It is proven. Gravity expands at speed of light

[TCO]

Originally posted by shade


euhm ... now I think of it...potential energy isn't about gravity...it's about the forcefield you're in(wich is in most examples the gravitational field)...but you could also calculate the potential energie of a electric particle in an ellectric field.

Shade

The potential enrgy involved in different combinations of nucleons has measurable mass effects. Think chemical would be the same but real small.

[Seeker]

Lars:

It's an assumption based on many, many posters on space.com who vaguely remembered or had heard about the S o L changing theory.

It always came back to van Flandern, usually to parts of his article copied onto different sites with the name changed to stop people from immediately disregarding it (Yes, Creationists ARE that low).

He starts with his explanation of why the Michelson-Morely experiment was wrong and goes from there, and he has a chart of different 'experiementally derived' values for c over time.

Maybe you have read something else I haven't heard of, but in 99% of posts similar to yours, the culprit was ultimately van Flandern, usually 'repackaged' to fake credibility, which fools a lot of people.

[Az]

Great Clarification on 'energy creates gravity', RJ. Thanks.

[Lars-E]

Originally posted by Seeker
Lars:

It's an assumption based on many, many posters on space.com who vaguely remembered or had heard about the S o L changing theory.

It always came back to van Flandern, usually to parts of his article copied onto different sites with the name changed to stop people from immediately disregarding it (Yes, Creationists ARE that low).

He starts with his explanation of why the Michelson-Morely experiment was wrong and goes from there, and he has a chart of different 'experiementally derived' values for c over time.

Maybe you have read something else I haven't heard of, but in 99% of posts similar to yours, the culprit was ultimately van Flandern, usually 'repackaged' to fake credibility, which fools a lot of people.

Maybe Flandern's stuff is just modified? copies of stuff he found somewhere. Maybe he even got it from credible sources, but there's no references on his site?

[Seeker]

True, true, and double true!

In which case you could have seen something earlier that he mangled, or possibly something he used, and then a piece of his stuff that was used by something else, like a telephone game of pop. sci.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by GP


Or just a positron/electron combination.

Sure, but the idea of matter & anti-matter planets colliding is more fun for the minds eye.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin


Sure, but the idea of matter & anti-matter planets colliding is more fun for the minds eye.

As a nuclear geek, I prefer the positron death spiral (oh...the sad fate of being born into an electron world.) Mix in some Compton scattering and I'll really get off.

[Az]

Btw, are cosmologists already positive on the fact that there is more matter than antimatter?

Could it be that there is a place where galaxies of anti matter escape into the vast distance of space, and matter is considered to be something of an exotic feat?

[Eli]

Speed of Gravity Results 'Incorrect,' Physicist Says

http://space.com/scienceastronomy/gravity_speed_030116.html

[TCO]

Originally posted by Eli
Speed of Gravity Results 'Incorrect,' Physicist Says

http://space.com/scienceastronomy/gr...ed_030116.html

I feel very justified in pushing for a tangible explanation of what was actually measured. Whether it is a business thang or a science thang, it often pays to unravel the ball of yarn to understand exactly what is going on.

It sounds like the matter is still in dispute. I would love to at least get a geometric desciption of what was measured.