A physicist explains gravity in terms we regular folks can understand.

[Wiccan_Child]

What we have so far is not an explanation but only a list. An explanation requires a description of interaction of things in the list. I will offer an example of an explanation. The explanation I give may not be true but the example it offers will be.

Let's start with something we understand: a laser hologram. We see the hologram because laser light flows into a region. The picture stops when the flow of laser light into the region stops. Similarly, a solid exists because energy flows into a region. If the energy were to stop flowing into the region then the solid would cease to exist. What we see as gravity is really our self being pushed toward the planet by the wind created by the energy moving into the region to keep the solid instantiated.

And what compels energy to flow towards this place?

 

[BobAliceEve]

And what compels energy to flow towards this place?

Listening is an important part of communicating. I specifically said that I was defining an explanation (as compared to a simple list) and that I was not explaining gravity. That purpose did not require a complete explanation.

Had I been explaining gravity then your question would have been appropriate. In that interest I will expand my explanation (for entertainment purposes only). I suggest that the same thing that science says compelled energy to condense into matter on an instantaneous basis is what could compel energy to flow to a region on a continuous basis. A single instance of something or repeating instances of the same thing should be allowed?

Your next question then would probably be "Where does the energy go?" to which I answer "Every particle of mass has at it's center a black hole connected to the edge of the universe. Like water flowing into the edge of a public swimming pool the edge of the universe continually fills the universe with energy.

Then you would probably ask "Does this answer any questions that we don't have good answers to?" to which I would respond " It completely explains the concept of the warping of space. It completely explains the effect of what we call "gravity" including the bending of light. It completely explains what we call "inertia" as the mass being pushed into it's own wind."

Going back to the top so to speak, my interest in this discussion is to compare the communication methods called explanation and list, not to define gravity.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Listening is an important part of communicating. I specifically said that I was defining an explanation (as compared to a simple list) and that I was not explaining gravity. That purpose did not require a complete explanation.

Had I been explaining gravity then your question would have been appropriate. In that interest I will expand my explanation (for entertainment purposes only). I suggest that the same thing that science says compelled energy to condense into matter on an instantaneous basis is what could compel energy to flow to a region on a continuous basis. A single instance of something or repeating instances of the same thing should be allowed?

Your next question then would probably be "Where does the energy go?" to which I answer "Every particle of mass has at it's center a black hole connected to the edge of the universe. Like water flowing into the edge of a public swimming pool the edge of the universe continually fills the universe with energy.

Then you would probably ask "Does this answer any questions that we don't have good answers to?" to which I would respond " It completely explains the concept of the warping of space. It completely explains the effect of what we call "gravity" including the bending of light. It completely explains what we call "inertia" as the mass being pushed into it's own wind."

Going back to the top so to speak, my interest in this discussion is to compare the communication methods called explanation and list, not to define gravity.

I apologise for misunderstanding you, it may be a language barrier. It seemed like you were trying to give your own explanation of gravity and actually giving a description of gravity. I'm not sure if that was your intent or not. Like I said, it's probably a language barrier.

 

[BobAliceEve]

I apologise for misunderstanding you, it may be a language barrier. It seemed like you were trying to give your own explanation of gravity and actually giving a description of gravity. I'm not sure if that was your intent or not. Like I said, it's probably a language barrier.

It probably is a language barrier, Wiccan Child. I accept your apology and I apologize for any lack of clarity I contributed. I look forward to many interesting discussions with you.

 

[Supreme]

That blog made my brain hurt slightly.

Didn't really understand much (if anything) it had to chance, but thanks anyway.