Thread: pulsating universe

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Ok good point, but isn't it a good indication, if nobody can explain gravity with bending of space-time, that our concept of gravity might be wrong? Or is everyone just too stupid to explain?

Since we're talking about the philosophy of science, we must be very careful and exact with our assertions. A physicist might casually say that gravity is "explained" by GR, but that's not technically correct. The actual statement is that gravity is explained with the assumption that masses bend spacetime. This may not be correct, in which case you will need to go back to the drawing board. But there is extremely strong and plentiful evidence correlating spacetime distortion with mass, so you can't plausibly argue that masses don't bend spacetime.

Now, there's the second and entirely separate question of how masses bend spacetime, and no one even claims to know the answer to that.

Something I never understood was the (hypothetical?) graviton particle... surely gravity is a result of GR, not particles..?

Yes indeed, the reason for gravity is the postulates. Brilliant explanation! LOL it's like you're just randomly throwing a bunch of words together... that's not science.

Don't blame me for your lack of comprehension Chayba.

How do masses bend space-time? The mass causes pressure differentials in the ether, which cause ether flows toward the masses.

But hey, science claims ether doesn't exist, so gravity will stay a mystery until they realize ether does actually exist

Why on Earth would you think that?

Not only is there no reason to believe that in the first place; there is also, as I have stated three times previously, empirical proof that there is no aether.

It doesn't matter how many inane or convoluted arguments you come up with Chayba. You can't argue with the fact that the aether has been observed not to exist.

I really don't know why you want it to exist so badly in the first place.

Dude, if the ether didn't exist, everything around you would simply collapse. Everything doesn't collapse, so it's dead obvious the ether exists. You're just brainwashed into believing into the biggest lie of the 20th century: vacuum.

If you would just stop being stubborn and start to logically think about the validity of vacuum yourself, you would come to the same conclusion. But, for some reason, you refuse to think and only brainlessly copy concepts from others.

Originally Posted by drewmandan

Since we're talking about the philosophy of science, we must be very careful and exact with our assertions. A physicist might casually say that gravity is "explained" by GR, but that's not technically correct. The actual statement is that gravity is explained with the assumption that masses bend spacetime. This may not be correct, in which case you will need to go back to the drawing board. But there is extremely strong and plentiful evidence correlating spacetime distortion with mass, so you can't plausibly argue that masses don't bend spacetime.

Now, there's the second and entirely separate question of how masses bend spacetime, and no one even claims to know the answer to that.

Actually, the current theory in the standard model relies on the existence of the Higgs Boson. I know that there are at least a handful of physicists who claim they know this theory to be correct, but only because they don't run into many people who can even attempt to dispute them.

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Dude, if the ether didn't exist, everything around you would simply collapse. Everything doesn't collapse, so it's dead obvious the ether exists. You're just brainwashed into believing into the biggest lie of the 20th century: vacuum.

If you would just stop being stubborn and start to logically think about the validity of vacuum yourself, you would come to the same conclusion. But, for some reason, you refuse to think and only brainlessly copy concepts from others.

Its my opinion that ether is only poor explanation for the truth, and is not that much different from the current explanation. The ether is born out of pure materialism and perhaps under that assumption (everything that is real must be made of something) it is accurate, but we've since learned that materialism isn't the whole truth of reality.

Afaik, the ether theory is just the opposite of materialism. The ether theory claims everything is ether, and matter is actually nothing but waves on the ether.

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Actually, the current theory in the standard model relies on the existence of the Higgs Boson. I know that there are at least a handful of physicists who claim they know this theory to be correct, but only because they don't run into many people who can even attempt to dispute them.

The Higgs has absolutely nothing to do with gravity. The Standard Model has nothing to do with gravity. The Standard Model, in its mainstream form, does not touch gravity. The Higgs does have something to do with giving particles mass, but the Standard Model uses mass for other purposes, not involving gravity.

Originally Posted by ChaybaChayba

Afaik, the ether theory is just the opposite of materialism. The ether theory claims everything is ether, and matter is actually nothing but waves on the ether.

I really wanted to give you a chance, and assumed that your rantings just came from ignorance. But now I see that you have an agenda. This discussion is over.

Well yeah I guess it kinda is a big blow to your scientific ego realizing everything you ever scientifically believed in was actually a lie. I mean, being proud all your life you know so much about science, but not even being able to explain the mechanics of the most fundamental forces of the universe like gravity isn't something to be proud about. I can, you can't, yet, I'm the ignorant one. That's very scientific of you.

Everything I've ever learned in science is a lie?

Please hurl yourself off the most convenient skyscraper, I'm sure gravitational force will fail to accelerate and ultimately kill you.

Its my opinion that ether is only poor explanation for the truth, and is not that much different from the current explanation. The ether is born out of pure materialism and perhaps under that assumption (everything that is real must be made of something) it is accurate, but we've since learned that materialism isn't the whole truth of reality.

No it isn't for goodness sakes, the aether is disproved by materialism.