Re: The earth is flat... why not the universe?

Sue... wrote:
On Aug 10, 7:36 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Sue... wrote:
So We can't say that processes on the ship are subject
to any net forces resulting from the inertial
motion.

Sue,
We have gone through this, No ship can be in inertial motion
unless it is so far away from all gravity that no gravity effects
it at all.

<< Already Newton recognized that the
law of inertia is unsatisfactory
in a context so far unmentioned in this
exposition, namely that it gives no
real cause for the special physical
position of the states of motion of the
inertial frames relative to all other
states of motion. It makes the observable
material bodies responsible for the
gravitational behaviour of a material
point, yet indicates no material cause
for the inertial behaviour of the material
point but devises the cause for it
(absolute space or inertial ether). This
is not logically inadmissible although
it is unsatisfactory. For this reason
E. Mach demanded a modification of the
law of inertia in the sense that the
inertia should be interpreted as an
acceleration resistance of the bodies
against one another and not against "space".
This interpretation governs the expectation
that accelerated bodies have concordant
accelerating action in the same
sense on other bodies (acceleration induction).
This interpretation is even more
plausible according to general relativity
which eliminates the distinction between
inertial and gravitational effects.
It amounts to stipulating that, apart
from the arbitrariness governed by the
free choice of coordinates, the
gm v -field shall be completely determined
by the matter. Mach?'s stipulation is favoured
in general relativity by the circumstance
that acceleration induction in accordance
with the gravitational field equations really
exists, although of such slight intensity
that direct detection by mechanical experiments
is out of the question. >>

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1921/einstein-lecture.html

Typicle Einstein dingleberry reply.
Do you even read that garbage or just post it out of reflex
condition?

Einstein used such bull*** yet he also gives no physical cause
for the change of course for the inertial motion.
Instead he just called the "straight inertial motion"
curved naturally.
What a freakin joke to science that has been.
Too bad you don't get the joke.

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Creator of the Clock Malfunction Theory
Spaceman







.

Quantcast