ReligionDiscuss General Theology, Religions and Denominations, God's Attributes, Predestination and Free Will, Dispensationalism, Eschatology, Philosophy, Origins, Archaeology, Science, World History and other such topics.
I hesitate to correct such a self-identified 'talented Physicist', but Gravity Waves are the sort of waves you see at the beach on the sea.
You are referring to GravitatIONAL Waves.
By all means hesitate.
Thanks once again for your typical contribution to my threads.
You are becoming an essential part of my lectures,
like Lou Costello.
"But if anyone, even an angel from heaven,
were to preach any other gospel than that of
Jesus the Christ, crucified, buried, and
raised from the dead by God the Father,
to deliver us from this present evil world,
let that false preacher be accursed.' (Gal 1:1-4,8-9)
Many are under the impression that 'Gravity Waves' are a prediction of Einstein's General Relativity (GR), and their discovery would be a proof of GR against Newton's Gravity Theory (NGT).
Why are you posting this here instead of ArchiveX or Phys Letters? Get all this thru peer review and then post the reference to the scientific literature.
Quote:
Newton's Gravity theory however also predicts Gravity waves, when stripped of its naive baggage. To do this we have to keep some notions, and reject others.
Fundamental to Newton, are the following Axioms:
(1) Space is three-dimensional and Euclidean. This is one of the features that distinguishes Newton from Einstein, and modern formulations of Newton use a Euclidean Spacetime Manifold.
(2) Gravity is fundamentally a static force, based on mass and distance alone, and independent of time. This is how Newton formulates it at a fundamental level. All dynamic effects of Gravity via motion, are based on treating Gravity as an instantaneous force, and applying it using Newton's equation, in combination with Newton's other laws of motion.
And how do you justify changing Newton's theory and still calling it Newton's theory? Notice you said #2 is fundamental. Yet above you stated that gravity waves don't work if this axiom is accepted as true. It seems to this biochemist that you have just shown that Newton's theory cannot predict gravity waves -- not without changing it to something that is not Newton's theory.
If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
And how do you justify changing Newton's theory and still calling it Newton's theory? Notice you said #2 is fundamental. Yet above you stated that gravity waves don't work if this axiom is accepted as true. It seems to this biochemist that you have just shown that Newton's theory cannot predict gravity waves -- not without changing it to something that is not Newton's theory.
I guess you were disappointed in not finding any math mistakes,
and are now quibbling over semantics.
Its simple. Newton's theory was never properly thought through or completed by Newton.
Its still a good theory, if we fix it up a bit.
"But if anyone, even an angel from heaven,
were to preach any other gospel than that of
Jesus the Christ, crucified, buried, and
raised from the dead by God the Father,
to deliver us from this present evil world,
let that false preacher be accursed.' (Gal 1:1-4,8-9)
Linear Mode
