On Friday, June 13, 2025 at 6:02:57 AM UTC-6 John Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 7:33 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> wrote: *> GR has many unexplained postulates,* *Many? General Relativity only has 3 postulates:1)The speed of light is constant for all observers.2) Gravitational mass and inertial mass are equivalent.* *3) Equations expressing physical laws should say the same thing regardless of what coordinate system is used to describe 4D spacetime, even accelerating or rotating ones. * And bodies in free fall, move along geodesic paths; and matter / energy causes spacetime curvature. AG *Or if you're willing to tolerate a little inaccuracy and wanted to say the same thing more poetically you could say it only has one postulate. "matter tells spacetime how to curve". * How does matter do that? AG *"Spacetime tells matter how to move" comes from the definition of spacetime. * >From a definition we get motion? Any clue how that happens? AG *And the definition of "move" is a change in 4D spacetime coordinates. * *And a postulate is not unexplained, * *Hypothetically, a deeper theory of gravity might be able to establish a physical mechanism for some of the postulates of GR. Pushing gravity is an attempt to do just that. But as a conformist who gives undue support to current theories, this possibility is beyond your narrow conceptual framework. AG * *it is unproven. A statement that cannot be explained is gibberish, but right or wrong "matter tells spacetime how to curve" is not gibberish. * *It leaves much unanswered. AG * *> like the physical reason mass distorts spacetime.* *And if tomorrow somebody found that X is the physical reason that mass exists then you would immediately ask what is the reason that X exists. As I keep saying there are only two possibilities, an iterated chain of questions either goes on forever or ends in a brute fact. * *> Consider the muon. Why does applying the LT cause its half-life to dilate?* *The same exact reason relative velocity causes ANY clock to slow down, the speed of light is constant for all observers. * *Firstly, you have no clue about the form of a muon's clock. Or how LT seems to select a clock no one can read. I mean the only clock which is read, is the clock in the muon's rest frame, which exhibits no time dilation. Who or what is reading the dilated clock? AG* *And time is what a clock measures. * *So if there's no clock able to be defined, does this mean time ceases to exist? You can't define the form of a muon's clock, yet you speak glibly about time, as if you have clue what it is. AG * On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 3:56 PM Brent Meeker <[email protected]> wrote: > *You're like Faraday* *Brent, you can't be talking about Alan Grayson! If somebody told me I was like Michael Faraday I would take that as a huge compliment. But I've read about Michael Faraday and Alan Grayson is no Michael Faraday.* *I wouldn't compare myself to anyone. I'm just a person who can see there are many questions you are unable to answer, but much worse, that you think the postulates of GR are the final answer to the mystery of gravity. AG* > *You read worse than a Trumper.* *I'm a little jealous, I thought I was the only one Grayson accused of being a Trumper because of a scientific disagreement. * *John K Clark See what's on my new list at Extropolis <https://groups.google.com/g/extropolis>* -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/8647333d-3a5c-4642-8e6d-baf289795cb6n%40googlegroups.com.
