A circular orbit and the strength of gravity

On Dec 28, 2:46 pm, Michael Moroney wrote:
" writes:

A circular orbit has only speed and no strength of gravity.
The equivalence principle does not apply if there is no acceleration.

Except, there is acceleration, of course. That's why the orbit is curved
and not a straight line.

Although gravity can very easily be interpreted as a force as well
(just like Newtonian law of gravity) under the very mathematics of GR,
the main stream misconception is to distance themselves to be as far
away as the classical understandings as if Pagan in nature.

Well, if space [and time] is really curved in the orbits in such a way
that the orbiting planet would continue its conception of straight
path to be observed as circular orbit by someone at the center of the
gravitating star, then any observers on the orbiting planet could
never see any stars tangent to the planet’s orbital path. Since this
is not true, the concept that things move because of curved space or
spacetime is just wrong and very stupid. shrug

On 12/29/2011 1:28 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Dec 28, 2:46 pm, Michael Moroney wrote:
m writes:

A circular orbit has only speed and no strength of gravity.
The equivalence principle does not apply if there is no acceleration.

Except, there is acceleration, of course. That's why the orbit is curved
and not a straight line.

Although gravity can very easily be interpreted as a force as well
(just like Newtonian law of gravity) under the very mathematics of GR,
the main stream misconception is to distance themselves to be as far
away as the classical understandings as if Pagan in nature.

Well, if space [and time] is really curved in the orbits in such a way
that the orbiting planet would continue its conception of straight
path to be observed as circular orbit by someone at the center of the
gravitating star, then any observers on the orbiting planet could
never see any stars tangent to the planet’s orbital path.

They may certainly see light coming in along a tangent.
Perhaps you mistakenly believe that light must follow the same path as
the planet?

Since this
is not true, the concept that things move because of curved space or
spacetime is just wrong and very stupid.shrug

On Dec 28, 11:28*pm, Koobee Wublee wrote:
On Dec 28, 2:46 pm, Michael Moroney wrote:

" writes:
A circular orbit has only speed and no strength of gravity.
The equivalence principle does not apply if there is no acceleration.

Except, there is acceleration, of course. *That's why the orbit is curved
and not a straight line.

Although gravity can very easily be interpreted as a force as well
(just like Newtonian law of gravity) under the very mathematics of GR,
the main stream misconception is to distance themselves to be as far
away as the classical understandings as if Pagan in nature.

Well, if space [and time] is really curved in the orbits in such a way
that the orbiting planet would continue its conception of straight
path to be observed as circular orbit by someone at the center of the
gravitating star, then any observers on the orbiting planet could
never see any stars tangent to the planet’s orbital path. *Since this
is not true, the concept that things move because of curved space or
spacetime is just wrong and very stupid. *shrug

Since when is mainstream science always correct with its
interpretations?

Do individual photons even move, the way most think of photons moving?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Dec 29, 7:01 am, PD wrote:
On 12/29/2011 1:28 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:

Although gravity can very easily be interpreted as a force as well
(just like Newtonian law of gravity) under the very mathematics of GR,
the main stream misconception is to distance themselves to be as far
away as the classical understandings as if Pagan in nature.

Well, if space [and time] is really curved in the orbits in such a way
that the orbiting planet would continue its conception of straight
path to be observed as circular orbit by someone at the center of the
gravitating star, then any observers on the orbiting planet could
never see any stars tangent to the planet’s orbital path.

They may certainly see light coming in along a tangent.

Oh, no. He was hoping for a bigger catch. As usual, the one who took
the bait is none other than the village idiot, PD, who is supposed to
be a physics professor at a somewhat decent university of some sort.
PD is always considered to be a by-catch in any angler’s almanac.
shrug

Perhaps you mistakenly believe that light must follow the same path as
the planet?

So, according to Einstein Dingleberries, spacetime is curved in such a
way that different traversed speed would experience different banking
just like the Indy-500 track. In any banked raceway, at zero speed,
the only way is straight down. Well, down to the gravitating source
that is. At high speed, you can negotiate any banking with ease with
falling down towards the gravitating source.

What if there is no gravitating source? Would the race car at no
speed still “fall”?

Well, Riemann did try to pin-point the culprit on curved space but did
not go anywhere. That is understandable. According to the
mathematics, it does not matter how much space is curved. Objects
just do not respond to curved space spontaneously. So, the only thing
GR can offer is the curved time which is gravitational time dilation.
This means the temporal dimension should not be considered as a
geometric dimension. Any conjecture attempting to integrate the
temporal dimension into the spatial geometry is playing with fire.
shrug

The curvature in the temporal dimension (gravitational time dilation)
is so special that if it is flat, there would be no gravitation. If
it is the opposite of time dilation, it would result in anti-gravity.
There are the cases regardless how flat or curved space is. So,
according to mathematics, it is not entirely true to claim gravity is
a manifestation of curved spacetime. In fact, it is a manifestation
of gravitational time dilation only according to the mathematics.

So, calling gravity as the result of curved spacetime is wrong. It is
solely a phenomenon of gravitational time dilation according to
mathematics. That means the temporal dimension is special. Self-
styled physicists cannot casually mix in the temporal dimension and
claim the curvature of spacetime as the culprit of gravity. shrug

Well, if the curved time is special, that spells the doom for both SR
and GR since the fundamental treatment in mathematics is to call the
temporal dimension a fourth dimension. A religion is born, and the
rest is history. shrug

Yes, the whole episode of SR and GR can be summarized as follows.

** FAITH IS LOGIC
** LYING IS TEACHING
** NITWIT IS GENIUS
** OCCULT IS SCIENCE
** FICTION IS THEORY
** PARADOX IS KOSHER
** FUDGING IS DERIVATION
** BULL**** IS TRUTH
** MYSTICISM IS WISDOM
** BELIEVING IS LEARNING
** IGNORANCE IS KNOWLEDGE
** PRIESTHOOD IS TENURE
** CONJECTURE IS REALITY
** HANDWAVING IS REASONING
** PLAGIARISM IS CREATIVITY
** FRAUDULENCE IS FACT
** MATHEMAGICS IS MATHEMATICS
** INCONSISTENCY IS CONSISTENCY
** INTERPRETATION IS VERIFICATION

shrug