Return to “Everything & Anything”

Post

Re: On the Motion of Galaxies

#17
Flatfingers wrote:...

Sometimes I really don't know how to deal with you guys. Here I am, taking the time to share some neat information and some obviously speculative ideas. Is it really necessary, or helpful, or encouraging in any way, to make no response other than to go looking for things that in your opinion have failed to be utterly complete and perfectly accurate?

"Geez, I guess Flatfingers just can't tolerate being corrected." Bollocks. It's a point of honor for me to admit when I'm wrong, and I am wrong sometimes, just like everyone is wrong sometimes. But the correction ought to matter.

If I'm clearly wrong on some fact that is important to the overall concept being considered, that's one thing. But this nit-picky stuff, that seems to have no purpose other than "ha-ha, gotcha!" just makes me want to stop trying to say anything.

Call that whatever you want.
geez. sorry that i pointed that out without any intention of being hostile or anything.
Post

Re: On the Motion of Galaxies

#20
Cornflakes_91 wrote:
Flatfingers wrote:...

Sometimes I really don't know how to deal with you guys. Here I am, taking the time to share some neat information and some obviously speculative ideas. Is it really necessary, or helpful, or encouraging in any way, to make no response other than to go looking for things that in your opinion have failed to be utterly complete and perfectly accurate?

"Geez, I guess Flatfingers just can't tolerate being corrected." Bollocks. It's a point of honor for me to admit when I'm wrong, and I am wrong sometimes, just like everyone is wrong sometimes. But the correction ought to matter.

If I'm clearly wrong on some fact that is important to the overall concept being considered, that's one thing. But this nit-picky stuff, that seems to have no purpose other than "ha-ha, gotcha!" just makes me want to stop trying to say anything.

Call that whatever you want.
geez. sorry that i pointed that out without any intention of being hostile or anything.
Well Cornflakes, you were wrong because for all you know Flat was talking about magnetic monopoles. A magnetic charge would move in precisely the way he described in a magnetic field.

You'd better be sure of your physics before correcting others.
Post

Re: On the Motion of Galaxies

#21
Some out-loud speculating:

It indeed looks like what a gravitational dipole would be like. Why, I don't know - the "hole in surroundings" seems very plausible to me, but I can't calculate that off the top of my head.

There is however an important difference between electric and gravitational forces: in electrostatics, opposites attract, while in gravity likes attract.
That means that natural movement of charges seeks to nullify dipoles. (hence no large-scale electrostatic things we notice).
However, if somehow a gravitational dipole would occur (either due to a slight over-and underdensity near each other, or due to "negative mass", or due to whatever), even the tiniest one, the like-like attraction of gravity would mean it would spontaneously get stronger, not weaker.
At least, that's what I think.

Kinda curious to put a situation with a tiny over-under-density fluctuation through a gravity sim now to see if I'm correct. :mrgreen:
Last edited by Dinosawer on Tue Feb 07, 2017 8:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
Warning: do not ask about physics unless you really want to know about physics.
The LT IRC / Alternate link || The REKT Wiki || PUDDING
Image
Post

Re: On the Motion of Galaxies

#23
Flatfingers wrote:(Note: I see that something called "negative mass" has been proposed, but I'm not equipped to assess whether that's plausible or pseudo-scientific gibberish. If plausible, it would be an explanation for the Dipole Repeller, but not the Shapley Attractor.)
Rather than negative mass, I'd offer Scalar-tensor-vector gravity as the explanation. I've long been a proponent of it as it matches observations on the "small" scales of star clusters and below, but offers explanations for other phenomena including the accelerating expansion of the universe.

Most relevant to this situation is that it suggests that gravity is stronger than we currently believe, but is countered by a fifth force that repels objects. This force may be responsible for the Dipole Repeller.
Games I like, in order of how much I like them. (Now permanent and updated regularly!)

Online Now

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests

cron