On Thursday, June 12, 2025 at 1:56:20 PM UTC-6 Brent Meeker wrote:
On 6/12/2025 5:10 AM, Alan Grayson wrote: On Thursday, June 12, 2025 at 5:36:15 AM UTC-6 John Clark wrote: On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 4:49 AM Alan Grayson <agrays...@gmail.com> wrote: *> The Newtonian postulate of inertia is inherently simpler than the GR postulate of geodesic motion on curved spacetime* *A good theory should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. Newton couldn't explain or predict that starlight passing near the sun will be bent by 1.75 arcseconds or that Mercury's orbit would precess by 43 arcseconds per century or that gravity could produce a redshift. But Einstein could. * What do you think you've established? That GR is superior to NM? We already knew that! But what we don't understand about gravity is truly mind boggling, but only for those with imagination. AG The problem is you don't even have a proper conception of "understanding". *GR has many unexplained postulates, like the physical reason mass distorts spacetime. You're the one who has an improper concept of "understanding". You don't seem to have a clue of what you don't understand! Consider the muon. Why does applying the LT cause its half-life to dilate? It's not even being observed, just thought of as being observed. Yes, one can say it happens in order to preserve the invariance of light speed. Is that really enough? You just don't want to go deeper and are happy with your equations. Sad. AG * You're like Faraday who conceived of the electric and magnetic fields as lots of masses and springs. If it was just equations it wasn't understood. It had to be masses and springs. When you saw the infalling space model of gravity you thought it provided you "understanding", but it wouldn't even allow for orbits. *No.You read worse than a Trumper. I wrote it didn't explain what happened to space when it reached the center of the gravitating mass, among other things unmentioned, like why does it flow. AG * In graduate school, if not earlier, physicists learn to let equations speak for themselves. Examples are good to develop intuition. But every example is incomplete. And every made-up visualization is misleading in some respect. So think about what counts as "understanding". Knowing the equations and how to apply them is the real understanding. Brent *> A lab atop a mountain sees the muons flying by, same as the lab at rest on the Earth. * *No it is not the same! I don't understand why you believe that muons are always moving at close to the speed of light relative to us. * Where did I make that claim? Nowhere. Never. AG *Muons are routinely made in the lab by smashing protons into carbon, and they can be moving at any speed. And muons have a negative electrical charge just like the electron so they can be easily manipulated; in fact the muon is identical to the electron except it is 207 times as massive and has a half-life of 1.56 *10^-6 seconds, which is very very long by particle physics standards. * So if we have two labs, one atop a mountain and another on the Earth's surface, will they measure different half-lifes? AG *John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* 7x= -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2f409a44-8791-4288-a2df-d3314183b8f4n%40googlegroups.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2f409a44-8791-4288-a2df-d3314183b8f4n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> . -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/f361693a-f2fd-4b16-b2f2-19c7d559dfdbn%40googlegroups.com.
