Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- From: "hanson" <hanson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 16:47:45 GMT
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:45F6C480.E7E5264D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Suriv wrote: E-mail:- einsteinhoax@xxxxxxxxHey Idiot Uncle Al, yes "GPS works" but NOT because of
"Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"[snip interminable crap]
Newton: Inertia is a massed body.
Gravitation is an accelerating geometry.
F_i = (m_i)a (inertia)
F_g = G(m_g)M/r^2 (gravitation)
(m_i)a = G(m_g)M/r^2 (vacuum free fall, F_i = F_g)
(m_i)/(m_g) = constant (at each infinitesimal time interval; the
Equivalence Principle)
Hey schmuck - Newton says you are an ass. The only way to break
Newton consistent with observation is by admitting Einstein or
Einstein-Cartan or Weitzenböck (in which Einstein is a restricted
subset),
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609417
16.8995 deg/yr periastron advance
GPS works.
Idiot. Uncle Al
Cartan or Weitzenböck nor the restricted subset-Einstein.
Thanks for that laughs, fanaticAl... ahahaha... ahahanson
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- From: Androcles
- Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- References:
- "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- From: Suriv
- Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- From: Uncle Al
- "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- Prev by Date: Re: Ether Steam Engine ???
- Next by Date: Re: GLOBAL WARNING? YES, CO2? NO NO NO...
- Previous by thread: Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- Next by thread: Re: "Defining Inertial and Gravitational Accelerations"
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
