Bruce,

 

I think you conceded too much in this message.  

 

In the previous message you wrote

 

eventually Einstein found a deep 'explanation' for gravity 

>> in terms of the effects that matter has on space itself

 

But grant writes:

 

Did he not theorize that gravity is a force that 

> curves space-time nearby rather than acting on other masses at a distance?

 

to which you essentially assent. 

 

But it's MASS that curves space, not gravity, no?   Isn't "gravity"
unnecessary?  A gratuitous mystery?  

 

N

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Bruce Sherwood
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2012 9:16 PM
To: Grant Holland
Cc: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Unsolved Problems in Psychology

 

Yes, that's what I meant in citing Einstein. As for the specifics of the
case, Einstein realized that action at a distance was not consistent with
the Special Theory of Relativity, that nothing could be communicated at a
speed greater than the speed of light. If something suddenly yanked our Sun
far away from us, it would be eight minutes before the sunlight vanished
(the Sun is about 8 light-minutes away from us), and it would also be eight
minutes before our orbit changed from circular to a straight line. It was
these considerations among others that led Einstein to seek a theory of
gravity, which is now called the General Theory of Relativity.

 

Bruce

 

On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 9:10 PM, Grant Holland <
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]> wrote:

> Bruce,

> 

> Did not Einstein put "action at a distance" wrt gravity to rest with 

> his general theory? Did he not theorize that gravity is a force that 

> curves space-time nearby rather than acting on other masses at a distance?

> 

> Just askin'

> Grant

> 

> 

> On 5/18/12 4:13 PM, Bruce Sherwood wrote:

>> 

>> Newton famously said about action at a distance, "I frame no 

>> hypotheses". I take this to mean something like the following:

>> 

>> "I completely agree with you that I haven't explained gravity. Rather 

>> I've shown that observations are consistent with the radical notion 

>> that all matter attracts all other matter, here and in the heavens, 

>> made quantitative by a one-over-r-squared force 'law'. On this basis 

>> I have shown that the orbits of the planets and the behavior of the 

>> tides and the fall of an apple, previously seen as completely 

>> different phenomena, are 'explainable' within one single framework.

>> 

>> I propose that we provisionally abandon the search for an 

>> 'explanation' of gravity, which looks fruitless for now, and instead 

>> concentrate on working out the consequences of the new framework.

>> Let's leave it as a task for future scientists to try to understand 

>> at a deeper level than 'action-at-a-distance' what the real character 

>> of gravity is. There has been altogether too much speculation, such 

>> as maybe angels push the planets around. Let's get on with studying 

>> what we can."

>> 

>> I think Newton doesn't get nearly enough credit for this radical 

>> standpoint, which made it possible to go forward. And of course we 

>> know that eventually Einstein found a deep 'explanation' for gravity 

>> in terms of the effects that matter has on space itself. There are 

>> hints in the current string theory community of even deeper insights 

>> into the nature of gravity.

>> 

>> Bruce

>> 

>> On Fri, May 18, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Russ Abbott<
<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]>

>>  wrote:

>>> 

>>> John, I like your gravity question. If this were Google+, I'd click 

>>> its

>>> +1

>>> button.  My wife, who studies these things, says that one of the 

>>> fiercest contemporary criticisms of Newton's theories was that they 

>>> depended on a mysterious (magical?) action at a distance.

>>> 

>>> -- Russ Abbott

>> 

>> ============================================================

>> 

>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at 

>> cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at 

>>  <http://www.friam.org> http://www.friam.org

 

============================================================

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv

Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives,
unsubscribe, maps at  <http://www.friam.org> http://www.friam.org

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to