supersport #fundie

supersport #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

"We already know that E=mc2 is wrong because it contradicts Newton's law of gravity. E=mc2 says nothing is faster than the speed of light....yet as we know, this is not correct. Gravity is instantaneous, thus faster than the speed of light. If the earth were to move, for example, the moon would somehow "know" it and move right along with it. Same with the sun...if the sun were to move, the planets would follow the sun around, all without ropes.

Scientists have long known that Einstein's theory contradicted Newton's law of gravity, but it's just one of those things they try to keep hush about and sweep under the carpet like it doesn't exist.

So if E=mc2 is wrong, which it is, then we can pretty much be assured that astronomers and cosmologists are not to be trusted because they simply do not know what they're talking about."

103 comments

old comment by Andrew

Newton's "Law" was no such thing. Law was just an old term for a theory. Eintein's theories merely extended and fleshed out the physics to reflect real observations (not to disrespect the marvellous nature of Einstein's work).

Action at a distance (such as gravity) is easily explained if you envisage space as 3-dimensional and not just 2D. The presence of a large body warps the space-time fabric and causes an indentation in the toplology that other bodies fall into. Imagine a sheet of rubber with a cannon-ball at the centre. If your were to put another object on the sheet then it will be instantaneously affected by the warped nature of the sheet. Depending on how the smaller object is introduced, it will roll directly torwards to centre, or approach in a spiral motion.

old comment by Robbie

OK, here's a question.

With the preponderance of evidence for instantaneous gravity of which you and your team of peers (whom I assume are the "we" to which you refer, since literally no one else in the universe supports this moronic claim) are obviously in possession, why isn't any of it presented anywhere in that inane post?

Newtonian physics are good enough for the small and the slow, supersport, but the fact is at relativistic speeds, they fall to pieces and a new theory is required. Shaking your head and saying "nuh-uh" - or even better, proposing a global scientific conspiracy - is hardly any way to cope with such an obvious discrepancy in the data.

old comment by Brain_In_A_Jar

Gravity is instantaneous, thus faster than the speed of light. If the earth were to move, for example, the moon would somehow "know" it and move right along with it.

If it weren't Supersport, there would be absolutely no doubt that this would be trolling. What he has described, apparently unwittingly, is almost precisely the classic thought experiment to describe the gravitational effects of relativity, and his answer is just a huge heaping pile of wrong. If the sun were to spontaneously disappear, the orbiting planets would continue to move in the same orbit for a brief period, specifically as long as it takes for the gravity wave to propagate outward from the site of the sun's disappearance, before then moving off in straight lines tangent to their original orbits.

Einstein does not contradict Newton; Newton approximates Einstein as long as the speeds of the described system are vastly lower than C, and the relativistic and newtonian laws of motion become identical as those speeds tend towards zero. It's called the Correspondence Principle, and any decent textbook on relativity will almost certainly emphasise it in the very first chapter or so.

Conclusion: Supersport is continuing admirably in his intensive campaign of expounding on things he doesn't know a goddamn thing about.

old comment by David B.

Gravity propagates at the speed of light. That is, the changes in the gravitational fields caused by the motion of the masses involved radiate out from the system at c. This is an expectation of General Relativity (the formula E = mc² is from Special Relativity) that has been explicitly confirmed by observing the orbits of binary pulsars. The observed decay rates of these orbits exactly agree with those predicted by the action of gravitational radiation in the form of waves.

So the gravitational field is always present, while changes in it propagate as gravitational waves (not gravity waves, which are something different), and at the speed of light.

old comment by An engineer

Actually, one of the first things my physics prof. in college told us when we studied both Special and General Relativity was that they did not agree with Newton's descriptions of gravity. However, for slow (ie non-relativistic speeds), Newton's approximations were accurate beyond most significant figures.

Secondly, as some people have pointed out, this would be a great example of progress within a scientific field as more knowledge and understanding are gained, theories are revised.

Lastly, we're currently witnessing the next step in this progression. There is an apparent contradiction between General Relativity and Quantum mechanics. Gravity is accurately described at distances greater than Planck's length by General Relativity and at distances less than Planck's length by Quantum mechanics. But there is a discontinuity in the descriptions at Planck's length. Eventually we'll see an updated theory that deals with this issue and both General Relativity and quantum mechanics will give way for a more accurate understanding. Damn progress is amazing.

old comment by Orion Blastar

Of course Einstein was bad at math.

He really meant to say E = MC^3, now that makes more common sense and it explains how the speed of light is a constant, and that gravity is just a reaction to mass and that it is all relative to the size of the mass in both objects affected by gravity.

Newton's theory of gravity can explain the orbits of the planets, but not the orbits of the stars around the galaxy. For stars on the inner and outer orbits around the center of a galaxy move at the same speed, and if the theory of gravity was correct the stars on the outer orbits would orbit slower than those stars on the inner orbits.

If the theory of gravity is flawed, and the theory of relativity is based on the theory of gravity, it too is also flawed.

Now some scientists claim there is matter and energy we can't see that increases the gravity near stars on the outer orbits of galaxies, and they call it dark matter and dark energy.

By the way, gravity doesn't have a speed, it is just the attraction of two objects to each other relative to their mass and distance. Yet there is a gravity constant on Earth of -9.8 meters per second every second that shows how fast things accelerate as they reach the surface of the Earth. Gravity does not have a speed, it is the masses effected by gravity that have speed and acceleration.

supersport #fundie christiandiscussionforums.org

103 comments

Confused?