Why two mass attracts each other?

I have no apathy towards the notion of "force". The only point I am trying to make is that this thread is about GR, and in GR there are no forces involved in the description of gravity and its effects.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This demonstrates that he did not like the idea.., not that he was presenting anything to the contrary.

There is nothing in the above that suggests Newton, associated the medium and the optics, of that medium as it relates to light, with gravity.

He also conducted experiments in alchemy and other areas of the occult.

It has been a long time since I read Opticks. Show me a direct quote that suggests Newton associated gravitation with the density of the aether.., the medium referenced...

In this you are correct! The above is disputable.

Newton toyed with a number of ideas including shadow gravity. I don't remember anywhere he actually endorsed any mechaism for gravity. Like Einstein, he described how objects interact with each other, without any commitment to how that interaction happens.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You have so many misconceptions in one single sentence,

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

....because mainstream science says that the upper limit is c, so "matter CANNOT accelerate to c", let alone "past" c.

Growing a little petulant when your errors are pointed out to you, eh?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Mass does not increase with velocity, relative energy increases. Relativistic mass is an obsolete concept, which causes all sorts of misconceptions. Black Holes are formed by the gravitational collapse of massive objects (stars). Matter, (anything with mass) cannot accelerate TO c, and there's nothing which can exceed c.

 

Science is not done through taking out-of-context quotations from the speculation of scientists while ignoring the details of their serious work.

 

No, I think it's easier to understand that there is a relation between mass and energy, As for accelerating faster than c, how was Einstein's objection shown ro be irrelevant? Why doesn't it matter that nothing can go faster than c, in the context of gravitational collapse? Do you know?
Does Tach? I doubt it.

Who was first with a model of gravitational collapse?

 

As a matter of fact, I do. This is why I was able to redline all your hilarious errors. Your arrogance is also why funkstar no longer teaches you math.

 

I don't believe you. Prove it.

I'm glad for you, but where and what with?

funkstar had no intention of teaching me anything, neither do you.

 

Nice try, no free lessons for you.

See the redlining of your hilarious post. AlexG pointed out some of the same misconceptions in your post, I suggest that you take the corrections to heart.

We both gave up, you aren't worth it.

 

You are truly pathetic, my son. No free sermon, huh?

 

You see, relativistic mass has no effect on the creation of black holes. I do not know where you get this fringe idea.
Also, massive objects cannot attain c, let alone surpass it. Again, I don't know where you got the kooky idea that "matter accelerates past c".

 

Two masses attract each other because of their gravitational pull. Gravity is a force pulling together all matter so if the matter is more then they are attract more.

 

This thread seems to be reduced to ridicule.