On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 08:38:45 +0000 (UTC), "Wizard-Of-Oz"
On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 05:27:01 +0000 (UTC), "Wizard-Of-Oz"
On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 04:59:45 +0000 (UTC), "Wizard-Of-Oz"
On Sun, 13 Apr 2014 01:45:40 +0000 (UTC), "Wizard-Of-Oz"
Divergent Matter
A Physical Model, But Will It Work
No .. because what your model describes DOES NOT HAPPEN.
The earth isn't blowing apart with enormous velocity giving the
illusion of gravity.
And you know this how?
That you do NOT know this is proof that you're a moron
The only proof I see is that you are
not willing to try the math to see if it
might work.
There is no POINT in doing so because what you claim DOES NOT HAPPEN
IN REALITY
And you would rather imagine the
apparent and measured upward acceleration
of the surface as some misinterpreted thing
instead of simply an upward acceleration?
The whole planet is accelerating 'upward' .. it is not expanding.
You'rea moron
Beside the point. :-)
Not when what you propose is moronic.
Because you don't "see" the expansion,
There is NO expansion to be seen. But I clearly see that you are a
moron.
It isn't seen
'Seen' means observerd
, it is felt, and measured,
No, none of those things either. IT DOES NOT HAPPEN
There is NO expansion of the earth or the moon or the sun or apples on
a tree.
doesn't that mean anything, isn't that
what acceleration is?
You simply don't understand. It appers that is not curable.
and even refuse to accept that expanding
regions of gas will form spheres without
gravity????
I said nothing about gas, and so the fuck what?
99% of the visible universe is gas
in spheres that can be expanding to
cause gravity instead of the Newtonian
"attraction".
Bullshit. Utter bullshit.
I feel it is important to find out if
the model can work because the stellar
dynamics would be completely different.
You model does not work because WHAT IT SAYS DOES NOT HAPPEN
The more models the better, even
if some don't work, comparison and
discussion is how ideas can originate.
You model does not work because WHAT IT SAYS DOES NOT HAPPEN
Keep saying that
Because it is true
You believe everything you see?
but if gases not
contained expand, with only inertia
retarding that expansion
No, only gravity retarding it
News for you, the effects of gravity
are identical to the effects of inertia.
, then stars
can form from that expansion alone,
No, they can't
I don't think you have done the math,
I don't think you can do the math.
and enough compression can result
There is no compression unless there is gravity
The effects of gravity are the effects
of inertia.
from the inertial containment
No such thing
It is a common term in physics.
http://mynuclearfusion.blogspot.com/2010/08/global-warming-los-alamos-does-inertial.html
for
fusion to start, without any attractive
gravity or a gravity field (other than
the retarding inertia of the outer parts
of the star).
Utter bullshit
The effects of gravity are identical
to the effects of inertia.
If gravity isn't needed to form stars,
But it is
So it has been thought, but it
is also known, the effect is the same
as inertia.
then maybe there isn't any gravity
except the mechanism of expansion.
Bullshit
No, more than just speculation too.
This scenario seems to provide
a mechanism to cause most stars
No, it does not
Let me finish the sentence.
to be less than a few solar masses,
because as soon as fusion starts,
any extra material nearby would
be blown away.
You're full of shit
I'll reduce that amount in a few minutes.