[RascalPuff]

Originally Posted by MJA Dear RP, If you wouldn't mind a writing critique only for the purpose of understanding or for clarity of your most knowledgeable views, I would suggest you start or end with a simple premise or sentence explaining your purpose. After reading your thread starter I can not determine if you personally believe that an inert state exists, or that all energy and mass are in motion. (Until further notice, there is no state of non-motion observed in energy or mass - Absolute Zero has yet to be observed or induced). Perhaps it is only my novicity of physics that creates this lack of understanding, but I also believe much of what we think we know about nature is absolutely incorrect, and for me worthless. Perhaps for clarity sake, in your personal view, you could answer these simple questions: Is matter or energy ever inert, or motionless? (Please reference the above response.) If not, how do you measure the "(inert mass value) weight", or the motionless weight of energy or mass, Riemann's metric tensor? (Inert mass value is determined by the amount of resistance offered by a given system when it is subjected - and offers a resistance - to a known rate of acceleration. This is called 'inert mass value'. Weight is determined by the influence of a a gravitational field on a given test object, this is called 'heavy mass value'.) Cannot gravity be defined as simply the motion of attraction, or the natural motion of equilibrium? (Will you find another way of asking the above question?) Do you believe gravity is measurable with absolute certainty? (Roland Von Eotvos measured gravitational acceleration within a billionth of a second, though I'm not sure that answers your question. Meanwhile, the Standard Theorists are still in unrewarded search of a 'graviton' they anticipate finding... The identity of gravity has always been mysterious - Newton was careful to clarify he didn't know or purport to know its causal identity.) Can gravity be measured as an inert energy value? (Not sure I understand your question.) Lastly, do you think the aether experiment of Michelson and Morley had any validity or truth? (It was an important null experiment. That is, they were looking for an aether conductor and didn't find one. It was a very important experiment for that reason.) Thanks for your help, = MJA PS: Is a mathematical physics equation an unnatural inert state(ment) of the natural state(ment) of motion? Or more simply: Can a motionless equation define nature? (If I understand your question: In lieu of finding or inducing a motionless natural state, I don't know that there can be any metric <descriptive, real adjective counterpart> equation that parallels the unfound condition of motionlessness, though such an equation may have a comparative value, relative to which motion can be measured.) Feel free Lloyd or anyone to wade in on these questions.

Regarding the critique you suggest I write for the purpose of expressing my most knowledgeable views: Suggest you look into http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie,
which, among other things, will provide more insight into the beginning of this particular thread.

Good to hear from you, MJA,
Best regards,
- RP