Universe itself is a black hole.

Mark Earnest escreveu:
**The gravity of Earth only appears to be bending the straight line of light
from the star. It isn't truly bending it at all. As you can tell when you
are looking at the star.

Being at the endpoint of a path of light, how can you tell it's not bent?

And no, it is not Earth's small gravity which made it bend from the star
until getting here.

**Same thing with motion. The star only appears to be a little off from
where it actually is. But you are seeing it where it actually is.

No, you're seeing the light of a star from, say, 2,000 years ago. It is
way off of its current position in space.

**Hint: seeing is a lot more then simply light hitting the retina.
It involves comprehending.

**iow: your mind processes the stars into their correct positions.


You may ask that to anyone plotting
trajectories of rockets and so forth. Much more evident on larger
scales than everyday human ones, which is what you experience is
telling you...

**Trajectories these days are always curves, not lines.

Exactly what I said. What are you missing?

**Nothing. Why did you bring it up?

I did brought it up precisely to show you that plotting trajectories
will never involve straight lines because it's unreal not to take into
account forces applying on the body.

Straight lines are only straight in a perfect, mathbook, Ptolomaic
universe, not this one.

**There is nothing imperfect about this universe.
It is our observations and understanding of it that are imperfect.

Not mine, yours.

I don't even need to go as far as Einstein complex transforms to show
you that: according to Newton, a body is supposed to maintain its
state of rest or constant velocity if no force is being applied to
it. It's the law of inertia, remember?

"The vis insita, or innate force of matter is a power of resisting, by
which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavors to preserve in its
present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward
in a straight line."

So, in that case, the equation governing the motion of a body is a
simple 1 degree polynomial, resulting indeed in a straigh line graph.
In face of a force applying to a body, either accelerating or
desaccelerating it, the polynomial turns to degree 2, resulting in a
curve.

Sadly a setting in which there are no forces at all applying to a body
is an *idealized setting*: it doesn't correspond to reality, it
simply doesn't exist. Here on Earth there's friction and in space
there's always, always a gravitational pull from some body around, no
matter how weak. The result of motion here is always a polynomial
with degree beyond 1, meaning a curve, however slight it is...

Straight lines are a math abstraction, not a physical property, sorry.

**Get your head out of the books long enough to breathe, sir.
Those books aren't exactly sacred texts, you know.
And if they were, scientists would reject them for that very reason.

what are you even saying, troll? Did you even grasp anything I told you?

forget...

--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9

On May 29, 4:13*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:
Mark Straight lines can be visualized as 100% straight,but reality is
they are all curved. *Trebert


Bert, how could we tell that some lines are curved unless we had
straight lines to compare then to?

Double-A

"namekuseijin" wrote in message
...
Mark Earnest escreveu:
**The gravity of Earth only appears to be bending the straight line of
light
from the star. It isn't truly bending it at all. As you can tell when
you
are looking at the star.

Being at the endpoint of a path of light, how can you tell it's not bent?

And no, it is not Earth's small gravity which made it bend from the star
until getting here.

**Same thing with motion. The star only appears to be a little off from
where it actually is. But you are seeing it where it actually is.

No, you're seeing the light of a star from, say, 2,000 years ago. It is
way off of its current position in space.

**Tell me, easy question he have you ever seen a star?
Simple yes or no will do.



**Hint: seeing is a lot more then simply light hitting the retina.
It involves comprehending.

**iow: your mind processes the stars into their correct positions.


You may ask that to anyone plotting
trajectories of rockets and so forth. Much more evident on larger
scales than everyday human ones, which is what you experience is
telling you...

**Trajectories these days are always curves, not lines.

Exactly what I said. What are you missing?

**Nothing. Why did you bring it up?

I did brought it up precisely to show you that plotting trajectories will
never involve straight lines because it's unreal not to take into account
forces applying on the body.

Curves are just a natural motion while steering, and not just by space
ships.


Straight lines are only straight in a perfect, mathbook, Ptolomaic
universe, not this one.

**There is nothing imperfect about this universe.
It is our observations and understanding of it that are imperfect.

Not mine, yours.

Getting personal here? Try harder.


I don't even need to go as far as Einstein complex transforms to show
you that: according to Newton, a body is supposed to maintain its
state of rest or constant velocity if no force is being applied to
it. It's the law of inertia, remember?

"The vis insita, or innate force of matter is a power of resisting, by
which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavors to preserve in its
present state, whether it be of rest, or of moving uniformly forward
in a straight line."

So, in that case, the equation governing the motion of a body is a
simple 1 degree polynomial, resulting indeed in a straigh line graph.
In face of a force applying to a body, either accelerating or
desaccelerating it, the polynomial turns to degree 2, resulting in a
curve.

Sadly a setting in which there are no forces at all applying to a body
is an *idealized setting*: it doesn't correspond to reality, it
simply doesn't exist. Here on Earth there's friction and in space
there's always, always a gravitational pull from some body around, no
matter how weak. The result of motion here is always a polynomial
with degree beyond 1, meaning a curve, however slight it is...

Straight lines are a math abstraction, not a physical property, sorry.

**Get your head out of the books long enough to breathe, sir.
Those books aren't exactly sacred texts, you know.
And if they were, scientists would reject them for that very reason.

what are you even saying, troll? Did you even grasp anything I told you?

That incantation? No. I deal with science the way it really is: in pure,
logical thought.

On May 29, 6:37*pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
**Tell me, easy question he *have you ever seen a star?
Simple yes or no will do.

Yes. No, I have no clue whether its light has reached me via a
straight line. More likely not since it's been bent.

Curves are just a natural motion while steering, and not just by space
ships.

Right, because there's torque, friction and other forces at work. In
space, you may try very hard to go via a straight line, but you'll
soon realize you're going over a curve because of gravitational fields
not accounted for.

what are you even saying, troll? *Did you even grasp anything I told you?

That incantation? *No. *I deal with science the way it really is: in pure,
logical thought.

There's no incantation other than a simplified argument based on
Newtonian formula for motion. Plain, tested and testable logical
thought: when you have forces upon a body (gravity all around), your
original straight trajectories go curvy. That's all. It's not even
physics, you may toy around with a plotter and some simple linear and
bilinear functions to see the graph results...

Fact is there's no straight lines in this universe because there's
*always* lots of forces acting upon a body at any moment (friction,
gravity, electromagnetic) and the chances they're acting all in a same
single direction is *null*.

Straight lines are an idealized abstract concept from math. Your
floor may look plain enough, your mirror and the line between your
fingers, but that's only so far as you have pretty useless measurement
devices to make it out. You simply can't see the results of the
forces very slightly deforming these objects with your bare eyes on a
small scale.

Anyone else willing to feed this guy? I'm done here...

"namekuseijin" wrote in message
...
On May 29, 6:37 pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
**Tell me, easy question he have you ever seen a star?
Simple yes or no will do.

Yes. No, I have no clue whether its light has reached me via a
straight line. More likely not since it's been bent.

Curves are just a natural motion while steering, and not just by space
ships.

Right, because there's torque, friction and other forces at work. In
space, you may try very hard to go via a straight line, but you'll
soon realize you're going over a curve because of gravitational fields
not accounted for.

what are you even saying, troll? Did you even grasp anything I told you?

That incantation? No. I deal with science the way it really is: in pure,
logical thought.

There's no incantation other than a simplified argument based on
Newtonian formula for motion. Plain, tested and testable logical
thought: when you have forces upon a body (gravity all around), your
original straight trajectories go curvy. That's all. It's not even
physics, you may toy around with a plotter and some simple linear and
bilinear functions to see the graph results...

Fact is there's no straight lines in this universe because there's
*always* lots of forces acting upon a body at any moment (friction,
gravity, electromagnetic) and the chances they're acting all in a same
single direction is *null*.

Straight lines are an idealized abstract concept from math. Your
floor may look plain enough, your mirror and the line between your
fingers, but that's only so far as you have pretty useless measurement
devices to make it out. You simply can't see the results of the
forces very slightly deforming these objects with your bare eyes on a
small scale.

Anyone else willing to feed this guy? I'm done here...

**Alright you can go.
One closing thought, though:
You have seen a star?
You said yes, you have.
Then you have looked across time, and seen the star
in its actual position, rather than the one is seems to be in.
You have looked across light years.
Well done.

On May 29, 6:26*pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
"namekuseijin" wrote in message

...
On May 29, 6:37 pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:

**Tell me, easy question he have you ever seen a star?
Simple yes or no will do.

Yes. *No, I have no clue whether its light has reached me via a
straight line. *More likely not since it's been bent.

Curves are just a natural motion while steering, and not just by space
ships.

Right, because there's torque, friction and other forces at work. *In
space, you may try very hard to go via a straight line, but you'll
soon realize you're going over a curve because of gravitational fields
not accounted for.

what are you even saying, troll? Did you even grasp anything I told you?

That incantation? No. I deal with science the way it really is: in pure,
logical thought.

There's no incantation other than a simplified argument based on
Newtonian formula for motion. *Plain, tested and testable logical
thought: *when you have forces upon a body (gravity all around), your
original straight trajectories go curvy. *That's all. *It's not even
physics, you may toy around with a plotter and some simple linear and
bilinear functions to see the graph results...

Fact is there's no straight lines in this universe because there's
*always* lots of forces acting upon a body at any moment (friction,
gravity, electromagnetic) and the chances they're acting all in a same
single direction is *null*.

Straight lines are an idealized abstract concept from math. *Your
floor may look plain enough, your mirror and the line between your
fingers, but that's only so far as you have pretty useless measurement
devices to make it out. *You simply can't see the results of the
forces very slightly deforming these objects with your bare eyes on a
small scale.

Anyone else willing to feed this guy? *I'm done here...

**Alright you can go.
One closing thought, though:
You have seen a star?
You said yes, you have.
Then you have looked across time, and seen the star
in its actual position, rather than the one is seems to be in.
You have looked across light years.
Well done.

Everything we see or detect is as you say in the past, and everything
including photons are in orbit around something. It is unlikely
photons or gravitons escape the event horizon of our closed universe.

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On May 29, 6:26 pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
"namekuseijin" wrote in message

...
On May 29, 6:37 pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:

**Tell me, easy question he have you ever seen a star?
Simple yes or no will do.

Yes. No, I have no clue whether its light has reached me via a
straight line. More likely not since it's been bent.

Curves are just a natural motion while steering, and not just by space
ships.

Right, because there's torque, friction and other forces at work. In
space, you may try very hard to go via a straight line, but you'll
soon realize you're going over a curve because of gravitational fields
not accounted for.

what are you even saying, troll? Did you even grasp anything I told
you?

That incantation? No. I deal with science the way it really is: in pure,
logical thought.

There's no incantation other than a simplified argument based on
Newtonian formula for motion. Plain, tested and testable logical
thought: when you have forces upon a body (gravity all around), your
original straight trajectories go curvy. That's all. It's not even
physics, you may toy around with a plotter and some simple linear and
bilinear functions to see the graph results...

Fact is there's no straight lines in this universe because there's
*always* lots of forces acting upon a body at any moment (friction,
gravity, electromagnetic) and the chances they're acting all in a same
single direction is *null*.

Straight lines are an idealized abstract concept from math. Your
floor may look plain enough, your mirror and the line between your
fingers, but that's only so far as you have pretty useless measurement
devices to make it out. You simply can't see the results of the
forces very slightly deforming these objects with your bare eyes on a
small scale.

Anyone else willing to feed this guy? I'm done here...

**Alright you can go.
One closing thought, though:
You have seen a star?
You said yes, you have.
Then you have looked across time, and seen the star
in its actual position, rather than the one is seems to be in.
You have looked across light years.
Well done.

Everything we see or detect is as you say in the past, and everything
including photons are in orbit around something. It is unlikely
photons or gravitons escape the event horizon of our closed universe.

**By "have looked across time" at a star I mean when you look at a star
you are looking beyond the apparent time of the remote past all the way
to the present.

**We see the star itself, not just the stream of light emitted toward us by
it.

On May 29, 7:26*pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

Everything we see or detect is as you say in the past, and everything
including photons are in orbit around something. *It is unlikely
photons or gravitons escape the event horizon of our closed universe.

**By "have looked across time" at a star I mean when you look at a star
you are looking beyond the apparent time of the remote past all the way
to the present.

**We see the star itself, not just the stream of light emitted toward us by
it.

TRACE sees the actual fluid and magnetic surface stuff of a star,
although it still sees only the past.

TRACE only cost us $50M. Thus far it's costing us less than $5M/year.

~ BG

"BradGuth" wrote in message
...
On May 29, 7:26 pm, "Mark Earnest" wrote:
"BradGuth" wrote in message

Everything we see or detect is as you say in the past, and everything
including photons are in orbit around something. It is unlikely
photons or gravitons escape the event horizon of our closed universe.

**By "have looked across time" at a star I mean when you look at a star
you are looking beyond the apparent time of the remote past all the way
to the present.

**We see the star itself, not just the stream of light emitted toward us
by
it.

TRACE sees the actual fluid and magnetic surface stuff of a star,
although it still sees only the past.

**If when you look into the clear night time sky and see a star, you are
seeing the star as it is. Your brain takes away the effect of its distance
from you.
Either you see the star or you don't. Be pure about it.



TRACE only cost us $50M. Thus far it's costing us less than $5M/year.

**What does TRACE stand for?


~ BG

Double A Even Jupiter can curve light. Photons would like to go from A
to B in a straight line,and they would,but the gravitation of all that
is in the universe sees to it by pulling on it that it will curve,
Eddington proved Einstein was right,and Einstein did not need that
experiment,for he knew his thinking was 100% on the money. I myself
have theories that are not as yet proven but know its 100% go figure
TreBert PS displacement proves curving. Not comparing