if it can not be prooved absolutely to be finite then we have to assume until proven otherwise that it is as Newton reluctantly accepted – infinite

if we have to accept that it is “infinite” then we have to assume that, as nothing can travel faster than light, there is not traveling at all but that there is some form of physical connection – think of every mass in the universe embedded in a solid field – that can not, with current technology, be detected or, can be detected and is being detected, but can not be recognised for what it is

if Gravity is the key then consider that red-shift is not the consequence of an expanding universe but of intergalactic light propegating at considerably higher speeds than within a higher gravity density region like a galaxy (http://arxiv.org/ftp/physics/papers/0701/0701130.pdf)

The trouble with our current view of the universe is that our model is too good – it’s enough to explain enough to keep us happy – but it needs more attacking – we should always attack most fiercly those assumptions that form the foundations of our beliefs and the speed of light being constant is one of the biggest assumptions our thinking rests upon – if C was not a constant (except within a local gravity density) then we no longer need gravity waves, expanding universes, dark matter and a lot of other Ptolemy epicyclic solutions to our fundamental misunderstanding of the universe

murray

Which is funny, because all political op-ed titles in the form of a question have a positive answer, usually before the end of the first paragraph.

My understanding is that gravity bends space-time, so my question is: why does gravity need waves?

The image in my mind of how gravity works is a two-dimensional grid which becomes bent and distorted with the presence of a mass. In my analogy, the grid would now appear to have a third dimension kind of like this (very ugly) picture:

http://www.rclsoftware.org.uk/gravel/v2/img08.jpg

Now if we could contral Gravity in say a bubble around a object, Then if object is standing still time pass more slowly if gravity in the bubble was increased. Same is true if gravity was less in the bubble time would pass faster by. Now if the object was moving at speeds that can be reached with a Ion rocket of 1/2 the speed of light and bubble is .1, .01 & so on we go faster then light related to out side the bubble but inside still be going 1/2 the speed of light. It could be some kind of warp field so to speak. As we would be warping Gravity.

I think this could be done in the next 25 years if sience were to do a Mannhatten project on the control of Gavity. I do believe that the speed of light is the masurement of time. It is accepted and now proven black holes are real so then a white hole could be equelly there. also. If a gravity bubble of absolute zero was reached then the light speed would be infinit and time also. One could travel across the Universe in split second of time.

It is just a thougth but if I am right the Star are not out of reach.

For details see the article at my blog.

Matti Pitkanen

if you use the sidebar slider to that only half the applet is visible, then the one that Sean placed clearly shows the individual particles expanding and contracting.

The applet at Lubos’s site does not show this effect, by only showing half the applet at Lubos’s site, you get a different co-ordinate projection, one that is 1/4 rotated, and no expansion or contraction.

I have asked Lubos to explain this defference,pv.

Your explination raises some interesting points, one of which is if there is a another way to proceed? this linked paper is in research that may be beneficial?:
http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0608115

Thanks again for making a very interesting subject so informative,pv.