Quote:
Originally Posted by NorthernBoy
Yours has been tested, has been shown to be wrong, and should be set aside.
If you genuinely do want to explain how the universe works, I'd urge you to spend four years doing an undergraduate degree in physics as the very bare minimum, before you look to rewrite what we know.
|
Sorry if I offended you...
My main purpose is simply to present this ideas and opinions and the phrase “No Need to Be Super Genius…” from the main title (in case you had read it) is just “to catch the attention” of prospective readers, not as a personal attack to the professional scientists, I have high respect to people like you. My mere intention is to review back our concept of gravity. Maybe, the abundant knowledge achieved by the people in this field seems leading them to a much complex analyses of the structure of the Universe that they are over-looking the possibility that gravity could be analyzed through the fundamental laws and theories provided by Newton and Einstein’s argument that gravity is not a force. The fact now, that I only wishes to simplify it seems, at the end, as I keep on analyzing this petty "grade one" theory, is leading me to complexity that gravity is somewhat a force (but not as attracting force) but due to the assumption that the interghanging of energy into new matter and then into a well defined matter and vice versa (that is, in a cycle), in the Universe could causes it and only appears as an attracting force.
Maybe, I am not authorized to tell what is valid and not valid, it need an authority like you to do that. But Galileo during his time was called heretic and Hawking was adviced by his colleagues to abandon his belief that a black hole emits light, mine is just an idea out of the analysis I conducted through reading Hawking's book. I am very sorry but still, I am adamant to withdraw my case without a good fight. (But maybe you are right, I am not Galileo nor Hawking) .