S
siarad
Guest
Just like quarks these seem to come in threes:<br />red shift<br />gravity<br />time<br />mass<br /><br />I've posted several topics recently because I can't seem to tie things up but don't know why.<br />It's possibly because of the loose usage by scientists of the four words above.<br /><br />Unfortunately no replies to my topics have served to lessen my confusion. Well except for an older topic pertaining to red shift which Saiph sorted.<br />Maybe it's because I'm not very good with words & don't explain the topic very well, or perhaps because I'm challenging accepted science but only the more to understand.<br /><br />Michelson to his dying breath didn't believe in the result of the famous M & M experiment & I can't see how it worked. Isn't it the only experiment to seal Einstein's relativity over Lorentzian?<br /><br />No one has given an answer to my challenge of Newton's arrows where I was hoping for someone to do the maths. There seems to have been agreement & disagreement.<br /><br />As for gravity whose speed can't possibly be as low as light or the Earth would fly out of orbit, then again which gravity? the position of the Earth has been measured using an external time frame, pulsar, & accords with gravity being near instantaneous. Way back in the 1950's NASA guys told me how a Moon shot was calculated & it assumed gravity acted instantaneously. They also said hitting the moon directly from earth was virtually impossible as a mere 30 mph variation would cause a miss, no wonder there are mid course corrections. <br />I've drawn a blank on the curvature of space by speed not gravity.<br /><br />I'm sure these things have satisfactorily been addressed by scientists or perhaps as yet don't have answers.<br />I'd be glad if anyone who hasn't looked at my topics would do so if they think it might help.<br />