Graviton collisions

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Not having read the book, I'm at a disadvantage. Shouldn't all large bodies exhibit the excess heat flow (Mars, Venus, large ateroids, etc.)? How is it measured?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

For Earth, the heat flow excess is only about 0.1% (as opposed to more than double the solar contribution in the case of Jupiter). We can only measure it because of our proximity to Earth. Likewise for the Moon: an Apollo experiment carried by astronauts to the Moon measured an excess heat flow there. Despite rumors of an excess detected at Venus, the data is not convincing. For most planets, the technique involves calculating the input solar radiation and measuring the output radiation summed over all wavelengths. -|Tom|-

What is the MM definition for "gravitational force"?

Gravity is REALLY a force? What is the meaning of "force"?

Yeah, I know all definitions based upon Newton or Einstein, but they are not convincing.

From rush

What is the MM definition for "gravitational force"?

Gravity is REALLY a force? What is the meaning of "force"?

Yeah, I know all definitions based upon Newton or Einstein, but they are not convincing.

---

You must be trying to pull some legs around here rush. You complained of me calling myself an idiot and about Im-a-dummy and here you go, calling Einstein and Newton not convincing. You may re-phrase as follows for making more sense:

"Yeah, I know all definitions based upon Newton or Einstein, but they are not convincing, well, Im-a-dummy and an idiot, any help?"

Do you really know all the definitions of Newton and Einstein. I am sure you don't...

Before you play smart play dumm. You did exactly the opposite rush.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>What is the MM definition for "gravitational force"?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

F = m*a (Force equals mass times acceleration.) Acceleraion, of course, is simply the rate of change of 3-space velocity (a vector) in coordinate time.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Gravity is REALLY a force? What is the meaning of "force"?<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That is correct: Gravity is a force. The idea of the geometric interpretation to represent gravity as just geometry works mathematically but fails to represent the physics of gravity correctly. If gives no cause for initiating or changing the state of motion of a target body, and requires the creation of momentum from nothing. Both of these violate principles of physics.

In GR, force is the gradient of potential. That gradient (a vector) could be retarded or instantaneous. But GR always chooses an instantaneous gradient with no propagation delay, which corresponds to forces propagating with infinite speed. -|Tom|-

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
mechanic:
You must be trying to pull some legs around here rush. You complained of me calling myself an idiot and about Im-a-dummy and here you go, calling Einstein and Newton not convincing. You may re-phrase as follows for making more sense:
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I did not called Einstein or Newton not convincent. I called their ideas not totally convincent. And no, I am not an idiot nor a dummy.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
mechanic:
"Yeah, I know all definitions based upon Newton or Einstein, but they are not convincing, well, Im-a-dummy and an idiot, any help?"

Do you really know all the definitions of Newton and Einstein. I am sure you don't...
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

-gravitational force is the gradient of the gravitational potential (it says nothing, but if you know the math you can conclude some things and it is useful)
-gravitational force is "something" that make all massive bodies be attracted one to each other. F=GMm/r^2. That is the Newton's definition for gravitational attraction between two bodies. Again, it says nothing about what really is "gravity".
-Gravity is a curvature of spacetime. That is the non-sensical Einstein's definition because there is NO such a thing as "curved space".

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
mechanic:
Before you play smart play dumm. You did exactly the opposite rush.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I'm not playing smart. I asked a question and put my position about what I already knew.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>That is correct: Gravity is a force. The idea of the geometric interpretation to represent gravity as just geometry works mathematically but fails to represent the physics of gravity correctly. If gives no cause for initiating or changing the state of motion of a target body, and requires the creation of momentum from nothing. Both of these violate principles of physics.

In GR, force is the gradient of potential. That gradient (a vector) could be retarded or instantaneous. But GR always chooses an instantaneous gradient with no propagation delay, which corresponds to forces propagating with infinite speed. -|Tom|-
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

That's ok. You are dealing basically with Newton's definition. But I still did not get the meaning of "force" (yes, I know all the math behind it, what is a gradient, potential, etc). Did you treat a force as a result of gravitons action?