Einstein’s general relativity explains gravity as the result of spacetime curvature due to mass, contrasting with magnetism’s dual ability to attract and repel. This theory introduces the concept of gravity wells, central to understanding gravitational pull. Credit: SciTechDaily.com
Why does gravity pull us down and not up?
Gravity is the reason things with mass or energy are attracted to each other. It is why apples fall toward the ground and planets orbit stars.
Magnets attract some types of metals, but they can also push other magnets away. So how come you feel only the pull of gravity?
In 1915, Albert Einstein figured out the answer when he published his theory of general relativity. The reason gravity pulls you toward the ground is that all objects with mass, like our Earth, actually bend and curve the fabric of the universe, called spacetime. That curvature is what you feel as gravity.
What Is Spacetime?
Before getting into the complicated world of gravity, you need to understand spacetime.
Spacetime is exactly what it sounds like: the three dimensions of space – length, width, and height – combined with the fourth dimension – time. Using some very brilliant math, Einstein was the first person to realize that the laws of physics work in a universe where space and time are merged together.
What this means is that space and time are connected – if you move really fast through space, time slows down for you compared to someone who is moving slowly. This is why astronauts – who are moving very fast in space – age a tiny bit more slowly than people on Earth.
Earth curves spacetime so that you fall toward Earth instead of away from it. Credit: Tokamac/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA
Matter Makes Gravity Wells, Not Gravity Hills
Remember, gravity is the idea that objects in the universe are attracted to each other because spacetime is bent and curved. When Einstein came up with general relativity, he showed that all stuff in the universe can curve spacetime – in physics terms that stuff is mass and energy.
Since your brain usually thinks about the world in three dimensions, it is really hard to think about the four dimensions of spacetime as a single idea. So to make it easier to visualize, imagine the surface of a trampoline. If there is nothing on it, it is flat. But if you stand on the trampoline, it stretches around your feet and creates a valley with you at the center. If there is a ball on the trampoline, it would roll toward your feet.
Gravity works similarly to how objects will roll toward your feet if you stand on a trampoline.
This is a two-dimensional example of how spacetime works. Your mass stretched the trampoline, creating what is called a gravity well that the ball rolls into. This is very similar to how the gravity of a heavy object – like the Earth – pulls things like you and me toward it.
To make things even weirder, since space and time are connected, time is also stretched by heavy objects!
In the movie ‘Interstellar,’ the characters go to a planet close to a black hole, and while they are there, they age slower than everyone else.
The heavier you are, the steeper the sides of the trampoline well. That is why really massive things in the universe – like the Sun or black holes – have stronger gravity than Earth.
So why does gravity pull you down and not push you away?
Imagine someone went under the trampoline and pushed up. The ball would roll away! This would be a gravity hill, not a gravity well. As far as scientists know, matter – or stuff – always makes gravity wells and not gravity hills. Scientists can imagine things made of exotic matter or energy that would cause gravity to push you off into space, but so far, no one has found anything that could cause gravity to push you away from Earth.
Written by Mario Borunda, Associate Professor of Physics, Oklahoma State University.
Adapted from an article originally published in The Conversation.
Since your brain usually thinks about the world in three dimensions, it is really hard to think about the four dimensions of spacetime as a single idea. So to make it easier to visualize, imagine the surface of a trampoline. If there is nothing on it, it is flat. But if you stand on the trampoline, it stretches around your feet and creates a valley with you at the center. If there is a ball on the trampoline, it would roll toward your feet. This is a two-dimensional example of how spacetime works.
This is very good.
Do you really want to know two dimensional example of how space-time works?
If you are really interested in this topic, you can browse the comments of https://scitechdaily.com/microscope-spacecrafts-most-precise-test-of-key-component-of-the-theory-of-general-relativity/ and https://www.zhihu.com/column/c_1278787135349633024.
The author hopes more people dare to stand up and fight against rampant pseudoscience.
Wishing you all the best.
I guess its ok to give something a name when you don’t really understand it but try to legitimize it zny way by namibg it – spacetime????
“When Einstein came up with general relativity, he showed that all stuff in the universe can curve spacetime”
…. using only a rubber sheet and a bowling ball!
Actually, he pretended bent light is bent space, which got a bunch of overfunded misguided mob youth media propagandists permanently excited, but don’t let that get in the way of a good old incessantly oversold and oversold fable.
Einstein didn’t “pretend”, he proved. The predictions of his equations have been confirmed again and again by observation.
Do the same, and you too will be taken seriously. Simple outrage is childish and unconvincing.
The “proof” exists only in your head. Einstein *pretended.*
“The predictions of his equations have been confirmed again and again by observation.”
Confirmed dark Matter fudging isn’t the only thing saving the misplaced supremacist egos of Einstein’s gravity acolytes. Proof is for mathematics, not science, but religious fanatics never ever learn.
General Relativity does not predict dark matter. Observations do. Until you actually learn General Relativity, any opinions you might have about it are completely worthless. You can’t criticize something you know nothing about
“General Relativity does not predict dark matter. Observations do.”
Things a moron can say for 100 dollars, Mayim!
Observations of conserved angular momentum with a galactic wave-cycle show quantum gravity (but not MOND) has a bone to pick with Einstein’s pride.
https://scitechdaily.com/cosmic-clarity-gravitational-lensing-reveals-the-fine-fabric-of-dark-matter/
https://scitechdaily.com/the-universes-hidden-backbone-alma-unveils-dark-matters-fine-scale-fingerprint/
https://scitechdaily.com/the-universes-hidden-backbone-alma-unveils-dark-matters-fine-scale-fingerprint/
MOND wants to pretend it’s not an idiotic gravity paradigm that invents galactic scale angular momentum only out on the periphery of a galaxy, where galaxy is weakest. MOND is so lame that no one has noticed low energy angular momentum conservation in vector quantum gravity dipoles turns “dark matter” into a GR-defined misplace-holder, but the supremacist crusaderist media needs a backup crusader wonk lineage for when gravitational time dilation failure becomes official globally.
“General Relativity does not predict dark matter. Observations do.”
Crusaderist norm-runs have to see these matter-guiding galactic fingerprint-template rings as rings of hidden matter located in the frame, *out there* where the orange is brightest. Crusaderist norm-runs cannot under any circumstances imagine conserved angular field carrier momentum in gravity originating close to the dense centers of the two galaxies being responsible for the orange rings.
The resemblance to a quantum gravitational way of producing krusader klan kyptonite on demand is slightly explorable.
You can tell MOND fanaticism is pedigreed astroturf gravity modification because no MOND fanatic has the nerve to say the mere idea of MOND, wrong or right, undercuts the logic of calling “dark matter” an honestly generalized placeholder. The quotes in the cites I gave automatically assigns a clumpiness parameter to quantum gravity phase cycling variations that vary concentrically because they are source-distance-dependent phase effects.
“You can’t criticize something you know nothing about.”
Any more things any religiously lying moron concealed crusader liberal arts nutjob can say online for this retired patent examiner to laugh at?
“Until you actually learn General Relativity, any opinions you might have about it are completely worthless.”
“Shaggy” is a clown name, you know. I know what kind of parochial bluffing colonial douchebag physics crusader you are: One that believes in gravitational time dilation over gravitational photon distortion. You’d even religiously bluff that it’s factored into GPS (it’s not, but some people pretend) to “win” a point.
“MOND is so lame that no one has noticed low energy angular momentum conservation in vector quantum gravity dipoles…”
Ummm, yeah. Sure. I may not be a physicist, but I still know complete BS when I see it. What the hell is “low energy angular momentum”? There’s angular momentum, and that’s it, period! But it gets worse, just what in the hell is “In the direction of something that does not exist dipoles” supposed to be? I mean, I get it, I do… WORDS ARE HARD, aren’t they? But for the love of all that’s remotely intelligible in the world… YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST TRY! Do it for yourself, if nobody else. You have to at least TRY. 𓃗
“I may not be a physicist”
You’re a social engineer, a liberal science jackass, like all my critics here, (“TheHeck”)
“What the hell is low energy angular momentum”
It’s you showing what a low energy spinning jackass you are.
“just what in the hell is “In the direction of something that does not exist dipoles””
It’s you, proving you are a stupid jackass with a fake quote.
Listen up, you complete lying piece of c**p” – stick to one name.
Sime Says makes you sound like a proper twit.
“I get it, I do… WORDS ARE HARD, aren’t they? But for the love of all that’s remotely intelligible in the world… YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST TRY! Do it for yourself, if nobody else. You have to at least TRY.”
You’re a psycho.
“What the hell is … ”
You’re such a charming psychotic, “Sime.” Such a way of passive-aggressive way asking stupid questions you obviously don’t want answered.
“Low energy angular momentum” is angular momentum that carries extremely, remarkably, low energy, you charming piece of cr*p.
Don’t learn American English in a tent in some gf desert halfway around the world.
“There’s angular momentum, and that’s it, period!”
What a stupid comment. Fascist mob pays you too much.
One more nail in the General Relativity coffin – Guy from Harvard, named Tom Van Flandern, who considered himself an astro-navigator and who worked for NASA in that field at one time, let the cat halfway out of the bag, one he’d apparently taken an oath to conceal, by suggesting different colors of light are associated with different values of vacuum lightspeed. He was apparently able to get away with that by not mentioning that the different observed colors in that case were generated remotely in different gravitational field intensities using the same light clock.
Guy from Xavier and Yale, not Harvard, named Tom Van Flandern. Celestial mechanics was his field, not astro-navigation. Maybe I can find his paper on gravitational light dilation/contraction but I suspect it has fallen into a permanent memory hole.
Special relativity was once explained using a “light clock” consisting of a light pulse, or photon, bouncing between two parallel facing mirrors placed some fixed distance apart, sitting side-by-side in a rocketship. Every bounce was a “tick.”
When the clock is moving, the pulse must travel further in between bounce, the delay between bounces is longer from the perspective of an observer that sees the clock as moving, but not from the perspective of an observer moving with the clock.
Nothing at all in any of that logically precludes the speed of light from taking on slightly different values in different locations and along different directions, due to different gravitational field gradients. Extending constant “c” to every point of vacuum in the universe is then nothing more than an annoying time-wasting fetish of Einstein’s determinate universe fanbase.
Special Relativity does something stronger. It shows that different observers measure speed of light the same even as they measure other physical quantities (like, time) differently.
“It shows that different observers measure speed of light the same even as they measure other physical quantities (like, time) differently.”
Enjoy projecting outrage much?
Looks like you stroked out (in rage, no doubt) after deleting your first attempt at naming the first item on your circular logic list there. Allow me to correct it – you meant to write “imaginary physical quantities (like British royal scientific competence and time).”
You don’t have a 2nd example?
“When the clock is moving, the pulse must travel further in between bounce, the delay between bounces is longer from the perspective of an observer that sees the clock as moving, but not from the perspective of an observer moving with the clock.”
Of course it goes quite realistically beyond that (assuming flat space) to notice that the rocket-bound perspective also sees slower non-rocket-bound light-clocks (assuming flat space) *paradoxically enough, supposedly* but I don’t get the paradox and maybe it’s just because I was raised on spacetime treated separately (assumes flat space except where it pretends to apply just as well elsewhere) under SR, followed by GR, starting over half a century ago, although I had no soul-steeped love for it after a short time it took a long time to get a solid grasp on most of its well-concealed failings. Moving fast not only breaks things, moving fast also messes around with perceptions of other people’s light clocks, whether or not those light clocks move, much like how other people’s gravity will only mess with light-clocks seen remotely. Relativistic muons apparently fall for it hook line and sinker every time, but that’s maybe a little too decay-centric, but protons don’t decay and predicting slow muon decay times is far too wonky for unfunded people. Need something tangible that demonstrably scales up beyond atoms.
“When the clock is moving, the pulse must travel further in between bounces, the delay between bounces is longer from the perspective of an observer that sees the clock as moving, but not from the perspective of an observer moving with the clock.
Nothing at all in any of that logically precludes the speed of light from taking on slightly different values in different locations and along different directions, due to different gravitational field gradients.”
The beauty of it is not only that it has been around for as long as SR, but also that the picture carries useful realism so well when the rules of SR are easily adapted to handle long-range light-speed variations. One can tell right away that changing the value of lightspeed gradually over a distance due to gravity leaves no room for gravitational time dilation/contraction, yet frequency dilation/contraction based only on gravity differences can be easily illustrated.
It’s the same with comparing flattened AdS space to a spring oscillator space, a standard spring near the mass at the center is stretched further, it vibrates faster and if the vibration moves outward into less-stretched springs the frequency drops and rate of movement outward slows.
Climbing up an extradimensional well that starts a photon out red closest to a mass-center in stretched space-time and keeps it red as it moves to the edge is crazy-fun-time sick kiddy-tramp logic.
“When the clock is moving, the pulse must travel further in between bounces, the delay between bounces is longer from the perspective of an observer that sees the clock as moving, but not from the perspective of an observer moving with the clock.”
All of that falls out of keeping the speed of light practically constant, but putting it more fundamentally, it is conserving photon energy, keeping the photon energy constant. If keeping the photon energy constant required varying the photon speed, then the sensible thing would be to vary the photon speed, even if it means one has to stop pretending space is bent.
I would never deny that particle time dilation, even relativistic time dilation, is a real effect for particles and light *under SR.* Muon time dilation never seems to factor gravity variation effects into decay time dilation, if no decay calculations consider a gravitational time bending effect then there is of course no evidence for it. Just one more reason to discard gravitational time dilation in favor of gravitational photon dilation, aside from news articles that leave gravitational time dilation out of a concise explanation of relativity in GPS for different gravity frames without denying remote observer gravitational-change frequency dilation.
Any delusion that distorts mathematics is a desecration of the spirit of science. Physics must respect the scientificity of two-dimensional mathematical models. The irresponsibility of so-called academic journals (such as Physics Review Letters, Science, Nature, etc.) has seriously affected the popularization and promotion of scientific knowledge.
The only problem with Einsteins “theory” is that if the effects of the push or pull of gravity propegate at “C” then none of our calcuated orbits would be workable. See “What is the speed of gravity” by the astronomer who did the math behind the space programs
In most cases, readers’ comments trying to disprove or disparage Einstein are motivated by antisemitism of those who cannot accept the fact that a Jewish person is such a gigantic scientific figure. Such attempts come in two varieties. They are mostly claims that Einstein’s theories are not original, i.e., that he stole them from someone else, invariably some other White scientists (never another Jew). But, sometimes, they appear in the form of amateurish claptrap parading as expertise, as witnessed by the Fixed Gravity guy.
“Antisemitism” is a news-speak nonsense fake-humanitarian bogus-linguistic word invented by British colonialist supremacists hoping the obvious fraud implicit in their clearly repugnant over-exclusive definition, combined with clearly repugnant overpaid corrupt media mobbing, can be overlooked.
Einstein was not in any way open or charitable in terms of providing relevant references for SR. Lorentz contributed to his fame but really it was all contributed toward the greater glory of the royal kiddy kolony klan that fights the poorest forms of whiteness wherever it dares to show it monstrous white face. How’s that float your white-baiting white-lording royal boat?
“such a gigantic scientific figure”
It’s all relative. Bigfoot seems smaller in you your mouth than the other major orifice because it’s accustomed to being in your mouth.
Clever fake-looking name, by the way, Mr. Vapid. Try capitalizing it next time if you want more of this.
“amateurish claptrap parading as expertise”
Says some dumb***k jackass who stole the name of a HS official. Send me an e-mail, knowitall.
In classical physics, time is a perfect periodic measurement of variation. In relativity time is another physical dimension which gets affected by inertial effects. One thing is certain when you place an atomic clock on different inertial platform the time will change due to the effect of inertia on the density of the atomic clock material.
As brilliant as Einstein was (e.g., E=M(C squared) due to the earlier misinterpretation of the duality of light as both particles and waves in the first double slit experiments, he ultimately got it wrong with “spacetime.” What actually accounts for the scattering of dots in the double-slit experiments is the regularly pulsing nature of radiant angular lines of gravity force, redirecting the photons in those other directions. I demonstrated some of that in my first low-budget at-home video first uploaded to YouTube in 2012 and since (inappropriate censorship of my comments on the Covid-19 ‘scamdemic’ and about the real causes of so much now epidemic chronic illness and premature mortality) deleted and uploaded to: https://odysee.com/@charlesgshaver:d/1Gravity:8
Obviously, to me, by causing the intensified locally generated lines of gravity force of a rotating wheel to interact with earth’s ambient field, to some degree gravity can be made to ‘push’ despite it’s natural tendency to ‘pull.’ Also not the first time for me to comment on this, ‘space’ just is and ‘time’ just isn’t. Time is nothing more than an incredibly fast succession of incredibly brief ‘now moments’ alternating with incredibly brief ‘intervals.’ True science begins with first being as fresh and totally objective as possible and, then, proceeding with caution in previously chartered territory. Merry Christmas to all.
Think of a quantum gravity carrier as a hidden or invisible rigged social justice dipole with no unconcealed moral authoritarian implications, one showing a rich word-driven air-filled proper good head on one end and a heavy solid or liquid head on the other. People naturally getting dunked over time on the heavy solid head end are being naturally compensated or replaced while people hitching a ride on the rich word-driven air-filled head end are naturally elevated.
“a rich word-driven air-filled proper good head on one end and a heavy solid or liquid head on the other”
Call it the complex “Sokal/Prescod-Weinstein” vacuum head oscillator. It represents all that is restoratively positive and negative and imaginative for energy emitted by the PR-space of a closed protected string theory enclave manifold.
I’ve got only two or three references for GR’s gravitational time dilation being contradicted by GPS.
“Global positioning system (GPS) satellites fly in different orbits around the Earth. These orbits are different frames of reference, so GPS has to take special relativity into consideration to help us navigate.” – Notice there’s nothing about general relativity in that.
https://scitechdaily.com/science-made-simple-what-is-the-theory-of-relativity/
“To an observer whose reference frame is standing on the Earth’s surface, a muon should travel only .4 miles in its 2.2 microsecond life. But because muons travel so close to the speed of light, from their reference frame time passes for them about 40 times slower than viewed by an earth observer.” – Notice again there’s nothing about general relativity in that.
I seem to recall at least one SR-only book that also claimed to explain muon time dilation but never mentioned gravity.
Also there is Godwin’s rule invokable in the context of this page.
Van Flandern is maybe not a great source despite not being from Hobbit U. Xavier U. is Catholics and Catholics are also at times supremely prone to bias and injecting religion into science. I was raised Catholic, so I should be able to have an opinion on that.
https://scitechdaily.com/science-made-simple-what-is-the-theory-of-relativity/
Let me re-emphasize the efficiency in this, the author seems quite authoritative.
“Global positioning system (GPS) satellites fly in different orbits around the Earth. These orbits are different frames of reference, so GPS has to take special relativity into consideration to help us navigate.”
That’s the whole blurb/paragraph on GPS, it doesn’t say “special relativity and general relativity” when it could do just that, instead it’s just “special relativity” that merits a reference. The rest of the article talks about a theory bending spacetime, but when it gets down to GPS brass tacks, gravity changes due to different orbits apparently don’t dilate or compress time or the average spacings between the centers of photons from the satellite, so clearly the implication again is gravity only changes photons at the individual level, including atomic clock photons, but gravity change has no impact left over to affect time itself. It’s just reality plus inductive logic replacing the constant “c” religion.
“To an observer whose reference frame is standing on the Earth’s surface, a muon should travel only .4 miles in its 2.2 microsecond life. But because muons travel so close to the speed of light, from their reference frame time passes for them about 40 times slower than viewed by an earth observer.”
Once again only particle speed factors into time dilation, although the particle goes from zero earth gravity to almost full earth gravity. Once again when the theory rubber hits the practical road there is absolutely no room left over to bring in gravitational time dilation, even to claim it’s too small to matter.
Is Catholic physics similar to Jewish physics? Or are they both the same?
You probably should ask someone who respects religion and its institutions as much as you.
Both religions seem to be 100% on board with idiotic gravitational time dilation and I have zero respect for both.
So, did you worship bent time and universal constant “c” like a good little boy this year?
This could be bad science news here, I hope you’re sitting down.
Einstein is not the messiah.
There, I said it. Come over to the dark side now. Feel the hate.
Another question for you, Mr. Rude Personal Question Guy, goes for any member of the spit club:
Anything that isn’t Einstein’s holy bent spacetime needs to be cast as reactionary Nazi flat-space physics, for the children, am I right?
… And don’t forget to give the old Nog a go with little Tiny Tim and a merry new Christmas trampoline there! Cheers!
Space has has structure, a dielectric constant, a permitivity constant just like regular matter, gravity pulls at this structure it becomes more dense and slows light.
As far as why mass always attracts, i was studying so read this article which shed no new light on subject. i have only some gut feeling that its related to entropy and momentum acceleration. Objects undergoing acceleration nuetralize gravity. Gravity seems to counter act momenentum, slowing things down capturing or reversing momentum and even converting momentum into other vectors heat or other forms of energy. This reduces the potential and kinetic energy of everything. Its as if matter is settling into energy wells independent of say electrical feild
matter energy can be tranferred to elecrical and back, but never without generating entropy.
One example of anti gravity is evaporation of black holes.
Imagine you are on a plane with moon and no at atmosphere, hard surfaces, and you have a gun and you shoot moon dead center, the moon moves away from you, the bullet hits moon rebounds hits planet and it also absorbes some energy and two bodies movie, this continues until all the energy in bullet is transfered to both bodies moving them apart.
It’s like a reddit muppet group dribbling in here.
Gravity slows light? Some say gravity reddens light (slows frequency). Reddened light equals gravitational time dilation, in other words.
Every aspiring fascist globo-political bandwagon clown thinks gravitational time dilation/contraction is timeless genius and a true inspiration to mind benders everywhere. That alone is not enough for me to give it a thumbs down.
But is it like saying the slower currents closer to shore in a riptide bend the path of a swimmer into the shore? Like the planet-facing “inner” side of any particle falls slower than the “outer” side? Is that why matter bends inward toward mass about twice as well as light where the field vector energy face inward only half the time?
“Like the planet-facing “inner” side of any particle falls slower than the “outer” side?”
This is like a “go-kart” theory of particles, with at least one inside wheel and one outside wheel, but a what if a simpler “unicycle”-like theory is needed and it says the “wheel”-like particle thing only turns inward because it’s turning toward a faster path of least resistance?
Relativity is just an optical illusion, and any theory based on it also has thus problem. Consequently all of modern physics is fundamentally flawed. Here is a very simple logic proof showing the built in falicy based on Einstein’s derivation of Relativity. No theory based on a logical falicy can be correct no matter how many experiments claim to prove it.
According to Relativity, two inertial moving observers will see each others space contract and time dilate. This is a complete contradiction and a physical impossibility if the effects are real. Objects and the passage of time can not be both small and large at the “”SAME”” time for the “”SAME”” observer. The only possible explanation is that the observed effects are an optical illusion. Any theory based on Special Relativity, such as General Relativity, must also have the same problem. Consequently all of modern physics which is based on Relativity needs to be rethought.
Again the argument is very simple and it is the argument Einstein used to derive Relativity, and no acceleration is used in the argument. A train with length (L) traveling at constant velocity (v) relative a stationary observer on a station platform. According to Relativity, the stationary observer will see the train contracted (L/r, where r is the Relativistic gamma), whereas an observer on the train will see it not contracted (L). So the train is both contracted (L/r) and not contracted (L) depending on the observer. This is a complete contradiction (L not equal L/r) and can not be true if length is real. The same argument applies to time (T not equal rT). Both observers will disagree on the passage of time. If time is real, it can not be both dilated and not dilated. If space and time are observed to be both large and small simultaneously for one inertial reference frame, such as the train, then it must be an optical illusion.
Relativity is a must. Matter+energy+space=one. See my comments above. Failing to understand the true nature of gravity is what renders a lot of physics mere “theory.”
Also, my father was not religious despite his undergraduate degree from Xavier. He attended because he had a full ride scholarship and was from Ohio. Later, the US Naval Observatory paid his tuition for his PhD at Yale. They were deeply impressed with his research on the moon watch project, his intellect and scientific work ethic.
Thank you for your insights.
The battle persists what is relativity, space is considered three dimensional is space that way, or could it be a better fit as a sphere a area of raidious and the density within the area rules the amount of attractive nature, then the force could be whether at static state or rotating, then the speed of the rotation would influence the amount of magnetic attraction. density is a collection of mass, the collection of protons neutrons and electrons compacted. If the compaction were to be so dense that the mass (singularity) were to slip (move) the formula would be attached to time a area of existence and the Bang would be expansion in all directions, the gravitational lensing would be a density of magnetic field flux surrounding a sphere, like how eyeglasses are lensed. The question is did time exist before the singularity or is time a manifestation of movement (expansion).
“General Relativity does not predict dark matter.” – Shaggy the clown
Relativity pseudo-detected and retro-invented dark matter, clown. Never forget.
Massive bodies may well converge on one another due to gravity wells, but apples most certainly do NOT “fall to the surface of the Earth”. They do in Newtonian gravity, but not in GR. Rather, in Einstein’s conception of gravity the apple, once disconnected from the tree, doesn’t move anywhere at all, and it is the Earth that rises up (at 9.8m² per second) and rudely interrupts Ms Fuji, who was doing nothing more than minding her own business and following a geodesic as any good inertial apple should.
“Ms Fuji”
Look at you, getting out a little macho globohomo passive aggression to ring in the new year!!! You go, ummm. When is the big change?
This is possibly the dumbest headline of the year.
I wouldn’t touch that turtle tramp troll analogy with a 120-inch pole.
In translating from TheHeckBridgeTroll-speak to English, for any situation describable as having notably small or “low” angular momentum, a case of “low mass” angular momentum or “low rate” angular momentum could fit the situation.
In the case that both mass and rate are notably “low,” especially in a context where a low angular rate is already posited, one could further say the angular momentum is “low energy angular momentum,” thereby efficiently adding further information about the low angular moment.
The use of a pulsed matter/antimatter engine works. The local gravity field created deforms both spacetime and moves any craft in the local deformation.
Never forget, you’re always being held down in an inescapable extradimensional “well” by Einstein fanatics and their supersized-ego “gravity theory!” I mean how cool is that!
Thanks to Einstein, the average poor sucker is stuck in an extradimensional depression and can’t get out!
space-time curvature is nonsense! It can be concave or convex!
https://www.facebook.com/100076879416271/posts/pfbid0vwPVGY4ZViQZFYjaT9bap8VxRTrGS6VbLZ7j9AvQw81Wu3E5d8xr7fpr6EWthsENl/?app=fbl