Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (278350)	11/3/2008 1:21:36 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794048

What triggered that?

To: LindyBill who wrote (278350)	11/3/2008 2:11:37 PM
From: nrg_crisis	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 794048

Way off subject Wow - yup - what brought that out, pray tell? As one of those muttering physicists, I can tell you that the integration of gravity with the other three fundamental forces (electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear interactions) has baffled the best of us, including Einstein. Gravity really does seem to be different than the other interactions in some fundamental ways. To me, though, the exact nature of gravity is fun but not really the most interesting problem out there. As I write this, I'm about to start a class on wave-particle duality, a mystery at its core as is so much of modern physics. One really good aspect of these mysteries of modern physics is the downfall of determinism, implicit in Newtonian mechanics, and limitations placed on what we human beings can know, even in principle. Hoo-boy. Maybe this is a discussion best taken off-line, or to a different forum. Is Obama really going to repeal the laws of physics as part of his program to heal the planet? Just wondering. nrg

To: LindyBill who wrote (278350)	11/3/2008 2:25:02 PM
From: mistermj	Respond to of 794048

If you start cranking out a Cello Sonata in C major I'm definitely going to UP my fish oil. ;-)

To: LindyBill who wrote (278350)	11/3/2008 2:47:14 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 794048

Did you catch the bio on Hugh Everett by his son on PBS? They should have made it eight hours on Discovery, but it was interesting. en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org The Bill that chose not to read the links is off dancing with hot girls. :)

To: LindyBill who wrote (278350)	11/3/2008 8:18:52 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794048

I think they will find the answer when they look upon gravity as a resultant force within mass. Resultant force within mass? The sum of all forces within mass is zero. In ETG, gravity can't be considered a force, but rather a path of least action determined by the geometry created by the g mu nu field associated with the field defined by gravity: ds^2 = g mu nu * dx^mu * dx^nu. When g mu nu = constant we have instantaneity or simultaneity, spooky action at a distance a la Newton, say, the Minkowski space, When the g mu nus are functions we have a natural explanation for acceleration, but then, gravity is best interpreted as geometry. IF you find this a little spooky too, you're onto something. A highly speculative guess about this could be that just as we are able to manipulate atoms to get heat, we may be able to do the same to get gravity. Speculative? Gravity can do work. That's how dams generate energy. Grandfather clocks too. And therefore a "gravity drive." Different animal. Such a device requires two things: worm holes without exotic matter, a very feasible proposition, and the discovery that some aspect of gravity has a velocity strictly greater than c. Call it, spin -1 field whose proper construction can save string theory without requiring supersymmetry.