Rod Ryker wrote:
"PD" wrote in message ups.com...

Rod Ryker wrote:
Rod: As my good friend Bill Hobba pointed out,
I have been rehashing old arguments.
So, Billy, this ones for you.

Galileo proved that two cannon balls 10 to 1 ratio,
accelerate at the same rate.
However, upon landing on Earth, they accelerate
at different rates, IOW's weight.
Why the contradiction?

No contradiction.

The force of gravity on the two balls is in the ratio 10 to 1.
The force the ground exerts on the two balls is in the ratio 1 to 1.

Using Newton's second law, it follows that the acclerations of the two
balls during the drop is 1 to 1. It also follows that the acclerations
of the two balls after impact is 10 to 1.

PD
Rod: That is good reasoning.
Now, why does a mass attract another mass?

We know how. We don't know why, any more than we know why some things
have a property (called electric charge) that makes them interact with
each other in a different way.

--
Rod Ryker...
The intricacies of nature is man's cannon fodder.

Rod Ryker wrote:
"Androcles" Androcles@ MyPlace.org wrote in message k...

wrote in message
oups.com...
|
| Androcles wrote:
| "Rod Ryker" wrote in message
| ...
| |
| |
| |
| | "MP" wrote in message
| ...
| | Rod Ryker wrote:
| | Rod: As my good friend Bill Hobba pointed out,
| | I have been rehashing old arguments.
| | So, Billy, this ones for you.
| |
| | Galileo proved that two cannon balls 10 to 1 ratio,
| | accelerate at the same rate.
| | However, upon landing on Earth, they accelerate
| | at different rates, IOW's weight.
| | Why the contradiction?
| |
| | The apparent contradiction is resolved
| | in General Relativity.
| |
| | According to General Relativity the
| | cannonballs do *not* accelerate, when
| | they are in free fall. They *do*
| | accelerate, when they "weigh", e.g.
| | when they "rest" at the surface of
| | the earth. [The electromagnetic forces
| | push against the natural motion that
| | the cannonballs would have, if there
| | were no matter at the earth's surface
| | prohibiting natural (geodesic) motion,
| | e.g. free fall]
| |
| | According to Newton's theory of gravity
| | the cannon balls "accelerate" (with respect
| | to absolute space), *when* they are in free
| | fall. They do *not* accelerate (with respect
| | to absolute space), when they rest on the
| | surface of the earth.
| |
| |
| | You mixed Newtonian ideas with ideas
| | of general relativy. Therefore the
| | apparent contradiction.
| |
| | MP
| |
| | Rod: Thank you for your comments.
| | Any one else.
|
| This is amusing:
| [The electromagnetic forces
| push against the natural motion that
| the cannonballs would have, if there
| were no matter at the earth's surface
| prohibiting natural (geodesic) motion,
| e.g. free fall]
| He's mixing Newtonian ideas with ideas of general relativity.
|
| Androcles.
|
|
| Rod: Great.
| Now, why do masses attract masses?

Nobody knows why. It puzzled Newton, and still is a puzzle.
We can describe WHAT happens, but not WHY.
Androcles.

Rod: You are correct Sir!

My idea is that the Earth (mass) accelerates the cannon balls
equally of course, but the masses are concentrated energies.
And these energies are attracted to each other.

If it is shown that light is bent by a planet, and a mass
is attracted to another mass, and two unequal masses
accelerate at the same rate towards another mass,
then it seems to me that energy attracts energy equally.

This is in fact already predicted by GR.
But you yourself have not addressed the question of why energy would
attract energy.


Rod Ryker...
It is reasoning and faith that bind truth.

"PD" wrote in message ps.com...

Rod Ryker wrote:
"PD" wrote in message ups.com...

Rod Ryker wrote:
Rod: As my good friend Bill Hobba pointed out,
I have been rehashing old arguments.
So, Billy, this ones for you.

Galileo proved that two cannon balls 10 to 1 ratio,
accelerate at the same rate.
However, upon landing on Earth, they accelerate
at different rates, IOW's weight.
Why the contradiction?

No contradiction.

The force of gravity on the two balls is in the ratio 10 to 1.
The force the ground exerts on the two balls is in the ratio 1 to 1.

Using Newton's second law, it follows that the acclerations of the two
balls during the drop is 1 to 1. It also follows that the acclerations
of the two balls after impact is 10 to 1.

PD
Rod: That is good reasoning.
Now, why does a mass attract another mass?

We know how. We don't know why, any more than we know why some things
have a property (called electric charge) that makes them interact with
each other in a different way.

Rod:
I once made a joke about energy attracting energy to EL
about another poster. Afterwards I learned of the Stirling Engine
where hot and cold, same energy but a potential, work on
a mass (piston) and moves it.
You _may_ say, ok but that's energy of potential working
on a mass and not a mass's own energy working on another mass.
And you are correct if your in agreement so far.
My problem then turns to an outside energy source
in order to create a potential between the 2 masses.
And the only energy potenial I can think of is caused by a chaotic Aether
as EL describes http://www.miwa1.com/hemetis/Intro.htm .
--
Rod Ryker...
The intricacies of nature is man's cannon fodder.