[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> From: Harry Veeder >> >> A Quantum theory of Gravity may require alternative' >> way of reporting. > > ... > >> See my 60k pdf file: >> >> http://web.ncf.ca/eo200/alternative.pdf >> >> for graphical aids. >> >> Harry Veeder > > I looked at your PDF file with some interest. Being a graphic artist myself > I'm always appreciate the efforts of others in their attempts to explain as > clearly as possible what they are proposing. Clean and simple! I like! :-)
Thanks. I appreciate your critical remarks. I believe my over all concept is valid, but my wording needs to be refined. > Unfortunately, despite the clear graphics it does not follow (from my > perception) that the "alternative" approach is a valid one. For example in the > alternative approach you state "if the observer were riding in the ball" he > would report that the velocity is "always being positive". > > I don't think so. > > If all things are the same between the ball being thrown in the traditional > approach versus the proposed alternative approach, the observer WITHIN THE > BALL would personally be experiencing ZERO velocity through out the entire > phase of the experimental observation. IOW, he would essentially be > experiencing weightlessness. Also, he would observe that the ground that is > initially receding from him is slowing decelerating as it travels away from > him - but later he would observe the ground accelerating towards him. The > observer in the ball would also conclude that anyone outside of his ball > standing on the ground would be feeling the effects of acceleration BECAUSE > they are standing on the accelerating ground In the alternative approach I should have said _speed_ instead of _velocity_, as velocity implies speed with a direction. Also, instead of a ball, imagine it is *you* who is thrown up but you carry a speedometer. The speedometer always reports a positive speed. Like the speedometer in a car or the air speed indicator in a plane, the instrument always reports a positive speed. In the alternative approach, the relative velocity of the ground is of no interest. What matters is what the speedometer says over time. > - which brings up Einstein's > comment that "Gravity" and "Acceleration" are essentially the same phenomenon. > Please correct me if I error on this last statement but I believe Einstein has > made that statement. > > I don't see the "discontinuity" you are proposing. > > Can you clarify? > Yes Einstein made that claim, but I don't think it is true. I believe there is a way to distinguish gravitational acceleration from engineered acceleration through this alternative approach. Harry
