Gravity: A Theory in Crisis (no joke!)

CEH ^ | May 5, 2009

[GodGunsGuts]

Gravity: A Theory in Crisis

May 5, 2009 — Note: This is **not** a joke. How could gravity be a theory in crisis? Isn’t gravity one of the best-understood facts of nature? Don’t we all avoid jumping off cliffs because of the law of gravity? Gravity is doing just fine, thank you. It’s our theory of gravity, and the cosmology built on it, that is in crisis – according to a report on PhysOrg today: “Study plunges standard Theory of Cosmology into Crisis.”...

[GodGunsGuts]

Ping!

[GonzoGOP]

I said Obama had no gravitas. Now they elected him and the entire universe is flying apart.

[andy58-in-nh]

I’m not sure how much weight to give this.

[GodGunsGuts]

Good one!

[SERKIT]

Heavy subject, man...

[MHGinTN]

I have no doubt that gravity is a spacetime phenomenon. My question is, however, what is it about mass that generates this phenomenon? ... Could it be that mass is an accumulation of temporal quanta? Isn't a particle merely a little bit of space and a smidgen of time wrapped up with energy? If the warping of spacetime is what gravity is, why have we left the temporal accumulation out of the reasoning?

[ClearCase_guy]

Well, I have been feeling a bit light-headed.

[ZULU]

How much does a breeze weigh?

[clamper1797]

Depends on what substance the breeze consist of and how much gravity is present

[ZX12R]

I’m not sure how much weight to give this.

The physg.org article:



The creation crap article:

[Erik Latranyi]

When I read this my lower jaw was attracted to the floor.

[mosaicwolf]

Ummmm. I may check this out the next time I fly my Cessna Skyhawk. I'll let you all know if I keep flying when I pull the power back to idle.

[theFIRMbss]

>Heavy subject, man...


"Worries about sagging breasts are very common in women as they age. All women want to retain the pert, firm look they had as teenagers and they despair of the natural drooping and sagging of breasts that tend to occur, due to the effects of gravity over time. ..."

What Can You Do About Sagging Breasts?

[andy58-in-nh]

How much does a breeze weigh?

That depends on how hard it blows.

[PapaBear3625]

Any changes to theory will still have physics and astronomy being incompatible with the notion that the universe was created 6,000 years ago (or 10,000 or anything less than billions of years).

[ErnBatavia]

That hit me like a ton of bricks.

[txroadkill]

Ow...that made my brain hurt

[andy58-in-nh]

Quantum mechanics is definitely not for lightweights. Some of the theoretical implications are so paradoxical that trying to wrap your mind around them is like trying to nail water to a wall - with a hammer made of light and a faucet that wasn’t turned on until tomorrow.

[La Lydia]

You don't have to believe in gravity to be affected by it!

He ain't heavy, he's my g = 9.8 m/s2 = 32.2 ft/s2.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Maybe you can explain what it is about physics that necessitates an old earth?

[lafroste]

I rarely say it, but I have what appears (to me at least) to be a coherent theory of gravity. SImply put, mass is it's own dimensional phenomenon and remains at all TIMES constant. Spacetime warp is simply a function of mass and absolute velocity (implying, of course that a set of absolute zero conditions, including velocity, exists). As a mass moves through this time wrp, it's apparent 4th dimensional energy state is altered in such a way as to keep its 5th dimensional "q" constant.

The theory has a lot of fascinating corollaries, and even suggests a method for building anti-gravity engines. Interested parties, see my tagline.

[DevNet]

Radioactive decay and the resulting extra heat produced by accelerated decay.

[Tanniker Smith]

Have you met my brother? Yeah, he's heavy.

He'd be heavy on the Moon.

[editor-surveyor]

Naturalism, a Religion in Crisis!

[Pox]

No no no! You see, the whole point behind the regular posting of this gibberish by GGG is to try and convince people that if any possible flaw in any theory that does not support creation has been found, any reworking of said theory is pointless and useless as the flaw implies that creationism is the only alternative and creationism MUST be the correct answer.

[CottShop]

[[If the warping of spacetime is what gravity is, why have we left the temporal accumulation out of the reasoning?]]

Because evolution hasn’t equipted us to deal rationally with such warped discussions

[andy58-in-nh]

I’m sorry to admit I actually got that reference. Maybe it’s because I’m getting older and parts of my body are falling.

[Landru]

"Because evolution hasn’t equipted us to deal rationally with such warped discussions"

But-but, that's twisted reasoning.

Sorry, had to.
Metaphors run amok do this to me. :o)

[La Lydia]

It’s funny what sticks in my mind.

[CottShop]

[[Quantum mechanics is definitely not for lightweights. Some of the theoretical implications are so paradoxical that trying to wrap your mind around them is like trying to nail water to a wall - with a hammer made of light and a faucet that wasn’t turned on until tomorrow.]]

Yep but hte great thing is that if you mistekenly come up with a wrong answer, you can just sleep Backwards that evening, and wake up the day before, and start all over again

[Some hope remaining.]

The mass of my upper and lower eyelids increased significantly while I was reading this article, causing them to irresistably attract each other.

[editor-surveyor]

"I'll let you all know if I keep flying when I pull the power back to idle."

And I'll hold my breath until we receive your report...

[andy58-in-nh]

LOL

[CottShop]

[[The mass of my upper and lower eyelids increased significantly while I was reading this article, causing them to irresistably attract each other.]]

His one eye was in love with his other- they kept starign at each other

[editor-surveyor]

"Any changes to theory will still have physics and astronomy being incompatible with the notion that the universe was created 6,000 years ago"

Relax! There's no incompatibility; it fits like glove when you leave out the fairy tales of naturalistic religion.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[PapaBear3625]

Maybe you can explain what it is about physics that necessitates an old earth?

Oh, little things like geology, fossils arranged in neat layers where you never find modern mammals or humans mixed with dinosaurs, stuff like that.

As far as astronomy is concerned, the idea that things are billions of light years away implying that the universe is older than 6,000 years is a start.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

temporal quanta

How do we know that "temporal quanta" exist?

[MHGinTN]

I disagree, but that’s grist for another mill.

[PapaBear3625]

No no no! You see, the whole point behind the regular posting of this gibberish by GGG is to try and convince people that if any possible flaw in any theory that does not support creation has been found, any reworking of said theory is pointless and useless as the flaw implies that creationism is the only alternative and creationism MUST be the correct answer.

That's a novel theory. I'd always thought the point was to try to convince the world that conservatives are creationist loonies, being done on a grant by the Democrat Party.

[montyspython]

Now you’ve gone and done it, bringing in facts and stuff... how dare you?

[MHGinTN]

I don’t ‘know’—as in scientifically proven; I rely upon inference ... what is it about mass (that’s an accumulation of particles) that warps spacetime? Something in the particles is responsible as they accumulate. Add to that question that ‘speed’ of an object influences the temporal passage for the object in motion—or an object caught in a gravitational field such a black hole.

[betty boop]

Could it be that mass is an accumulation of temporal quanta? Isn't a particle merely a little bit of space and a smidgen of time wrapped up with energy? If the warping of spacetime is what gravity is, why have we left the temporal accumulation out of the reasoning?

Wonderful questions, MHGinTN! Somebody ought to be chasing them down.

[BTW, how's your book coming along???]

[Wissa]

I'd always thought the point was to try to convince the world that conservatives are creationist loonies, being done on a grant by the Democrat Party.

Actually, THAT makes a lot of sense.

[count-your-change]

The money quote:

“it is conceivable that we have completely failed to comprehend the actual physics underlying the force of gravity”....”.

Give the man a prize for understatement! We may not be able to fully comprehend how gravity works. So far the descriptions have fallen short and describing a thing is not the same as understanding it, a start, yes, but not the same.

If the nature of gravity is not completely understood it's not surprising theories based upon our very imperfect and limited understanding prove to be faulty.

[Deaf Smith]

"How much does a breeze weigh?"

Today in Fort Worth, it's weighing in at around 29.9 and rising.

[MHGinTN]

Thanks for asking ... I’m about to finish it and move on.

[The Sons of Liberty]

OK, bottom line - does this mean that the next time I step on the scales I will weigh less?

[GodGunsGuts]

==Any changes to theory will still have physics and astronomy being incompatible with the notion that the universe was created 6,000 years ago (or 10,000 or anything less than billions of years).

Not at all. Creation cosmologists have already demonstrated that it is possible for the Earth to be thousands of years old, and the outer reaches of the Universe to be billions of years old, and both be the result of the SAME creation event. See the following for more:

http://creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter5.pdf