Well the ball whorshipp is full of flaws wich I have yet to find clear answers.
Let's dispose of Newton first and point out the obvious flaws in mass attracting mass causing random orbital acceleration.
You see the problem right off the bat. This is a FIRST LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS VIOLATION and a violation of Newton's OWN first law of motion. Where did the initial energy come from to cause acceleration? If these objects are at rest, what caused them to move? There has to be something and it MUST be an OUTSIDE form of energy applied that was not innate to the objects.
Newton's gravity is INSTANT. This means that it exceeds the speed of light. This would conflict with Einstein's General Relativity and Einstein's weak equivalence principle since Einstein claims nothing could travel in excess of the speed of light in a vacuum. One MUST be wrong or is it that they are BOTH wrong? Just a note. Einstein's weak equivalence principle claims everything is in free fall. How can things be falling freely and bending spacetime at the same time? Is "spacetime" also in freefall? The reason this is in conflict with Newton is that very assertion. If mass attracts mass, how can anything be falling freely and not following the trajectory of the mass and independent of them? Complete conflict in Newton's and Einstein's version of "gravity." Never mind that spacetime is a cartoon concept reified with mathematics.
Newton's gravity does not comply nor is consistent with quantum mechanical laws. Quantum mechanical laws remain in compliance with ALL NATURAL LAW.
Also proven incorrect with the double slit experiment showing superposition of states. Is light a particle? A wave? How would gravity act on this is it has no mass?
Einstein's general relativity theory was never validated. It superseded Newtonian gravity although Newtonian gravity is still used by academia as a conjured and pretend "proof" of the cartoon ball earth. Einstein's mechanics for gravity assume the bending of two conceptual mediums causing the uneven distribution of mass the leads to the emergent force of "gravity." Conceptual mediums are not science. A 4D Riemannian Manifold is an idea and it does NOT reify some mythical force into reality through a colloquial theory that has not been validated by the scientific method. Einstein's GR and SR are an absolute mess of error and begging the question fallacies.
Einstein was done with quantum entanglement. All 1875 instances of this "spooky action at a distance" blowing up his assertion that nothing can exceed the speed of light.
Proven incorrect by the observations of Sagnac and his interferometer, Michelson and Airy's null. These observations also showed the earth to be motionless.
The equations used to in relation to relativity (field equations and tensor calculus) require specific points in this "spacetime" or 4 dimensional Riemannian Manifold. This is a CONCEPT, not a naturally observed phenomenon as physics requires nor can be this conceptual medium be assumed or applied in the scientific method.
Never mind the fact that these "field equations" can only be applied to one mass at a time AND these "specific points" cannot be obtained since there is no defined point of origin in their mythical "universe" (a clear violation of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle) that they can not quantify and assumes this space to be ever expanding into ...space
All of this from their presupposed "big bang" than can be debunked by simply applying the laws of the conservation of angular and linear momentum.
Newton and Einstein had completely different explanations of gravity. Newton had believed that there was a fundamental cosmic attraction between masses. Einstein explained it via a warpage of spacetime caused by mass.
Neither of those men claimed they knew what gravity was exactly. They only offered an explanation as to how it works. Newton's explanations work great here on Earth. Einsteins work great on the universal scale.
I'm sure we are a long ways away from understanding what it is exactly too ... And any good scientist would tell you that.
Well the ball whorshipp is full of flaws wich I have yet to find clear answers.
Let's dispose of Newton first and point out the obvious flaws in mass attracting mass causing random orbital acceleration.
Einstein's general relativity theory was never validated. It superseded Newtonian gravity although Newtonian gravity is still used by academia as a conjured and pretend "proof" of the cartoon ball earth. Einstein's mechanics for gravity assume the bending of two conceptual mediums causing the uneven distribution of mass the leads to the emergent force of "gravity." Conceptual mediums are not science. A 4D Riemannian Manifold is an idea and it does NOT reify some mythical force into reality through a colloquial theory that has not been validated by the scientific method. Einstein's GR and SR are an absolute mess of error and begging the question fallacies.
Just to start...
Newton and Einstein had completely different explanations of gravity. Newton had believed that there was a fundamental cosmic attraction between masses. Einstein explained it via a warpage of spacetime caused by mass.
Neither of those men claimed they knew what gravity was exactly. They only offered an explanation as to how it works. Newton's explanations work great here on Earth. Einsteins work great on the universal scale.
I'm sure we are a long ways away from understanding what it is exactly too ... And any good scientist would tell you that.
I know. I was just correcting the liberal :-)
Spamming that shit everywhere rather than engaging in actual arguments just makes you look like a gullible fuck