How is Gravity Actually Caused? (was - How Do Gravitons . . .)

On Apr 18, 2:41 pm, oldcoot wrote:
Seems we're down to far less than one atom per
m3 as it is... Is our all-inclusive universe at less than one atom/km3 doable?

You're missin' the whole point. An atom is like a vacuole or 'bubble'
embedded in the much-more-energy-dense 'Ocean' of space. Even if there
were *zero* atoms in a cubic kilometer of space, the 'Ocean' itself
would remain unassailed and unaffected.
There's the parable of Mr. Fish swimming deep in
the ocean, and he sees a gas bubble that's come out of solution. To
him, the bubble is 'being' while the much-more-substantial ocean in
which it's embedded is 'not-being'. Similarly, we interpret atoms and
atomic structure as 'being' and the 'Ocean' of space as not-being or
'void'. This is the grand ruse that was foisted on the scientific
world 80 - 85 years ago with the instigation of the 'no medium', space-
as-void paradigm.
One must absolutely learn to grasp this principle
of *embeddedness* if he/she is to understand matter's relationship to
space.. and the fact that all atoms and atomic structure are
**processes of** the flow of space itself venting down to its lowest
pressure-state.

Where's the cosmic drain hole for our universe, or even for the Milky
Way?
.. - Brad Guth

On Apr 18, 2:23*pm, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

*That is why it (gravity) is such a big mystery.
That is why GR is the best we have and yet it does not fit.

GR certainly 'fits' as far as being a *description of effects* of
gravity (ie., "curvature of space"). But GR does not go to the next
step, which is to _explain the mechanism_ causing the effects being
described. GR's cryptic 'curvature' describes the _rate of
acceleration_ of flowing space.

Where's the cosmic drain hole for our universe, or even for the Milky
Way?

At the core of every atomic nucleus, AND through the twin maws of the
'Engine' of the universe. http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/

On Apr 18, 3:22 pm, oldcoot wrote:
Where's the cosmic drain hole for our universe, or even for the Milky
Way?

At the core of every atomic nucleus, AND through the twin maws of the
'Engine' of the universe. http://community-2.webtv.net/oldcoot/ContinuousBigBang/

OK on the CBB, because it's as good of theory as any.

How many CBB universes do you think are out there?

What was the size of the original SMBH (super massive black hole ot
God fart) that created our universe, that which has now gotten itself
expanded out to a pathetic density of less than one atom/m3 ???
.. - Brad Guth

oc Yes GR has its math going for it. that is why its good. It gives a
cause for the effects of gravity. Gravity has to come from the micro
realm same as submicroscopic particles are the building blocks for
matter. That is why I use photons for the cloud that is the structure of
electrons,and that this cloud of photons spin at 'c' Why an electron
has a negative charge I know not. Can I give you a realistic definition
of "charge" I can not Charge is tricky stuff. Gravitons are tricky
stuff Space is tricky stuff Micro realm space is bigger than
macro if you relate the size of objects immersed in it.and that means
there is more space between an electron to the proton in the hydrogen
atom than the space between Sun and Pluto. Go figure bert

How many CBB universes do you think are out there?

Numerically, as many as the number of hydrogen atoms in 'our'
universe. This was discussed at length here in past years. In Gordon
Wolter's model, our entire macro universe is a simple H atom in a
higher cosmos, *embedded* bubble-like in the spatial medium of that
higher cosmos. If you're familiar with Sagan's 'Cosmos' series,
remember that Sagan toyed briefly with the universe-as-atom idea. But
being a Void-Spacer and having no concept of embeddedness, he couldn't
go anywhere with it.

What was the size of the original SMBH (super massive black hole ot
God fart) that created our universe...?

Wolter coined the term 'megagalactic' to describe the size of the CBB
macro-universe. So the mass of its centerpiece 'Engine' would be
"mega" compared to a galactic-scale BH. So mass-wise, it's one BIG
mama. And incidently, it's 'waaay more than sufficiently massive to
gravitationally close the universe and account for the perceived
"missing mass".

...that which has now gotten itself
expanded out to a pathetic density of less than one atom/m3 ???

Again, in your fixation on atoms per unit volume of space, you're not
grasping the concept of *embeddedness*, that atoms are the least
substantial, bubble-like "holes" in the spatial medium, or that in
terms of energy density, matter is the ephemeral and transient
'dustbunny' tagged onto the pre-existant Plenum of space.
Think back to that instant in time that the mainsteam
calls "inflation" and then the nucleosynthesis of the first elements.
In the rapidly-depressurizing spatial medium, the first elements
"fizzed out of solution" just like popping the cork on a soda bottle.
But only the lightest elements had a chance to form before the
pressure dropped below fusion level. That's why only the lightest
elements predominate in the universe, and why primordial deuterium
(which cannot be created by stellar processes) exists in the
universe.

oc Not the hydrogen atom to relate a universe with but best to use snow
flake. That lets me say again that there are as many universes as snow
flakes in an endless storm. Both are very symetrical. Bert

On Apr 19, 8:09*am, (G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote:

Not the hydrogen atom to relate a universe with but best to use snow
flake. *That lets me say again that there are as many universes as snow
flakes in an endless storm. Both are very symetrical.

If you recall Bert, it was stated from the outset that under the CBB
model, the H atom is the microscale analog of the macro-universe,
sharing the same toroidal planform. The macro universe with its
central 'Engine' is reflected in microscale by the H atom with its
central proton and surrounding electron shell. This modified sphere
'dimpled in' at the poles, with its dual hemispheres and common
equator, rotating on a polar axis, is the most primal form in nature
from which all else 'fractalizes' and evolves (under the CBB model
that is).

oc Hydrogen atom to simple a structure to relate to a complex universe.
That is why a complicated snow flake structure is much more relative
Bert

Any where YOU are, BradBoi! lmfjao!

Saul Levy


On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:50:43 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth
wrote:

Where's the cosmic drain hole for our universe, or even for the Milky
Way?
. - Brad Guth