to move away from the Earth if this acceleration is static.

Religion, no.  For evidence, when I drop an object, the earth rushes up to it.

you can not possibly believe that. hahah.

If I jump in the air I should continue to move away from the Earth if this acceleration is static.

No.  Because you are no longer in conntact with the Earth, you would stop accelerating and simply begin to move at a constant velocity.  While the Earth (Still accelerating) would come up to meet you.

Granted, I don't buy the idea of a Universal Accelerator one bit.  We know we are not moving at near the speed of light (As is necessitated by a constant acceleration) relative to the rest of our universe.

The only way FE'ers could explain this is to assume that the UA is working on everything in the universe.  Which seems rather unlikely to me.

If I jump in the air I should continue to move away from the Earth if this acceleration is static.

Acceleration is static?  Acceleration is constant if that is what you mean.

Quote from: "TheEngineer"

Religion, no.  For evidence, when I drop an object, the earth rushes up to it.

you can not possibly believe that. hahah.

From the reference frame of the object, that is exactly what happens.

Newton tells us that in the absense of force, an object in motion remains in motion, and an object at rest remains at rest. If I am holding an apple, and let go, either the ground rushes up to meet the apple, or else the apple falls down to meet the ground, so I ask myself, which of these things could be true. Well, an object at rest remains at rest, and the apple was at rest, so it should stay at rest unless some force is acting on it. But there is no evidence of any force on the apple. In common experience, things that move have something doing the pushing: either a person pushing a cart, or an engine moving a vehicle, or a pool cue hitting a cue ball. There is no visible means that could be acting on the apple, so unless we accept some invisible action at a distance with no mechanism we can see or understand (a supernatural force if ever there was one), we must assume the apple is stationary, and the earth is moving to meet it. Of course, we can't see what is pushing on the earth either, but the earth is very large and we can see very little of it, so it's no stretch to believe something may be pushing it.

There is no visible means that could be acting on the apple, so unless we accept some invisible action at a distance with no mechanism we can see or understand (a supernatural force if ever there was one), we must assume the apple is stationary, and the earth is moving to meet it.

That is one of the most negligent arguments I have ever heard.

What about electromagnetism?

You can't see the "push" that attracts the oppositely polarized ends of a magnetic dipole.

You can't see the "push" that attracts two current carrying wires together.

All of the above are "action at a distance" and we don't attribute them to some "supernatural."  How could you so casually dismiss the existence of action at a distance when all of modern electronics are dependant on it?

oh lol.

Interestingly in the Dawkins book I'm reading at the moment he implores scientists not to use analogies or religious terms in their arguments unless they really mean them because less intelligent people will take them out of context and make it look like you're arguing something that you're not.  He thinks we should avoid that confusion when we can .

Newton tells us that in the absense of force, an object in motion remains in motion...[snip]...Of course, we can't see what is pushing on the earth either, but the earth is very large and we can see very little of it, so it's no stretch to believe something may be pushing it.

Well, actually, theoretically, we would be constantly moving up, still. It's just that the force is constantly accelerating, so when an object is dropped, it would still keep moving up, but would no longer have the Earth accelerating it. So the object would not be at rest, but the Earth, still accelerating, still comes up to meet the object that was dropped.

~D-Draw

we live on a round earth, on this earth we have a thing called gravity.

we live on a round earth, on this earth we have a thing called gravity.

Really. That's amazing, because I like how gravity has absolutely no scientific value either. Do you actually know what force causes gravity? Absolutely nothing. It sounds fishy to me.

~D-Draw

Quote from: "skeptical_scientist"

There is no visible means that could be acting on the apple, so unless we accept some invisible action at a distance with no mechanism we can see or understand (a supernatural force if ever there was one), we must assume the apple is stationary, and the earth is moving to meet it.

That is one of the most negligent arguments I have ever heard.

What about electromagnetism?

You can't see the "push" that attracts the oppositely polarized ends of a magnetic dipole.

You can't see the "push" that attracts two current carrying wires together.

All of the above are "action at a distance" and we don't attribute them to some "supernatural."  How could you so casually dismiss the existence of action at a distance when all of modern electronics are dependant on it?

It is true that electromagnetism is similar in that there is no immediately visible mechanism for the force in question. However, it has been shown that photons are responsible for mediating the electromagnetic force. Photons are nice, easily observed objects. There is a well understood mechanism for this. It can be blocked by something that can block photons; for example placing a sheet of metal between two negatively charged objects will block the repulsive force between them.

Gravity, as RE scientists put forward, is very different. It cannot be blocked by an intervening object. It is not carried by any particle we can see or even detect. And to make matters worth, the leading RE theories of gravity are in fundamental conflict with the leading RE theories of everything else.

So unless you can show me a graviton, I'll continue to claim that the apple is stationary and the earth is accelerating up to it.

Well, actually, theoretically, we would be constantly moving up, still. It's just that the force is constantly accelerating, so when an object is dropped, it would still keep moving up, but would no longer have the Earth accelerating it. So the object would not be at rest, but the Earth, still accelerating, still comes up to meet the object that was dropped.

~D-Draw

Yeah, yeah. But any inertial reference frame is as good as any other, so I'll use the one in which the apple is at rest at the instant I drop it for the ease of explanation.

Gravity, as RE scientists put forward, is very different. It cannot be blocked by an intervening object. It is not carried by any particle we can see or even detect. And to make matters worth, the leading RE theories of gravity are in fundamental conflict with the leading RE theories of everything else.

So unless you can show me a graviton, I'll continue to claim that the apple is stationary and the earth is accelerating up to it.

Hey, Skeptical Scientist. Maybe the molecules just WANT to be together. I like snuggling with women; maybe the Earth molecules like snuggling with OUR molecules, and vice versa! HAH! I think I'm onto something here!

~D-Draw

the leading RE theories of gravity are in fundamental conflict with the leading RE theories of everything else.

How so?

How else would you explain the formation of the planet?

Quote

the leading RE theories of gravity are in fundamental conflict with the leading RE theories of everything else.

How so?

How else would you explain the formation of the planet?

This is a long and complicated subject, but the summary is roughly as follows: our best theory of gravity is general relativity, which is a great success and explains many things very accurately. Our best theory for the other fundamental forces is quantum mechanics, which is a great success and explains many things very well. In most situations, we can work with one theory and use an approximation to the other which explains the phenomena. Unfortunately, there are certain phenomena (black holes and the origin of the universe are the two prime examples) where both theories come into play, and in such situations they produce conflicting or nonsensical results.

Quote from: "phaseshifter"

Quote

the leading RE theories of gravity are in fundamental conflict with the leading RE theories of everything else.

How so?

How else would you explain the formation of the planet?

This is a long and complicated subject, but the summary is roughly as follows: our best theory of gravity is general relativity, which is a great success and explains many things very accurately. Our best theory for the other fundamental forces is quantum mechanics, which is a great success and explains many things very well. In most situations, we can work with one theory and use an approximation to the other which explains the phenomena. Unfortunately, there are certain phenomena (black holes and the origin of the universe are the two prime examples) where both theories come into play, and in such situations they produce conflicting or nonsensical results.

For black holes, it's understandable, since once matter enters them, they no longer have to follow any known law or property attributed to matter in the universe. As far as I know, science accepts the fact we simply do not know what the state of matter is once it's in the black hole, or how it behaves.

One theory avoided this by suggesting that black hole create quantum tunnels by bending space. It even went as far as saying tha ttime was also bent, and matter on the other side of the" tunnel" were displaced in time. Then it went into more complicated matter by attributing this to the formation of the cosmic egg and explain the missing mas of the universe at the same time.

For black holes, it's understandable, since once matter enters them, they no longer have to follow any known law or property attributed to matter in the universe. As far as I know, science accepts the fact we simply do not know what the state of matter is once it's in the black hole, or how it behaves.

I'm not talking about the behavior of matter in black holes; I'm talking about the behavior of matter very near black holes, the behavior of black holes themselves, and the behavior of the universe near the time of the big bang. The conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics is well documented. For good reading directed at a non-physicist, see Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe, especially Chapter 5: "The Need for a New Theory: General Relativity vs. Quantum Mechanics." A big part of the reason that theoretical physicists are so involved in the search for a unified theory is because of this incompatibility between the existing theories of gravity and of everything else.

For good reading directed at a non-physicist, see Brian Greene's The Elegant Universe

Ooh.  Will do.  There definitely needs to be more books for us laymen that are interested in that stuff, but don't want to spend a decade in college!

I think its being pushed by some sort of telekinetic power.

Quote from: "Cheech6"

we live on a round earth, on this earth we have a thing called gravity.

Really. That's amazing, because I like how gravity has absolutely no scientific value either. Do you actually know what force causes gravity? Absolutely nothing. It sounds fishy to me.

~D-Draw

What causes gravity is a huge mass.

The earth is thousands and thousands of cubic kilometers of rock and iron - a huge enough mass to have a gravitational pull.