Nope, I agree with Einstein completely. You say you do too. Mainstream says they do. Yet I see mainstream talking about Black Holes when E said nope.
Actually, the mainstream doesn't agree with Einstein completely...and black holes is one area where he made a mistake. He thought Schwarzchild singularities (as they were then called) would spin faster and faster as they collapsed, and that speed would be the speed of light and the energy density being infinite well before collapse, whereas today it is known that collapse is not through stationary systems.
The paper in question is "on stationary system with spherical symmetry".
For another simple area where Einstein was wrong - the uncertainty principle (which we know is very much true).
Einstein was quite brilliant - no question - but his work is not all correct.
I see you and mainstream trying to uphold GR when E said in the end he didn't think his theory was valid.
Rubbish - it's entirely valid (and has been tested empirically to extraordinary degrees of accuracy) - he just knew that it didn't hold true on certain very particular scales, and thus was incomplete. This much was known pretty much immediately. There has been no experimental evidence that has shown GR to be wrong on any scale, other than the very scales which we already know it doesn't hold entirely true. Like Newtonian gravity, it's not wrong, just not a complete picture.
But he still held out hope someday it would be figured out how moving bodies interact electrodynamically.
No, he had worked that out already - he joined the known laws of mechanics with Maxwell's equations by postulating special relativity. What he hoped to find was a unified field theory that would reconcile his theory of gravitation with electromagnetism. Hence - SUSY, string theory, and so on.
But of course you ignore E, yet claim to base everything on him. So have you looked into this electrodynamic interaction between moving bodies, or have you just taken gravity for granted?
Gravity is not an electrodynamic interaction between moving bodies.
Without knowing what causes it except mass, which is energy?
Not quite, E's theory of gravity says that the action of the stress-energy-momentum tensor curves the space-time metric, and objects thus follow the overall geodesics of this curvature.
Why do you avoid this energy? Why do you dismiss every research into electrical activity in space?
This is just a
weird statement...
We are just trying to investigate this energy, this electromagnetic interaction E was looking for.
He wasn't 'looking for' an electromagnetic interaction.......have you actually read any of his papers or are you just making stuff up? I think it's the latter.
This energy that makes mass what it is
????
Mass comes about through several proposed mechanisms - for W and Z bosons it seems it is via the symmetry breaking of the Higgs scalar field potential, (although there are other models that can account for a 126GeV Higgs).
Energy doesn't "make mass what it is". Mass and energy are
equivalent.
This energy that hold the very atom together.
That would be both the electromagnetism (in the case of electrons) AND the strong nuclear force, which
isn't electromagnetic....
Come join the investigation and let's bypass those fascinating theories that point to sun's being the center of everything.
There is no heliocentrism in mainstream physics whatsoever.....the Sun isn't even at the geometric center of the orbit of the planets around it! What a bizarre strawman....