Our landmark paper on “Neomechanical
Gravitation Theory” has just been posted on the Natural Philosophy Alliance
website:
Borchardt, Glenn, and Puetz, S.J., 2012, Neomechanical
gravitation theory ( http://www.worldsci.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_6529.pdf ), in Volk, Greg, ed., Proceedings of the Natural Philosophy
Alliance, 19th Conference of the NPA, 25-28 July: Albuquerque, NM, Natural
Philosophy Alliance, Eagan, MN, v. 9.
Posts
2 comments:
From Bill:
Good article. Of course, I agree that energy is nothing more nor less than matter in motion.
I think the nomenclature of "modern" physics is terribly deceptive, although most physicists will usually claim that the words are technically correct. Others with a "spiritual bent" like the implication of the words, which suggest "disembodied power".
The term "dark energy" is simply a substitute for the visible effects of invisible "gravitons", which must be matter in motion to cause the effects it does. The term "dark matter" simply refers to matter that doesn't emit or reflect light and therefore its motion can't be detected. The distinction between the two is just that "dark energy" produces evident gravitational effects, whereas the remainder of "dark matter" does not.
If pressed, I think most physicists would agree that "dark energy" IS some form of "dark matter" in motion.
Bill
Bill:
Whoops! Energy is not matter in motion. It is not the running dog; it is a description of the running dog--big difference.
Sorry, but "dark matter" is what produces the gravitational effects, not "dark energy," although it surely is misnamed. You are probably right that modern physicists think that energy is matter. It ain't.
Post a Comment