0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Mr. Scientist on 11/12/2009 13:55:42Why not? Well, because we can already imagine all kinds of things. Simply declaring that all repulsive forces are antigravitational forces adds nothing. (1)QuoteIf there is somewhere in the fudamental universe we cannot destinguish the forces by my definition, then the definition itself could hold as true as saying that on a cosmological scale, there could be an antigravitational repulsion in the form of antimatter in the distant and yet not observable universe. Antimatter is well understood and we know its gravitational properties and its electromagnetic properties quite well. We can indeed distinguish between them on the basis of behaviour and measurement. (2)QuoteIs this a kind of prediction you wanted me to assert? Because it's only a postulation, but my principle holds true that is until we find an actual antigravitational mass.What principle? Could you please restate, clearly, what you imagine your principle to be?
Why not?
If there is somewhere in the fudamental universe we cannot destinguish the forces by my definition, then the definition itself could hold as true as saying that on a cosmological scale, there could be an antigravitational repulsion in the form of antimatter in the distant and yet not observable universe.
Is this a kind of prediction you wanted me to assert? Because it's only a postulation, but my principle holds true that is until we find an actual antigravitational mass.
(1) - That's your opinion. But one which is quite cloudy, because if you follow your own logic, you would not be asking the questions you are unless it were so easy.
(2) - On the microscopic scale, we believe we do understand. But as i have made more than clear, we have not tested any of the antimatter properties (incuding) their effects on macroscopic scales, and thus your own postulations against the principle does not hold.
(3) - I hate repeating myself more than three times. Please read the OP again.
All I want to knwo is what your "repulsive principle" is. When I asked for details, you made the claim that any force that is repulsive is an antigravitational force. Given the recent evidence from cosmology, this not only includes electromagnetism, it includes gravity too!But that can't be all that there is to your proposal, because now you seem to be claiming that antimatter, despite being seemingly no different from ordinary matter except for charge, actually acts against gravity. Or perhaps you are arguing that antimatter is not opposite charge, it is acually opposite gravity.I simply do not know what your principle is and when I ask you to rephrase whatever your principle is, you refuse. Given your poor spelling and grammar, it is difficult for me to understand the meaning of your long oridinal post, so I would really like to see it in more direct language than already given.