how gravity works

[rupol2000]

Aristotle considered Newton's principle of inertia to be absolute nonsense. In particular, he wrote: “Thrown bodies usually move without touching the body that pushed them, either by reaction ... or because the set in motion imparts movement faster than moving the body to its own place; in emptiness, nothing this does not happen, and in this case it is possible to move only by means of transfer ... Further, no one can say why a body set in motion will stop somewhere, because why would it rather stop here and not there? it is necessary either to rest or to move endlessly, unless something stronger interferes "

He considered endless movement delirium in itself
It is easy to see that in the last two phrases the law of inertia is essentially formulated, which is now called the first law of mechanics. It is only formulated by contradictory method, i.e. Aristotle claims that if there were an infinite empty space of atomists, then the law of inertia would operate

 

[g5000]

Fair enough. I mean I have nothing against everything being relative, but GR "space-time" can go suck an egg. Since space possesses no properties it simply cannot "warp."

There is no gravity. The Earth sucks.

On a more serious note, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was proven by an experiment during a solar eclipse in 1919. Space does indeed warp near large bodies of mass.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Further, no one can say why a body set in motion will stop somewhere, because why would it rather stop here and not there? it is necessary either to rest or to move endlessly, unless something stronger interferes "

I.E., inertia. Now to ignore with you, troll.

 

[rupol2000]

I.E., inertia. Now to ignore with you, troll.

Aristotle opposing sophists and degenerates too

 

[rupol2000]

Here the most interesting thing is not even this, but the question of why the church and modern pseudo-physics so zealously defend the position of the sophists, contrary to common sense. After all, the entire pseudophysics of the second half of the 20th century is not doing anything else, except for the reincarnation of atomism and Newtonianism buried in the 19th century. All their sophisticated sophistry serves only to make friends with the phenomena of ether and emptiness

Why do they need the common people to believe in emptiness?

 

[rupol2000]

Buddhists wanted the same

 

[rupol2000]

This is extreme buffoonery. Aristotle declares that if there was a emptiness, the first law of modern mechanics would operate, and Newton postulates exactly what Aristotle considers insanity, precisely in this formulation.

 

[rupol2000]

Moreover, in 2 other dogmas he has a direct contradiction: if the action is equal to the reaction, then the collision of different masses must have the same acceleration. A funnier comedian is hard to find. He built a whole theory on false premises, which, moreover, contradict each other.

 

[Colin norris]

How does mass bend spacetime by simply being there?

What is the force being applied to spacetime that causes the warping?

Where is the force originating from?

What is the force behind the warping of spacetime?

What is gravity?


I understand that gravity is what happens when spacetime is warped, but I don't understand what is warping it. Mass? Mass in motion? Mass in stand-still?

Is there even any? Why or why not?



Fellow science enthusiasts?

There's not doubt it happens and science and physics have proven it.

The question that is still unanswered is very simply. How does gravity start? Why creates it in direct proportions to the size of the planet for instance?
We still don't know.

 

[rupol2000]

When he described the anatomy of vision, he said that there are some kind of flying "stones of light" (an analogue of the modern nonsense about photons) that hit the pupil and irritate the nerve endings

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Why creates it in direct proportions to the size of the planet for instance?
We still don't know.

*mass of the planet

 

[rupol2000]

There's not doubt it happens and science and physics have proven it.

Where such confidence?
Modern physics does not bother itself with any proofs at all, it just makes unfounded statements.
For example, they declared the observed centrifugal force a fiction, and they consider the real force to be a centripetal force that no one saw. But the concept of fiction does not prevent them from using fictitious forces in their calculations.

 

[rupol2000]

It's about the same as if you thought your penis was non-existent, but used it for sex.

 

[rupol2000]

Modern "physicists" annoyed everyone with their tales about the curvature of time and acid trips, but they have not made a single tangible discovery in 100 years, everything that was done in physics was done when there was no THIS smelly kind of physics

 

[Grumblenuts]

There is no gravity. The Earth sucks.

On a more serious note, Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was proven by an experiment during a solar eclipse in 1919. Space does indeed warp near large bodies of mass.

You're clearly convinced anyway. Is that what makes it so or can you elaborate upon your reasoning? Why can't the light bend due to something else? When hair bends toward a comb do you feel obliged to attribute it to space or time or spacetime?

 

[rupol2000]

Including the discovery of nuclear decay. The nuclear bomb was developed precisely when, by "the will of fate", the Einsteinian were not in Germany.

 

[g5000]

You're clearly convinced anyway. Is that what makes it so or can you elaborate upon your reasoning? Why can't the light bend due to something else? When hair bends toward a comb do you feel obliged to attribute it to space or time or spacetime?

Light bends because of static electricity?!?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Newtonianism and atomism are religious teachings. Newton himself was a priest
Newtonianism does not use a scientific method of verification, but dogmatism borrowed from scholasticism. Newton's postulates are not based on experience.

Sorry, Newton was not an atomist and proved himself a brilliant experimenter among other things. Tell you what, build the equivalent of the first telescope or create something like the calculus with religious dogma.. then get back to us.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Light bends because of static electricity?!?

That's you elaborating upon your reasoning? It was an analo.. sorry, never mind.

 

[rupol2000]

Sorry, Newton was not an atomist and proved himself a brilliant experimenter among other things. Tell you what, build the equivalent of the first telescope or create something like the calculus with religious dogma.. then get back to us.

Sorry I don’t know how to react to this in any way, because it’s just utter nonsense. Newton is a pure atomist and Newtonianism is pure dogmatism, literate people know this.