Where General Relativity Goes Wrong


 Science > Physics > Where General Relativity Goes Wrong

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 1

1
 
Topic: Science > Physics
User: "Mitchell"
Date: 22 Sep 2004 10:49:50 PM
Object: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong
The strength of gravity (in weight) is defined by the equivalence
principle -
it is equivelent to acceleration.
Acceleration and gravity (in weight) are equivalent.
I have been proposing that if acceleration has a limit then by
the equivalence principle gravity should have a limit.
I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.
Where Einstein went wrong is defining the equivalence principle as:
the acceleration that is equal to gravity is: The Rate of Change of
Velocity.
In including rate in this definition acceleration becomes a limitless
quantity.
He was wrong to include a rate in gravity's weight. There is none.
General Relativity went wrong in equating a limitless acceleration
with limitless or infinite gravitational strength.
In dropping the rate in the equivalence then what you have is
a more general equivalence principle. Gravity is then more general.
Gravity(weight) is equivalent to - only a change in velocity/without
time.
Without rate acceleration can no longer be a limitless quantity.
The speed limit then defines the change in speed limit and the
change in speed limit is c, the speed of light.
Getting rid of rate in the equivalence principle(gravity's weight)
defines a limited strength gravity theory; a limited General
Relativity.
That's where General Relativity has gone wrong: The equivalence
principle must become more generalized by removing the time variable
because it doesn't apply in gravity's weight. And in removing it
you have a limited strength gravity theory.
Gravitation's equivelent acceleration(in weight) is more general than
the limitless accelerated motion of matter - limitless by definition.
Limited gravity is the law.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --
.

User: "Igor"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 23 Sep 2004 05:46:20 PM
(Mitchell) wrote in message news:<9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>...

The strength of gravity (in weight) is defined by the equivalence
principle -
it is equivelent to acceleration.
Acceleration and gravity (in weight) are equivalent.
I have been proposing that if acceleration has a limit then by
the equivalence principle gravity should have a limit.

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.
Where Einstein went wrong is defining the equivalence principle as:
the acceleration that is equal to gravity is: The Rate of Change of
Velocity.
In including rate in this definition acceleration becomes a limitless
quantity.
He was wrong to include a rate in gravity's weight. There is none.
General Relativity went wrong in equating a limitless acceleration
with limitless or infinite gravitational strength.
In dropping the rate in the equivalence then what you have is
a more general equivalence principle. Gravity is then more general.
Gravity(weight) is equivalent to - only a change in velocity/without
time.
Without rate acceleration can no longer be a limitless quantity.
The speed limit then defines the change in speed limit and the
change in speed limit is c, the speed of light.

Getting rid of rate in the equivalence principle(gravity's weight)
defines a limited strength gravity theory; a limited General
Relativity.

That's where General Relativity has gone wrong: The equivalence
principle must become more generalized by removing the time variable
because it doesn't apply in gravity's weight. And in removing it
you have a limited strength gravity theory.

Gravitation's equivelent acceleration(in weight) is more general than
the limitless accelerated motion of matter - limitless by definition.
Limited gravity is the law.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --

So many bridges, so many goats, too little time...
.

User: "Bernardz"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 23 Sep 2004 08:54:49 AM
In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.

There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.
I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics
Say we had an object spinning on a string.
Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r
Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.


--
Very few people get their 15 minutes of fame. Those that do live off it
for the rest of their lives.
Observations of Bernard - No 68

.
User: "Mitchell"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 23 Sep 2004 07:00:59 PM
Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bbd80b5d008512a989b5b@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.


There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.

I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics

Say we had an object spinning on a string.

Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r

Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.

Bernard, what I am concerned with is V's limit. It is Special
Relativistic.
You cannot rotate at the speed of light.
It is true that force is unlimited because mass can be unlimited.
The same is true for gravity; it is limited to less than - an
equivalent - light speed acceleration in weight. But its force would
be unlimited because mass can be.
Limited gravity is the law. That is why there are no infinities in
gravity.
Black holes are the very failure of General Relativity.
Einstein knew as much. He didn't believe in a complete collapse.
But he never saw the obvious - that his gravity should be a limited
strength theory.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --
.
User: "Bernardz"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 25 Sep 2004 11:38:51 AM
In article <9c3da975.0409231600.64a4cf9@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bbd80b5d008512a989b5b@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.


There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.

I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics

Say we had an object spinning on a string.

Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r

Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.

Bernard, what I am concerned with is V's limit. It is Special
Relativistic.
You cannot rotate at the speed of light.
It is true that force is unlimited because mass can be unlimited.
The same is true for gravity; it is limited to less than - an
equivalent - light speed acceleration in weight. But its force would
be unlimited because mass can be.
Limited gravity is the law. That is why there are no infinities in
gravity.
Black holes are the very failure of General Relativity.
Einstein knew as much. He didn't believe in a complete collapse.
But he never saw the obvious - that his gravity should be a limited
strength theory.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --

However the observer could never reach C under SR. What he can do is get
closer and closer to it.
Bluntly however at C the observer on the ball would see the string as
having no length while his mass would be infinite. Velocity would be
unaffected by the speed so re-using this Newtonian formula we have
F=MV^2/R
The force is infinite.


--
Very few people get their 15 minutes of fame. Those that do live off it
for the rest of their lives.
Observations of Bernard - No 68

.
User: "Mitchell"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 25 Sep 2004 06:48:06 PM
Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bc04a22c925437b989b60@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409231600.64a4cf9@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bbd80b5d008512a989b5b@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.


There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.

I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics

Say we had an object spinning on a string.

Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r

Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.

Bernard, what I am concerned with is V's limit. It is Special
Relativistic.
You cannot rotate at the speed of light.
It is true that force is unlimited because mass can be unlimited.
The same is true for gravity; it is limited to less than - an
equivalent - light speed acceleration in weight. But its force would
be unlimited because mass can be.
Limited gravity is the law. That is why there are no infinities in
gravity.
Black holes are the very failure of General Relativity.
Einstein knew as much. He didn't believe in a complete collapse.
But he never saw the obvious - that his gravity should be a limited
strength theory.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --




However the observer could never reach C under SR. What he can do is get
closer and closer to it.

Bluntly however at C the observer on the ball would see the string as
having no length while his mass would be infinite. Velocity would be
unaffected by the speed so re-using this Newtonian formula we have

F=MV^2/R

The force is infinite.

I am not saying that force is not unlimited. I am saying that speed
and acceleration are.
Mitch Raemsch -- Time Moves --
.
User: "Bernardz"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 26 Sep 2004 07:46:39 AM
In article <9c3da975.0409251548.59e0ef06@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bc04a22c925437b989b60@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409231600.64a4cf9@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bbd80b5d008512a989b5b@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.


There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.

I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics

Say we had an object spinning on a string.

Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r

Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.

Bernard, what I am concerned with is V's limit. It is Special
Relativistic.
You cannot rotate at the speed of light.
It is true that force is unlimited because mass can be unlimited.
The same is true for gravity; it is limited to less than - an
equivalent - light speed acceleration in weight. But its force would
be unlimited because mass can be.
Limited gravity is the law. That is why there are no infinities in
gravity.
Black holes are the very failure of General Relativity.
Einstein knew as much. He didn't believe in a complete collapse.
But he never saw the obvious - that his gravity should be a limited
strength theory.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --




However the observer could never reach C under SR. What he can do is get
closer and closer to it.

Bluntly however at C the observer on the ball would see the string as
having no length while his mass would be infinite. Velocity would be
unaffected by the speed so re-using this Newtonian formula we have

F=MV^2/R

The force is infinite.

I am not saying that force is not unlimited. I am saying that speed
and acceleration are.
Mitch Raemsch -- Time Moves --

You are right about speed but not acceleration!
Same example
Newtonian physics
F=MA----------(1)
F=MV^2/R----(2)
=> A= V^2/R
As R approached zero , A (acceleration) -> infinity.
--
Very few people get their 15 minutes of fame. Those that do live off it
for the rest of their lives.
Observations of Bernard - No 68

.
User: "Mitchell"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 27 Sep 2004 02:20:35 PM
Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bc1653b1081a474989b66@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409251548.59e0ef06@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bc04a22c925437b989b60@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409231600.64a4cf9@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

Bernardz <Bernard_zzz@REMOVEhotmail.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1bbd80b5d008512a989b5b@news>...

In article <9c3da975.0409221949.39a202f8@posting.google.com>,
macromitch@internetCDS.com says...

I have been wrong in the past pushing accelerations limit; except for
rotation.
Rotation has a speed and a changing direction. Centrifugal force is
the
closest thing to gravity.
Even if that would be limitless gravity still would not be.


There is no limit to Centrifugal force in relativity either.

I will try to explain it using a slightly modified Newtonian physics

Say we had an object spinning on a string.

Under Newton the formula for the F=mv^2/r

Using relativity we know as the V increases the observer in the middle
will see that the M will increase and R will decrease so causing F to
increase.

Bernard, what I am concerned with is V's limit. It is Special
Relativistic.
You cannot rotate at the speed of light.
It is true that force is unlimited because mass can be unlimited.
The same is true for gravity; it is limited to less than - an
equivalent - light speed acceleration in weight. But its force would
be unlimited because mass can be.
Limited gravity is the law. That is why there are no infinities in
gravity.
Black holes are the very failure of General Relativity.
Einstein knew as much. He didn't believe in a complete collapse.
But he never saw the obvious - that his gravity should be a limited
strength theory.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --




However the observer could never reach C under SR. What he can do is get
closer and closer to it.

Bluntly however at C the observer on the ball would see the string as
having no length while his mass would be infinite. Velocity would be
unaffected by the speed so re-using this Newtonian formula we have

F=MV^2/R

The force is infinite.

I am not saying that force is not unlimited. I am saying that speed
and acceleration are.
Mitch Raemsch -- Time Moves --


You are right about speed but not acceleration!

Same example

Newtonian physics

F=MA----------(1)
F=MV^2/R----(2)

=> A= V^2/R

As R approached zero , A (acceleration) -> infinity.

Thankyou Bernard. Others on this board think I can't be corrected.
Just because they can't correct me doesn't mean that noone can.
I'll take your correction.
Acceleration is unlimited.
But gravity isn't. That's my point.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light falls --
.
User: "tj Frazir"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 27 Sep 2004 08:14:15 PM
Acceleration is limited.
Nothing will go faster than the conductor will allow AND the more
force the more resistance.
.
User: "Mitchell"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 28 Sep 2004 01:31:08 AM
(tj Frazir) wrote in message news:<2951-4158BAE7-329@storefull-3211.bay.webtv.net>...

Acceleration is limited.
Nothing will go faster than the conductor will allow AND the more
force the more resistance.

Don't confuse me tj.
What is your definition of acceleration?
Its mass that does the limiting.
Mitch Raemsch -- Light falls --
.
User: "tj Frazir"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 28 Sep 2004 09:08:17 AM
Its mass converted to resistance that dose the limiting. Energy and mass
are the same thing and interchangable.
Resistance to sudden impulsive force .
Sound is EMF waiting on mass to move.
F equals MA is the definition.
"A" is the displacment to less energy.

.




User: "Morituri-Max"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 26 Sep 2004 12:22:24 PM
Bernardz wrote:

I am not saying that force is not unlimited. I am saying that speed
and acceleration are.
Mitch Raemsch -- Time Moves --


You are right about speed but not acceleration!

Same example

Newtonian physics

F=MA----------(1)
F=MV^2/R----(2)

=> A= V^2/R

As R approached zero , A (acceleration) -> infinity.

Nice try at explaining it to him, but...
Don't waste your breath or time.. mitchell is one of the local trolls we are
trying to ignore here.. along with tj frazir, spaceman, nth complexity and ed
conrad.. the only thing you'll ever get from mitchell is "show me where I am
wrong, you can't" etc etc...
no reply necessary, just a local heads up for ya..
have a good one..
8 )
.


User: "tj Frazir"

Title: Re: Where mitchel gets B for effort. 25 Sep 2004 10:40:38 PM
Mitchel might be a green idiot..but unlike moon max he is trying to
discuss physics.
Moron max never tryed.
C is all the conductor will allow.
energy reacts with energy at C .
More energy wount go faster it will change directions more.
If your going as fast as physics lets you and you add energy you will
just change directions.
Electrons dont act like planets.
A planets path is predicted with GR but an electrons path is predicted
by SR.
YOU all have a rite to your opinions but dont have a rite to your own
facts.
ALL morons can post is thier opinions.

.


User: "Morituri-Max"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 25 Sep 2004 10:11:54 PM
Bernardz wrote:

The force is infinite.

Don;t waste your breath or time.. mitchell is one of the local trolls we are
trying to ignore here.. along with tj frazir, spaceman, nth complexity and ed
conrad.. the only thing you'll ever get from mitchell is "show me where I am
wrong, you can't" etc etc...
no reply necessary, just a local heads up for ya..
have a good one..
.
User: "tj Frazir"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 25 Sep 2004 10:31:05 PM
Your a fucking retarded worthless punk moron max.
Answer the mans question stupid ***** !!!
YOU did nothing but troll for 4 years.
In 4 years you never once posted any physics.
***** you
.





User: "Uncle Al"

Title: Re: Where General Relativity Goes Wrong 23 Sep 2004 10:56:36 AM
Mitchell wrote:


The strength of gravity (in weight) is defined by the equivalence
principle -

[snip]
Not even wrong, idiot.
<http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/RelWWW/tests.html>
Mathematics of gravitation
<http://wugrav.wustl.edu/people/CMW/update98.pdf>
<http://www.astro.northwestern.edu/AspenW04/Papers/lorimer1.pdf>
Equivalence Principle testing
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0111236
Geometric structure of reality
http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0103044
http://arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0307140
GR structure, especially Part 4/p. 7
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume4/2001-4will/index.html>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0311039
<http://www.weburbia.demon.co.uk/physics/experiments.html>
Experimental constraints on General Relativity
<http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf>
Nature 425 374 (2003)
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html>
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
<http://www.public.asu.edu/~rjjacob/Lecture16.pdf>
Relativity in the GPS system
<http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html>
Hafele-Keating Experiment
Science 303(5661) 1143;1153 (2004)
http://arXiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0401086
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0312071
Deeply relativistic neutron star binaries
<http://www.npl.washington.edu/eotwash/pdf/prl83-3585.pdf>
http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0301024
Nordtvedt Effect

Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls --

http://arXiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9909014
Phys. Rev. Lett. 92 (2004) 121101
falling light
Fucking imbecile.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.


  Page 1 of 1

1
 


Related Articles
 

NEWER
pg.1612     pg.1232     pg.940     pg.716     pg.544     pg.412     pg.311     pg.234     pg.175     pg.130     pg.96     pg.70     pg.50     pg.35     pg.24     pg.16     pg.10     pg.6     pg.3     pg.1

OLDER