Eric Flesch wrote in news:mt2.0-23044-1321306837
@hydra.herts.ac.uk:

On Mon, 31 Oct 11 07:11:54 GMT, Eric Flesch wrote:
My stance is that they are both wrong.

I've had time now to look over JT's gedankenexpirements and EG's site.
And what I see is a house of cards. Basically if we start with the
axioms of matter-energy and a flat 3-manifold, then we end up,
fractally, with notions of gravity gravitating etc.

Do you think the 'house of cards' comment have anything to do with the
fact that everything you wrote after that was nonsense?

The full Einstein field equations are nonlinear by their very nature.
You can even see this when trying to create first order solutions while
demanding the stress tensor be divergence free, in that you can't do it
without including higher order contributions...



My point is that by adjusting the axioms, we can get a simpler
outcome. No, I don't have the solution, but I know a skunk when I
smell it.

Let me get this straight. You do not understand general relativity, but
when presented with an aspect of it you don't like you think it stinks?
Is this really sci.astro.research?

There is no axiom to 'adjust'. This is a fundamental consequence of the
strong equivalence principle. Change that and you don't have relativity
anymore.


JT's gedankens basically say that I would have a gedanken
perpetual-motion machine because other gedankens (perfect springs,
etc) could be used to make one, given my intitial stance. But if you
need X to make X, then you have not truly made X. So I think JT's
gedankens do not prove his point.

Uh, what?

Could you elaborate on how you feel you could turn gravitational binding
energy into perpetual motion?

The laws of thermodynamics and conservation of energy (when the concept
exist and are relevant) both apply in general relativity.


On that note, I'll bow out of this discussion, because I don't have
the breakthrough. But if you read the literature of 100 years ago,
you'll be struck by how many ladders were leaning against the wrong
walls then. Guess what, today is no different.

cheers, Eric

Uh, what?

Hold on now.

If you are going to make a bunch of ridiculous statements then leave the
discussion, why make the ridiculous statements at all?