New theory for gravity statistics: Posted by timmyw8724 — 5:46 PM - 1 day ago ..read more

Simple and complex are relative and arbitrary. Whats simple for the bread baker may be hard for the brick layer. It could be argued either way. all that really matters is how accurately our existing models allow us to forecast future results given a set of conditions. statistics: Posted by iNow — 2:16 AM - Today ..read more

marnixR wrote: ↑ 7:47 PM - Today rankinafwow wrote: ↑ 5:51 PM - Today Nature is straightforward and simple, ... au contraire - nature is messy and unpredictable, where every rule has a multitude of exceptions man may try to impose order on this tangle, but fails as often as he succeeds Do you think that the "rules" that apply at the most fundamental levels are likely to be extremely simple? I mean ,if at that level there are very few "moving parts" ,then you wouldn't expect to have or need a whole library of behaviours to understand or predict . Is there a chance man will ever get to tha ..read more

You are comparing water to gravity. I am comparing gravity to water. Nature is straightforward and simple, man make it confusing due to their lack of knowledge. What would Carl Sagan Think. statistics: Posted by rankinafwow — 5:51 PM - Today ..read more

It’s not, though. Unless you mean we can make predictions that turn out later to be wrong. statistics: Posted by iNow — 2:24 AM - Today ..read more

Well, it’s not a dark river flowing, but an ordinary one, everything is predictable. statistics: Posted by narandi — 7:31 PM - 1 day ago ..read more

narandi wrote: ↑ 6:07 PM - 1 day ago If the river is wide and there is a lot of water in it, then the size and weight of the boats will not matter. Of course it matters. The depth of the river matters. The width of the river matters. The velocity of the river matters. The curvature of the river matters. The width of the boat matters. The length of the boat matters. The cargo weight on the boat matters. The engine type and rudder and buoyancy of the boat matters. Ignore these self-evident facts at your own peril, sailor boy. statistics: Posted by iNow — 6:59 PM - 1 day ago ..read more

If the river is wide and there is a lot of water in it, then the size and weight of the boats will not matter. If the river is wide and there is a lot of water in it, then the size and weight of the boats will not matter. statistics: Posted by narandi — 6:07 PM - 1 day ago ..read more

narandi wrote: ↑ 3:53 PM - 3 days ago Why do all bodies fall to Earth with the same acceleration, regardless of mass, if there are no forces other than gravity? Of course, acceleration is deduced from the equality of Newton's second law and the law of gravitation, but the mass of the body is reduced. And body weight is not needed..Maybe gravity will depend on the area of this body and how many particles responsible for gravity pass through it, and on Earth the surface density of such particles will be almost the same.I mean bodies much smaller in mass than the Earth. Imagine water flowing do ..read more

marnixR wrote: ↑ Nov 16, 2023 so in essence what you're saying that for at least part of its existence the rate if expansion of the universe exceeded the speed of light  The rate of expansion is not a speed. Speed has units of distance/time. The expansion rate is usually expressed as distance/time/distance, or more specifically, km/sec/megaparsec.  That isn't a speed and cannot logically be compared with one. It makes no syntactic sense to talk about space expanding faster than some speed. The rate at which an object can move tops out at c only relative to an inertial frame, and th ..read more