On Dec 26, 2:36*pm, (oldcoot) wrote:
Painius wrote, reposting one of the VS'ers:

**Note that you still have no * * * * * * * * * mechanism or how

the magnitude of * * flow is established...

No-brainer. The size of the mass establishes the size of the sink; the
larger the sink, the higher the flow rate.. up to the mass of a BH whose
inflow rate exceeds the speed of light, establishing the BH's event
horizon.

Actually, no, they can't be normal. The * exact trajectories will

be quite complex due to local mass variations.

This would be true with bodies like the moon with large subsurface
mascons (irregular mass concentrations).

Yet these items travel many orders of * magnitude slower than the

speed of * * * gravity as predicted by General * * * * * * Relativity. Thus you cannot claim that * your construct obeys the

mathematics * of GR.

The *speed of gravitational charge* (bet that's a new one on 'im) is not
the same thing as velocity of spaceflow. The 'speed of gravity' is
instantaneous irrespective of distance. Were it no so, aberration of
planetary orbits would cause them to spiral outward over time. The
stability of planets' orbits over billions of years attests to gravity's
instantaneity just as Newton originally observed.
* * * * * * * Incidently, Uncle Albert's belief that gravity itself
propagates at c is just plain wrong. Carlip's "gravitomagnetic" theory
attempting to exonerate him is just plain ol' fudgery.

Now place another H atom into this * * * universe, at a macro-scale

distance. * * Experimental physics tell us that these * two atoms
will then experience forces * proportional to their (equal) masses in the direction of the other atom * * * * * * * (remember that forces

are vector * * * * * quantities), and their motions will be * * affected accordingly. Yet this flow * * * * model can't explain

these forces. How * is a net force generated?

Take *any* two masses, even two H atoms separated by any distance. Each
is a flow sink, generating a zone of lower pressure between the two.
Higher pressure from 'behind' literally *pushes* the two sinks toward
each other. How does he suppose interstellar gas and dust accretes into
protostellar clouds and then into suns?


You think that gravity is instantaneous? I like better the idea that
all gravitational interactions are local, whether you attribute those
inteactions to space that's warped, or space that's flowing, not any
kind of direct interaction beteen two distant masses. The only
scenarios I've seen that would test intantaneous gravity would be
situations such as if the Sun were to suddenly disappear. We know
that these kinds of things never happen in nature, and that in itseff
should give us something to ponder. Lack of aberration has other
explanations.

Merry Christmas, oc! Thought I saw the Christmas star last night, but
then decided it was only Jupiter.

Double-A