<a href="http://hollowplanet.blogspot.com">LeSage's Push Gravity</a>: <a name="relative">General Relativity?</a>

Monday, October 23, 2006

General Relativity?

I won't go into much depth concerning the flaws of general relativity as it's not my particular speciality and much more can be said by those that know their own trade. I will, however, address a few of the more well-known flaws or exclusions which are common-place and well-known to any physicist or cosmologist as far as the reigning theory of gravity is concerned.

To begin, general relativity is a mathematical/geometrical description of the fabric of space/time which attempts to unite all known matter into one grand orchestra of operation in their movements and influence they have upon other matter within the known universe. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with attempting such a description as far as the description coincides with observed reality. This is where things begin to get interesting. As scientists and physicist began to push the general relativistic mathematical description of the universe to its mathematical limits, several exclusions or "singularities" are chanced upon. One important mathematical singularity has manifested itself and has come to be known to the lay person as the "black hole."

Black holes exist by posulation alone and none have yet to be directly observed in nature. Yet, if general relativity is to prove to be an accurate description of the observable universe, black holes must necessarily exist. Scientists and theoriticians alike agree that the only limiting factor keeping us from observing black holes is the limits of our current technology. It is, however, a distinct possibility that black holes are merely a figment of the hopeful imaginations of scientists and theoriticians alike eager to prove an aging relic of the past, namely their beloved theory of general relativity. Volumes can and have been written on this subject alone and many have been made famous in the process such as theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking.

There are, however, even more glaring discrepancies than that of the mathematical singularity which has taken shape in recent scientific lore as the black hole, such have come to be known as dark energy and dark matter. According to theorists and cosmologists the universe started with a big bang ... an explosion of energy and matter, although not infinite in proportion, hardly fathomable to our finite minds and limited frames of reference. Despite the enormous energies and speeds duly imparted to the matter thus speeding away from the epicenter or the birth-point of our universe, due to the general relativistic description of the universe, mathematicians and theoriticians alike propose that the expansion of our universe must necessarily be slowing down. Accoring to their projections the universe will eventually stop its expansion only to begin speeding back towards its point of origin and eventually result in a "grand slam." This decrease in the rate of expansion of the universe, however, according to careful and meticulous observations is not taking place! The universe is in fact expanding at an ever increasing rate!

In order to compensate for this glaring and rather troublesome observation, theorists have posulated the existence of a dark energy and dark matter that is purportedly currently beyond our observational capabilities but is necessariliy pushing the universe apart against the force of gravity and at ever increasing speeds and energies!

With the posulation of dark energy theorists and scientists may have unknowingly stumbled upon the true source of gravitational attraction, for according to 18th century Swiss physicist Georges-Louis Le Sage, gravity is in fact due to a seething ocean of energy which pervades all space in which planetary and stellar bodies alike are unwitting inhabitants. This energy impinges itself upon all material bodies alike, but when two bodies are in close proximity to each other (close in terms of stellar and planetary distances) they effectively lie in each others' shadows as they shield each other from the etheric push of this cosmic energy. Thus, the planetary or stellar forms are pushed or "drawn" together by what appears to the inhabitants of these spheres to be a pulling or tugging force. This perceived "force" is actually the net effect of the push of the cosmic energy that is omnipresent throughout the universe.

Thus, even unwittingly, scientists have concluded, despite the flaws of current theories, that the expansion of the universe is due to an unseen and apparently unobserved cosmic force pushing bodies apart. According to LeSage this same energy that forces the universe apart at ever increasing speeds is also responsible for the accretion of localized matter, or gravity, as it has come to be called and popularized in the last several hundred years. Instead of attempting to continually patch an outdated, outmoded theory which has hitherto been insufficient at describing observed results, it would be more appropriate to regroup and reformulate a more accurate and appropriate description of the actual mechanism behind the observed gravitational tug on material bodies. Hence, a push theory of gravity is duly called for. Once scientists have accurately described a mechanism for the source of gravity, as the push theory does, we can then attempt to use it to describe the motions of planetary and stellar bodies.


Blogger Speaking Truth said...

Suppose that time stretches out with expanding space, so that the further back in time we go the more compressed time is? We can only see objects of the past and it would appear from our perspective, that things out there are moving faster than they should.

Just a thought….


5:36 AM  
Blogger Benjamin "Reticuli" Goulart said...

You don't feel gravitational tug, hence the reason push theories of gravity don't work. And ether has a definite key vantage and is not relativistic, which is why it also has not lasted. All those theories have difficulty don’t even the basics correct. Attempts to combine ether, relativity, and quantum mechanics become (by definition) field theories, not ether theories. The most promising research being done seem related to the nature of gravity, anti-matter, and the two's interaction, not going back to corpuscles and ethers.

1:58 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home