| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Raheman" |
| Date: |
06 Mar 2004 10:24:22 PM |
| Object: |
dark energy? nah.. |
I have an alternative idea. It has to do with gravity. I do not
doubt the theory of gravity, however. Instead, I contest its
manifestation in our universe. That is, gravity itself is causing the
expansion of the universe.
Let me start with the example. It is not immediatelly apparent, but
two masses which have sufficient velocities (both a particular speed
and trajectory) can pass each other without colliding, and both gain
speed. To illustrate, consider the following diagram; two masses
(indicated by astrix * ) A and B each with respective velocities in
the direction of vA and vB.
* <-- mass A
||
\/ vA
vB /\
||
mass B --> *
If the speed of mass A and mass B aren't great then, eventually, the
two will collide. However, if the speed is increased, a point will be
reached where the two masses will come together, but instead of
colliding they will "swing around each other" and exit. The whole
incident, entering, "swinging around each other" and exiting, would
certainly be analagous to a "dosi doe" in Folk dance. However, this
"dosi doe" can cause both masses' speeds to increase.
As I said, the speed of the masses must be quite great in order for a
gravitational "dosi doe". Our universe is full of masses all hurtling
by each other at phenominal speeds. There is sufficient room between
stars and planets so that they do not collide often; yet, that
sufficient room (and great speed of masses) is ideal for gravitational
"dosi does". Thus, I believe that there isn't anything like a dark
energy. It's simply a manifestation of gravity.
Since the two masses gained speed, it is obvious that I'm implying
that the law of conservation of energy is wrong. Yes, it is wrong.
I'm sure everybody thinks I'm talking gibberish by now. If you don't,
and would like to read my outlandish thoughts, then just go to Google
groups search engine, and search for "ideas blochee".
.
|
|
| User: "Franz Heymann" |
|
| Title: Re: dark energy? nah.. |
07 Mar 2004 03:26:24 AM |
|
|
"Raheman" <blochee@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
news:9b2ad1a2.0403062024.64f88c75@posting.google.com...
I have an alternative idea. It has to do with gravity. I do not
doubt the theory of gravity, however. Instead, I contest its
manifestation in our universe. That is, gravity itself is causing the
expansion of the universe.
Let me start with the example. It is not immediatelly apparent, but
two masses which have sufficient velocities (both a particular speed
and trajectory) can pass each other without colliding, and both gain
speed. To illustrate, consider the following diagram; two masses
(indicated by astrix * ) A and B each with respective velocities in
the direction of vA and vB.
* <-- mass A
||
\/ vA
vB /\
||
mass B --> *
If the speed of mass A and mass B aren't great then, eventually, the
two will collide. However, if the speed is increased, a point will be
reached where the two masses will come together, but instead of
colliding they will "swing around each other" and exit. The whole
incident, entering, "swinging around each other" and exiting, would
certainly be analagous to a "dosi doe" in Folk dance. However, this
"dosi doe" can cause both masses' speeds to increase.
Only in what I would roughly call the "approach phase". In the CM coords,
the speeds are back to normal when the objects have receded fully.
[snip]
Franz
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: dark energy? nah.. |
07 Mar 2004 11:29:24 AM |
|
|
Raheman wrote:
I have an alternative idea. It has to do with gravity. I do not
doubt the theory of gravity, however. Instead, I contest its
manifestation in our universe. That is, gravity itself is causing the
expansion of the universe.
Let me start with the example. It is not immediatelly apparent, but
two masses which have sufficient velocities (both a particular speed
and trajectory) can pass each other without colliding, and both gain
speed.
[snip]
*****. Violation of conservation laws. Learn something about
vector summation and reference frames in Newtonian physics. You
assertion is crap with four-vectors, too.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net!
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
