Re: Space, matter, gravity question

From: N:dlzc D:aol T:com \(dlzc\) (net_at_nospam.com)
Date: 03/10/05 

Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2005 06:50:53 -0700

Dear Bjoern Feuerbacher:

"Bjoern Feuerbacher" <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in
message news:d0p7a5$nni$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de...
> Zach wrote:
>> Bjoern Feuerbacher <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote
>> in message news:<d0mgc5$79h$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>...
>>
>>>Zach wrote:
...
>>>> Then a gravitional curve in space
>>>> occurs because the rubber *** has
>>>> become weaker because all the
>>>> space is used up creating the matter.
>>>
>>> Err, why should space curve just
>>> because it has become "weaker"?
>>
>> Instead of "weaker" how about the
>> "tensile elastic modulus" (Young's
>> modulus) of space-time varies
>> under the presence of matter?
>
> Even if that modulus varies, why
> should space curve then?

Something that might be useful to point out about the "rubber
***" model of gravitation, is that it *still* invokes gravity
to:
- keep the "orbiting bodies" on the ***,
- deform the *** based on their weight,
- and use gravitational potential energy to obtain the "orbits".
It is an analogy that is already pushed to it's limit. How can
you explain something only in terms of itself?

David A. Smith

Quantcast