Blog
20150624
Luis
has a great question:
“I
have a question about your Universal Cycle Theory. Do you think it is
compatible with Bill Gaede's Rope Theory of Matter? And does it have
anything in common, in your view, with the Electric Universe theory?”
[GB: Luis, I have always been a fan of Bill Gaede, not because of the
accuracy of his theories, but because of the humor with which he teases
regressive physicists. That “mathemagicians” line is quite a kick. He rips up
their fantasies in a most direct fashion. To him, I owe the definition of
matter as that which has xyz dimensions and location with respect to other
things. Nevertheless, his rope theory of gravitation is something else. In
that, he envisions tiny invisible ropes that produce gravitational pull. The
resulting tension between objects is supposed to be what causes them to move
together. Distant objects tend to pull in the opposite direction, with the most
massive object wining the rope-pull contest. Of course, all our PSI books
eschew talk of any kind of pull as a mechanism for anything. We emphasize
Newton’s three laws, which only involve pushes. In particular, all causes
follow Newton's Second Law of Motion, F=ma, which describes the acceleration of
one object by another.
Newton provided a push theory and a pull theory for
gravitation, but indeterminists popularized the pull theory, probably because
they were solipsistic. His equation works for either one. Steve and I explained
the actual physical cause of gravitation in “Universal Cycle Theory” and,
specifically, in our paper on “Neomechanical
Gravitation Theory.” A 27-minute podcast of my presentation on it is here. In summary, we
speculate that gravitation is caused by variations in aether pressure, which is
a function of distance from baryonic (ordinary) matter. Coincidentally and
necessarily, baryonic matter forms from aether during a complexification
process that reduces the activity of aether particles. Space occupied by and
surrounded by baryonic matter is less available to free aether particles, which provide the push we call gravity.
Luis, I know little about Electric Universe Theory, but
like all theories I have reviewed, it seems to have some stellar moments and
some not so stellar. I like the emphasis on the ubiquity of subatomic
particles, but not so much on suggestions as the one about the center of the
Sun being hollow. In “Universal Cycle Theory,” we emphasized how heavenly
bodies formed as a result of vortex action in compliance with Stoke’s Law. In
other words, rotation of a heavenly body tends to push massive particles
towards its center. I suspect that the EU folks need a set of founding
assumptions such as "The Ten Assumptions of Science," so they won’t
be led down such impossible paths.]
1 comment:
It's enjoyable to learn more and more from your blog. Thanks for sharing.
MAcy
www.gofastek.com
Post a Comment