On Saturday 14 April 2007 01:40, Harry Veeder wrote: > Jones Beene wrote: > > Harry Veeder wrote: > >> the push theory has some serious theoretical difficulties > > > > to overcome. If gravity is a push why don't the planets spiral > > into the sun because whatever is doing the pushing would also > > have a drag effect on the planets. > > > > > > I am not well-versed in the details, but do have 'cut-and-paste' > > functionality ;-) ... but the superficial answer is that the drag effect > > in one vector is balanced by a boost in the other IF the system lacks an > > *arrow of time* WOW (am I mis-stating that conclusion)! > > > > Are we essentially in a "timeless" orbit? > > That would be kind of ironic, since classical mechanics and quantum > mechanics already depend on time symmetric laws of motion. > > > Here is the first paragraph from the Ibison paper, which Terry mentions, > > and Xavier has his own explanation, which seems a bit less provocative: > > > > "This document presents some results that provide support for the > > existence of time-symmetric electromagnetic interactions involving equal > > positive combinations of advanced and retarded fields. According to > > common experience however, electromagnetic interactions are exclusively > > retarded. Retardation establishes an electromagnetic arrow of time, > > which, coincidentally, agrees with the thermodynamic arrow of time the > > direction of increasing entropy. Since these two could be interrelated, > > a conservative application of a time-symmetric theory with no danger of > > conflict with observation should be confined to systems lacking any > > arrow of time thermodynamic or electromagnetic." END of Ibison quote > > > > WOW. Those are some heavy duty implications, no? ... or else, this > > proves the point as stated at the start: "I am not well-versed in the > > details" > > > > ...yet > > > > Jones > > Harry
Just a thought: maybe they are a vector cross product of each other... Standing Bear
