"oldcoot" wrote in message...
...
On Jun 16, 11:44 am, "Painius" wrote:

...it is so important to realize that any
idea, good or bad, that is the offspring of a trip to
our imaginations must be subject to the evidence
that can be determined...

in this frame of reference, i.e., from the
perspective of scientific scrutiny on planet
Earth.

All else, whether sound or frivolous, is speculation
without evidence to back it up.

....Unless, by its numerous cross-congruent 'sidebars' and spinoffs,
it addresses and answers such issues as : Unification of gravity with
the SNF, seamless conciliation of QM and relativity, resolution of
"dark matter/ dark energy", whether the universe is open-ended or
closed.. which bears on the biggest questions in cosmology, like the
ultimate fate of the universe. If the theory is elegant, rational, and
easily understood by the layman without need for math, and if it shows
all the fundamental forces and "particles" reducible to *processes* of
One Flow driven by One Force in the Unified Field of Spatial Flows,
then, based on the law of probability (vis-a-vis "uncertainty"), the
theory holds a better chance of being true, than not.

And the Devil's-Advocate response might be akin to...

Gravity as a "pull" force, as a force field emanating
from matter and "attracting" other matter, is an axiom
that has been held without evidence, (that bears a
repeat), *without evidence* since the origins of mind,
since the beginnings of antiquity. So, it's not just the
age that makes it so hard to break, it's also the fact
that there is no evidence to support the Pull-Gravity
Axiom. It is deeply acceptable _without question_!

If someone comes along with a "push" theory of any
kind, particulate or energetic, science will not even try
to begin to accept it unless the proposal is neatly and
tightly wrapped with hypercompelling evidence found
by strictly applying the scientific method.

I believe that this is also the reason for the deep, deep
embeddedness of the Void-Space Paradigm. While this
axiom is much younger than Pull Gravity, there is still
no compelling scientific evidence either way. And since
a SPED or any other kind of aether is deemed wholly
"unnecessary", even "unlikely" to today's physics tenets,
Wolter's profound thoughts go unattended, and we
continue to bang our (fortunately very hard) heads up
against walls of steel.

And yet, the banging can be fun, educational, even
occasionally insightful. Or so i keep reminding myself.

g

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth

P.S.: Thank YOU for reading!

P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net