![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Painius wrote,
...we must keep in mind that these are no more, no less, mathematical constructs for us to use to better understand what's happening out in the "real" world, the world of "physical reality". That's very true in the world of pragmatic "applied sciences". But there is an interesting case study on the 'Primacy of Math' axiom going on over in that "Tunnel through the center of the Earth" thread. The premise is based on 'gravity-as-geometry'. So "The Math" is calculating acceleration rates of an object dropped down the hole based on 'gravity-as-geometry'. It shows the object under constant acceleration all the way to center. But what if gravity is really caused by Flowing Space? Would there be a difference in the acceleration curve? Well, let's look at a column of spaceflow as it enters the Earth's surface (or surface datum as it were) at 11.2 km/sec or 7 miles a second. As it descends, velocity drops off and continues dropping with increasing depth (due to the increasing amount of gravitating mass "above/behind" and abeam). And the acceleration component of the spaceflow drops concomitantly with velocity. Velocity (and its acceleration component) will drop to zero at center. To an object freefalling in the spaceflow, maximum velocity ('terminal velocity') will be reached 'waaay before center. And it will be some fraction of the peak 11.2 km/s surface velocity. The object will "coast" on conserved momentum on through center at this reduced velocity, whereupon it will begin encountering spaceflow coming head-on from the opposite direction. So the FSP presents a considerably different picture than the 'gravity-as-geometry' paradigm and the pefectly good Math describing it. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"oldcoot" wrote in message...
... Painius wrote, ...we must keep in mind that these are no more, no less, mathematical constructs for us to use to better understand what's happening out in the "real" world, the world of "physical reality". That's very true in the world of pragmatic "applied sciences". But there is an interesting case study on the 'Primacy of Math' axiom going on over in that "Tunnel through the center of the Earth" thread. The premise is based on 'gravity-as-geometry'. So "The Math" is calculating acceleration rates of an object dropped down the hole based on 'gravity-as-geometry'. It shows the object under constant acceleration all the way to center. Constant acceleration? How can that be? Even a theory based upon mere curvature of space and geometry ought to recognize the changes in intensity of the gravitational field on an object as it moves through such a tunnel. Is somebody saying that the force on the object is basically constant? That, too, would have to be a myth. But what if gravity is really caused by Flowing Space? Would there be a difference in the acceleration curve? Well, let's look at a column of spaceflow as it enters the Earth's surface (or surface datum as it were) at 11.2 km/sec or 7 miles a second. As it descends, velocity drops off and continues dropping with increasing depth (due to the increasing amount of gravitating mass "above/behind" and abeam). And the acceleration component of the spaceflow drops concomitantly with velocity. Velocity (and its acceleration component) will drop to zero at center. To an object freefalling in the spaceflow, maximum velocity ('terminal velocity') will be reached 'waaay before center. And it will be some fraction of the peak 11.2 km/s surface velocity. The object will "coast" on conserved momentum on through center at this reduced velocity, whereupon it will begin encountering spaceflow coming head-on from the opposite direction. So the FSP presents a considerably different picture than the 'gravity-as-geometry' paradigm and the pefectly good Math describing it. I'll try to check out that thread a little later. happy new days and... starry starry nights! -- Indelibly yours, Paine Ellsworth P.S.: "In real life, I assure you, there is no such thing as algebra." Fran Lebowitz P.P.S.: http://yummycake.secretsgolden.com http://garden-of-ebooks.blogspot.com http://painellsworth.net |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
An Attractive Proposition - ping Timo | oldcoot[_2_] | Misc | 2 | January 5th 09 02:31 PM |
An Attractive Proposition - ping Timo | oldcoot[_2_] | Misc | 0 | January 2nd 09 04:28 PM |
An Attractive Proposition - ping Timo | G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] | Misc | 0 | December 28th 08 12:28 PM |
An Attractive Proposition - ping Timo | oldcoot[_2_] | Misc | 3 | December 26th 08 02:17 PM |
An Attractive Proposition - ping Timo | oldcoot[_2_] | Misc | 2 | December 22nd 08 10:44 PM |