[MJA]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff MJA inquires: What is your simple definition of gravity? ___________________________ Dear MJA: In the words of A. Einstein, 'Gravity is acceleration'. That's the simple answer, in three words. Moreover, acceleration is motion, accompanied by and generating inert mass value. Is that too complicated for you? Until further notice, there is no such thing as motionless matter or the absence of positive and negative - inert and heavy - mass value. Although you argue these points, they are not tenably arguable. "You have complicated the issues to such a state of confusion, quagmire and mud" (and regressive vocabulary), that you can't truly absorb with simple clarity, what you claim to wish to understand. Your proclamation: "Your answer is incorrect". Is incorrect. You didn't answer the question of whether or not you've studied Tao or the I Ching. They are surprisingly relevant to this exchange and your interests. Another indicator that you're not fully engaged in this dialogue. Ostensibly, you're not referencing and familiarizing yourself with the provided URL. http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie. The URL is provided here again, though, going by your inquiries and proclamations, it seems unlikely that you have, or will, refer to the provided information resource. Best regards, - RP

Dear RP,

Thanks for your response, but again you failed to answer the question.

I asked simply: what is your simple definition of gravity?'
You answered with Einstein's words.
Are they your words too?

As far the Eastern philosophies of equality are concerned, I have read much and find many parallels to the equality I see, but prefer to find the truth through experience and intuition, rather than in the words of a book. I have yet to find the simplest truth in any book, but continue to read.
What relevance do you see betweenTao, I Ching, physics, equality, gravity and you and me?

One last question: Did Einstein define Gravity in any other way besides advanced calculus? Was mathematics the only solution he could find?

=
MJA

[RascalPuff]

Dear RP,

Thanks for your response, but again you failed to answer the question.

I asked simply: what is your simple definition of gravity?'
You answered with Einstein's words.
Are they your words too?

My work is based on Einstein's work, consequently I selected his definition that agrees with mine, or conversely. Of course they're my words also.


As far the Eastern philosophies of equality are concerned, I have read much and find many parallels to the equality I see, but prefer to find the truth through experience and intuition, rather than in the words of a book. I have yet to find the simplest truth in any book, but continue to read.
What relevance do you see betweenTao, I Ching, physics, equality, gravity and you and me?

"For every action there is a reaction, equal and opposite". - Newton.

Gravity is both a pull and a push; likewise the I Ching and Tao corroborate same.

Many eminent scholars consider the I Ching to be among the greatest books ever written- and the Tao to be among the most powerful symbolic icons. I was just sorta thinking you might find time to browse through some books about the I Ching, if not the I Ching itself, which is characteristically misunderstood by many Westerners.

Having yet to find the the simplest truth in any book, it's unlikely you'll find what you're looking for by corresponding with me - I've written ten, and refer to hundreds of them over the years and most of my intuition and experience is based on that referential experience. I see abundant 'relevance between Tao, I Ching, equality, gravity, you and me'. Much more relevance than it's practical for me to elaborate on for you at this time. (You may profit from reading and reflecting on more books than you do...).


One last question: Did Einstein define Gravity in any other way besides advanced calculus? Was mathematics the only solution he could find?

My advise is that you read a few books by and about Einstein and draw conclusions that render answers to your questions.

The equivalence of gravitational and inertial mass values is central to his General Theory ('Gravity is acceleration') and the uniform velocity of light (Celeritias constant - 'C') is key to his Special Theory, but then he wrote a lot of mathematics around both of those non mathematical facts, which may not interest you.



=
MJA

Regards,
- RP

[RascalPuff]

Dear MJA:
The first half of the book, Ideas & Opinions, by Albert Einstein, contains a minimum of math while purveying a lot of his work on physics. I suggest you look into it and see if that helps any.

Best regards,
- RP

[RascalPuff]

Your recent post indicates that you're not much on reading books, whereas, a previous post seems to lean heavily toward extensively studious experiences in literature...

Quote:
Originally Posted by MJA
Great Thinkers

If you want to be a great thinker, study the greats.

Some of my favorites in no particular order are:

Boethius, he saw the truth.
Socrates, came close to defining truth. He tried but never grasped it.
Aristotle, some say the greatest of all Saw oneness, but thought it not true.
Epicurus, epic, what a place to be.
Bible, "the truth shall set us free." Amen!
Spinoza, "there is only one substance God or Nature." Invented proofs
Descartes, "I think therefore I am." From a hotel in Ulm Germany, the same place Einstein was born.
Poincare, found resolve in coffee.
Hue-neng, Zen master about the nothing of nothing.
Milton Freidman, freedom of business.
Dr. King Jr. Freedom of Equality.
Plato, had trouble with cave people. "You cannot conceive the many without the one."
He knew our sences to be untrue, and thought only truth was attainable after death.
Shakespeare, "Be great in act, as you have been in thought."
Lincoln, held the union together through a war of division, WOW!
J Adams, Independence
Jefferson, The truth of equality.
Gandhi, died for equality.
Einstein, questioned measure, found Relativity, and came close to truth.
Thoreeau, The truth of nature.
Bertrand Russell, I learned the Old Greek from him.
Jane Goodall, Knows the truth.
Crazy Horse, My favorite Native American.
Buddha, About going back to the market place.
Nature, the truth.
The axial Age, was right on.
Pythagoras, "all things are numbers," Not!
Paramenides, "On Nature."
Copenhagen Interpitation, a group of great thinkers. They tried.
Master Chuang Tzu, very wise.
Nietzche, "the mountains of truth."
Mandella, Equality.
Dante, on love.
Seneca, Fortune.
Marcus Aurelius, Meditations.
Hawking, Very smart.
Hiesenberg, Questioned measure.
Capernicus, Moved the center of the universe. Double Wow!
Michelangelo, Study nature for truth.
Parsigis, Zen and the art.
Feynman, Democritus, and the list goes on and on.

But know one I believe knew the truth of everything, because if they had, we would be free.
That's coming soon!

=
MJA

Dear MJA:
Your spelling is as irreproachable as your list of distinguished persons and their achievements.
Your ostensibly ardent studies - and your apparent retention of them - certainly know how to sharpen a point.

Best regards,
- RP

[MJA]

HI RP,

Just a couple more questions:

Originally Posted by RascalPuff MJA inquires: What is your simple definition of gravity? ___________________________ Dear MJA: In the words of A. Einstein, 'Gravity is acceleration'. That's the simple answer, in three words. So then the Earth's gravity is acceleration? Can you explain what is accelerating and how to measure that? If E=M, is the energy of light accelerating too? Or simply does C accelerate or have gravity? Moreover, acceleration is motion, accompanied by and generating inert mass value. Is that too complicated for you? Until further notice, there is no such thing as motionless matter or the absence of positive and negative - inert and heavy - mass value. You contradict yourself here. First you write there is a 'generating inert mass value', then you write 'there is no such thing'. Which is it? Can you give an example of an inert mass? Although you argue these points, they are not tenably arguable. "You have complicated the issues to such a state of confusion, quagmire and mud" (and regressive vocabulary), that you can't truly absorb with simple clarity, what you claim to wish to understand. Your proclamation: "Your answer is incorrect". Is incorrect. You didn't answer the question of whether or not you've studied Tao or the I Ching. They are surprisingly relevant to this exchange and your interests. Another indicator that you're not fully engaged in this dialogue. Ostensibly, you're not referencing and familiarizing yourself with the provided URL. http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie. I have tried several times to find some value in your work, and thus far have failed, thus these questions and concerns. The URL is provided here again, though, going by your inquiries and proclamations, it seems unlikely that you have, or will, refer to the provided information resource. Best regards, - RP

Thanks again,

=
MJA

[MJA]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Dear MJA: The first half of the book, Ideas & Opinions, by Albert Einstein, contains a minimum of math while purveying a lot of his work on physics. I suggest you look into it and see if that helps any. Best regards, - RP

RP,

It's a great book, one of the best I have read.

I suggest Walter Isaacson's new book, 'Einstein'. A great read.

=
MJA

[MJA]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff Your recent post indicates that you're not much on reading books, whereas, a previous post seems to lean heavily toward extensively studious experiences in literature... Quote: Originally Posted by MJA Great Thinkers If you want to be a great thinker, study the greats. Best regards, - RP

Life in moderation includes the wonderful time spent reading.
I have learned much reading books, and will continue to do so; but have found the ultimate truth of nature in nature itself.

Have a look outside RP.

=
MJA

[RascalPuff]

HI RP,

Just a couple more questions:



Quote:
Originally Posted by RascalPuff
MJA inquires: What is your simple definition of gravity?
___________________________
Dear MJA:

In the words of A. Einstein, 'Gravity is acceleration'.
That's the simple answer, in three words.

So then the Earth's gravity is acceleration?
Can you explain what is accelerating and how to measure that?

My abbreviated book at the provided URL does that.

If E=M, is the energy of light accelerating too?
Or simply does C accelerate or have gravity?

(Refer above.)


Moreover, acceleration is motion, accompanied by and generating inert mass value.

Is that too complicated for you?

Until further notice, there is no such thing as motionless matter or the absence of positive and negative - inert and heavy - mass value.

You contradict yourself here. First you write there is a 'generating inert mass value', then you write 'there is no such thing'. Which is it?

I write that there is no such thing as the absence of positive and negative - inert and heavy - mass value; both values accompany all matter. End quote...

Can you give an example of an inert mass?

All matter has an inertial mass value, positive and negative. It's positive mass value is the tendency for it to remain in motion once in motion, its negative mass value is rest mass tendency to resist forces acting upon it.


Although you argue these points, they are not tenably arguable.

"You have complicated the issues to such a state of confusion, quagmire and mud" (and regressive vocabulary), that you can't truly absorb with simple clarity, what you claim to wish to understand.

Your proclamation: "Your answer is incorrect". Is incorrect.

You didn't answer the question of whether or not you've studied Tao or the I Ching.
They are surprisingly relevant to this exchange and your interests.
Another indicator that you're not fully engaged in this dialogue.

Ostensibly, you're not referencing and familiarizing yourself with the provided URL.
http://forums.delphiforums.com/EinsteinGroupie.

I have tried several times to find some value in your work, and thus far have failed, thus these questions and concerns.

So I see. Given your mature background as a seasoned scholar, it's probably my unrefined inability to properly express - and my tendency to contradict - myself. Perhaps you may find something better to do with your reading and correspondence time...

The URL is provided here again, though, going by your inquiries and proclamations, it seems unlikely that you have, or will, refer to the provided information resource.

Best regards,
- RP

Thanks again,

=
MJA

[MJA]

Originally Posted by RascalPuff All matter has an inertial mass value, positive and negative. It's positive mass value is the tendency for it to remain in motion once in motion, its negative mass value is rest mass tendency to resist forces acting upon it.

I finally got it RP,

You know how to measure the motionless weight of mass even when as you have said: there is no such thing.
The smoke and mirrors of science, I got it!
Thanks,

=
MJA

PS: Do you have trouble explaining fundamental matter too?