[valonispetr (OP)]

Einstein's theory of gravity tells us about material bodies is curved space that is not Euclidean straight . Aside from unclear physical interaction mechanism among  own body and the geometry of space, ie the interaction of matter with empty space remains to me by anyone yet unanswered question: who straightens curved space after the removal of the material body?

[valonispetr (OP)]

Offering a simple answer: the curvature of space itself straightens. With a little reflection we find that in the universe itself is not going to happen! Everything must have an material stimulation to any change. So what causes the space "alone" even? Why is far from  material bodies the universe so "straight"? Just by itself? Theoretical physicist Lee Smolin says: It seems that space is filled with something like "particles building space". Is not it time to give these Smolin's "building particles" any particular form? Then of course the Einsteinian empty space wasn't so completely empty and the responsibility for "plane" space would pass on these "building blocks" . They are by matter ejected from their null positions and if the matter is removed of,  they returns to their null positions.  What do you think about it?

[valonispetr (OP)]

The exact Einstein's equations accurately describe the forces by which they interact between bodies, more precisely, between  mass bearers. Describes the state of the space between them like the deformation his geometry. But they say almost nothing about the principle, the deformation mechanism. We can accept the idea that the mass of a body in contact with the immediate area affects its geometry. Although it is rather the idea from the realm of mysticism. Completely out of physical causality is the idea,  ​​how this mechanism operates on the geometry of a remote space. QED offers his vision of radiated gravitons. This is in contradiction with Einstein's vision of deformation geometry. Nature does not duplicate anything, the effect of gravity can not have two diametrically opposed principles! Moreover, the principle of emission of gravitons as bearers of the momentum has its pitfalls: single element in the total universe: the only body (mass) can radiate gravitons with even a slight impulse but with nonzero mass! Therefore  this body would after a long, but finite time de-exitated whole his mass. This situation, like Socrates case of electric charge alone in the universe, (see: https://petrvalonis.blogspot.com [nofollow] ) QED not solve!
If anyone of you knows the causal and logical physical principle of gravitation, please add it here.

[valonispetr (OP)]

Einstein told us that the bodies that carry the substantiality have the ability to change the geometry of space . Not in the universe other content categories than empty space without substantiality and body  (particles), which are carriers of substantiality . There is therefore nothing but bodies that would change the geometry of space .  If you spurn the old Newtonian idea of contactless immediate action at a distance then many options left! Ask yourself: how body that is bounded by its volume, changes the geometry of a remote space? As we emerge from the current notions of contact action, then we conclude that the body can change the geometry of space just inside his volume. What the other spaces outside the volumes of solids? We can only believe that this remote area is "curving " something other of thing than the material body. But what? Einstein always maintained that the mass of a body change the geometry of space. Not a space change geometry for himself! The only solution is: substantiality of bodies do not curving  the geometry of space, but substantiality changes zero mass of space to his nonzero mass. This process of spreading substantiality with the speed of light in a spherical space around  outside of the body. Then is fulfilled Einstein's prediction that substantiality changes the structure  of space. The gravitational field  is not curved  geometry of space, but gravitational field is spherically distributed substantiality of bodies on the whole space. Gravitational field has a substantiality as it should itself body (particle)! The gravitational field is a continuation of the mass of bodies in space. This is consistent with Socrates' vision of kvarton‘s model of the universe. For the curious interested informed about it Socrates writes on: (http://qarton.sweb.cz [nofollow])

[valonispetr (OP)]

I put the question of who straightens curved space, to the  physicits he is  publishing in journals  and he surprised me with quick answer: no one, it did himself. He added that such a question he never put to himself. I asked him again: why it makes that space?  Why not stay curved? Now on a long meditation then said: I guess it something to forcing. I asked further and what makes him straighten up. He said: I really do not know. On top of that, I never thought about. I asked him: does ask  you about it sometimes any physicist? Never, anyone; he said
 Don't it really the tragedy of physics? Everyone talks about the curving geometry of space with matter, but no one ever asked the question: why and how the geometry straightens again. It is a tragedy!

[valonispetr (OP)]

Yes, Einstein's gravitational equations are very accurate, but they are misinterpreted . Einstein's space is all empty,whole intangible. Einstein saw that this space is somehow close to the body changes. But it has no matter, no structure so what has in it changing? Thus, Einstein gave it to geometry. Nothing else in his  immaterial space isn't !! According to Socrates' model space has the structure of a material and that  is exposed to the elements change! As well as are changing the structure of space around the elementary particles. The gravitational field is the summary makrofield from all the particles that comprise the body.  No curvature geometry! And therefore it is not necessary to the settlement!.
 Interpretation of what is happening around the body serves Socrates model of elementary particles and vacuum.
(More about it on https://petrvalonis.blogspot.com [nofollow])

[Omaughuntinaser]

thee is NO curved space, it is an impossibility, and there is NO PROOF for it.

[valonispetr (OP)]

And what evidence do you have for the curvature of space ?

[Omaughuntinaser]

And what evidence do you have for the curvature of space ?

[valonispetr (OP)]

2336 readers visit this article. Although the title of the article invited readers to let me answer the question in the title of the article: Who straightens curved space?
However, he found no one in the Anglophone world, who would seriously that question answered. Even the one article helpfully described the warning to readers: nofollow. One would assume that he probably physics alive, that he has it at his fingertips. Does not! On the simple question not answered! Yet there is no doubt: as long as none of physicists causally not answer this key question of physics to budge not from the place! Because they does not know what creates cosmic space. P.A. Dirac once said, "if you are not able to correctly describe vacuum as you can believe that you can describe anything more complicated!" (Moscow, 1956). Although there have been some hints: P.A. Dirac talked about the ocean of electrons with negative energy, Lee Smolin turn on basic "stones" vacuum. V.I. Rydnik fills the space with physical vacuum and talking about the polarization of the vacuum as a splitting of the positive and negative vacuum But the community of physicists ignored it and continued to wander. How long?

[Space Flow]

I have an answer for you.
I feel your frustration. But the answer  is simple. You have been circling around it this whole thread.
Einstein almost had it. He was so close. His own theory tried to tell him. But I suppose brilliant as he was, he was still a product of his own beliefs.
He introduced "Lambda" to make the Universe stand still.
He also considered spacetime as static. A fixed set of coordinates that could be bent and twisted by Matter, but did not move.
Let me ask you something.
Wether the Quantum/Graviton point of view or the GR Static Space view, How does Gravity get out of a Black Hole Event Horizon?
All your answers are here; http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=65064.0

Hope that helps..

[puppypower]

If GR curves space-time, why don't we use polar coordinates, since polar coordinates has two angles to describe position as a function of curvature? This would cut out the middleman, and allow a direct connection between GR and angles. We use Cartesian Coordinates because it is easier for expressing space that remains at right angles. This choice may be a source of confusion.

Space-Time is a reference variable by which we relate tangible things. Space is the void between tangible things and time is not a thing we can save in a bottle. Space-time is similar to the wind shield display on a jet. As the plot moves around, the display changes to reflect how tangible things change with respect to each other.

If one uses this windshield display long enough, one will begin to lose the distinction between tangible reality and the overlapping reference display, making these two things appear as one integrated thing. When space-time bends or curve, it is really the imagination that is bending. But since the imagination and reality have often merged in the mind, to become one, the distinction between tangible and imaginary is not clear cut causing each to take on the properties of the other.  If the display was shut off, it would take some time for the mind to adapt to using only tangible things. I am flipping the switch so one can see the difference.

In ancient times, Helios would ride his golden chariot across the sky.  Helios was in the imagination and was used like the ancient windshield display, to help tell the time of day. There was a mind merger. At that same time in history, astrology and astronomy were one thing, with the astrology the wind shield display used to reference changes in the astronomical night sky. This display of mythology allowed the ancients to plot and predict the sky with good accuracy, considering the tools that had; eyes. If consistently good results is proof of something, their good results in astronomy appeared to prove astrology, due to the two things having merged in their minds. Once the gods were displaced, the windshield display was turned off and they had to adapt. Many maintained the old display, even with the gods displaced, because the display created good results.

There is no rule in science that requires the calibration of the mind, even though the mind is the most important tool of science. How do you zero the mind? Seeing this two part distinction; windshield display and tangible reality, is part of that calibration, that few actually do, since this is not required. This distinction, although hard at first, allows one to use alternate windshield displays, that may be more functional under other conditions, such as polar coordinates and GR. If this polar coordinate and GR display was allowed to merge, than the two angles would take on abstract meaning, that could begin to defy common sense, since no calibration is required.

[valonispetr (OP)]

Answer to Space Flow:

All the "physicists" just parroting Einstein: weight curved geometry of space.
 weight curved geometry of space.... Nobody cares who it straightens !!

I do not have that problem with a black hole. KMV of Socrates tells me, that when heavy stars collapse completely into a singularity
 the collapse stops on average half Schwarzshild horizon. R_g/2,  i.e. to 2kM/2c², when all energy/mass is emitted !!  Births "body" - gravimon-, has no weight, was emitted during the collapse. Therefore it can not emit any photons!
Read something  of Wonderful Socrates' Kvarton Model of World.

[alysdexia]

The curvature of space-time is a misnomer; it's actually matter that curves, where matter isn't limited to the EM van der Waals-London boundary.  The corollary of the infinite-range laws is that a mote or body takes up the whole univers and that the field and body are identical.

[valonispetr (OP)]

The answer is as an alibi from all  Einsteinian  physicists. I did not expect anything else. On the question of what straightens the curved geometry of space, physicists from these principles, can not answer. In the Einsteinian scheme massless enclosed area outside of elementary particles is nothing material that could flatten warped geometry of space. So they refuse to answer the simple question: What flattens ... Surely by Einstein after removing the bodies already there is nothing !!

[Space Flow]

Surely by Einstein after removing the bodies already there is nothing !!

But on the other hand there is a weighty argument to be adduced in favour of the ether hypothesis. To deny the ether is ultimately to assume that empty space has no physical qualities whatever. The fundamental facts of mechanics do not harmonize with this view. For the mechanical behaviour of a corporeal system hovering freely in empty space depends not only on relative positions (distances) and relative velocities, but also on its state of rotation, which physically may be taken as a characteristic not appertaining to the system in itself. In order to be able to look upon the rotation of the system, at least formally, as something real, Newton objectivises space. Since he classes his absolute space together with real things, for him rotation relative to an absolute space is also something real. Newton might no less well have called his absolute space "Ether"; what is essential is merely that besides observable objects, another thing, which is not perceptible, must be looked upon as real, to enable acceleration or rotation to be looked upon as something real.

[alysdexia]

You may think that mass belongs to the body that you can see.  Draw a ball.  Now you may ascribe the mass to the region inside the ball.  However if a ball is a mote or a cluster of motes, this doesn't apply.  Draw another ball umbe this ball proportional to how long the first ball has been steady.  Mass, charge, and "color" belong to this region between the balls, the field which stores all of these things.  That's where measurements are taken.  It may be decades until scientists learn this.

[valonispetr (OP)]

Hit of contemporary cosmology is the dark matter in the universe

Scientists know that dark matter, although no doubt exists, but is invisible (hence is dark) absolutely permeable (puts to bodies zero resistance), and the device is elusive. Just like a dressed-undressed, "phantom". So scientists desert their imagination to invent the strangest exotic particles-nonparticles and weed-infestating with  them  professional cosmological Forums; this is a contest for the dumbest hypothesis. What's that dark matter actually is? If would the scientists read Socrates' Kvarton  Model of the uUniverse they  easily have found that, in the ominous "dark matter" every day wading, cavort and flung like a kids.
Yes these are the known physical fields (especially that gravity), which are, according to Socrates KMV, physical. Kvartons, like those Smolin‘s ‚foundation stones of space', when they are in  the null position they  contains 4 protoels inside subcritical volume dW_krit in which their unitary bearers antipodean mass protoels mutually completely are saturated, so that the outer space (ambient kvartons) does not act at all. It is an ideal massless state of space. By inserting such an area free, antipode uncompensated protoel, (all bodies are a set uncompensated even partially compensated of protoels), which begins its unmatched mass disrupt kvartons in its surrounding, so their protoels move away from nullity volume of kvarton, dW_krit and the breach  kvartons become be material. Because everything that disturbs the ideal external nullity kvartons that reveals the mass of their components,  so that makes these "disturbed" kvartons the material. That is the essence of all physical fields. (Read more in Socrates study: Wonderful Socrates' Kvarton Model of World)

Have philosopher Ernst Kolman alredy knew clearly affected nobelist Marquis Louis de Broglie, that every massive particle contains primary material and her singularity generated material  field extending from the singularity into the whole surrounding area. It's a question what part of the primary mass of protoel  falls on the very singularity (particle) and how much his mass is distributed over a mass of excited kvartons, ie. On the gravitational field.

 Just this model of the mass field of elementary particles (KMV) confirms ancient ideas L. de Broglie in which singularity is responsible for particle characteristics elementary particle and its mass properties of the wave field behind. A field of integrated mass of all particles forming the body can be identified with the gravitational field of the body. So the gravitational field is generated from exitated kvartons, ie. from nullity state escorted kvartons, in this way gaining his mass, ie. the ability to influence its tangible protoels out of kvartons on outer space by the famous farmland formula q = Q /r².  In this way, the mass of the primary singularity - (vacant) is spreads throughout the surrounding space continuum of kvartons.

 This suggests that the gravitational field, especially in the vicinity of galaxies is very physical environment and as such contributes significantly to the dynamics, especially nests' of galaxies that is actually observed astrophysics. Einstein's notion of only intangibles  gemetry essence of gravity is wrong! His tensor equations for gravitational field does not reflect the hypothetical curvature of geometry in intangible spacetime, but the rate of mass in the kvartons continuum around the bodies. This "revelation" is that dark matter of 'universe is devoid of magic! Mass of gravitational field just witnessed, like many other physics "mysteries", the realistic hypothesis of Socrates KMV (Kvarton Model of Vacuum).
What part by mass of the primary, completely uncompensated protoel falls on a singularity (particle) and what part of its spatial mass is spread on tangible field, I do not dare guess. It may also be several times the mass of the singularity.