🚀 go-pugleaf

On May 3, 6:45 am, RP <no_mail_no_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 2, 11:16 pm, Dono <sa...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 2, 8:29 pm, RP <no_mail_no_s...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > I left of the clincher.  Go back to Einstein's famous thought
> > > experiment of the observer in an elevator.  In this case Einstein
> > > argues that such an observer cannot distinguish his inertial
> > > acceleration from a gravitational field.
>
> > EWver heard about Eotvos, horse's ass? No?
> > There is also a large body of experiments that test EEP. You are too
> > busy huffing and puffing yourself, Richard Perry, trying to make
> > yourself look important to "waste" your time checking facts.
>
> > > From this argument he argues
> > > in favor of the equivalence principle, stating that gravitational
> > > forces are exactly the same as inertial forces because they are
> > > completely indistinguishable. From this is derived the equivalence of
> > > inertial and gravitaitonal mass.
>
> > So, you didn't hear about Eotvos, horse's ass .....
>
> > > Well there is no mystery here when it is accepted that gravitational
> > > forces are electromagnetic in orign.
>
> > No, it isn't. The scientist that manages to explain gravitation is in
> > line for the Nobel prize, the subject is still unexplained.
>
> > > In the case of the observer on
> > > the elevator, as already explained, the forces are exclusively
> > > electromagnetic.
>
> > Explained by the crank Robert Perry? No, thank you.
>
> > > So here Einstein is equating gravity, an attractive
> > > force, to a repulsive electromagnetic force.
>
> > No, he's not. Only an old crank like you can make such stupid claims.
>
> > > I'm certain that had he
> > > percieved his blunder here, he would have imm..ediately recanted all
> > > of his papers on GR, and immediately set out to correct that error.
>
> > ....or, better even, he would have called the orderlies to readjust
> > your restrains and administer the appropiate drugs for your delusions.
>
> Here you are showing your shallowness once again. I most certainly
> understand the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass. You
> simply either didn't read what I said, or are perpetually stupid.

Ok, maybe that was harsh given that you're very slow and all. So here
is a task for you. Derive a proof showing that it is impossible for
attractive electromagnetic forces to be exerted between neutral
masses. As soon as you do this I'm certain that all liquid and solid
masses in the universe will instantly vaporize, that is, since all of
their neutral atoms will at once lose the ability to bind together
into molecules, crystals and liquids.  Now maybe, if you're willing to
admit that these attractive forces are present in nature between
neutral masses, then you can skip this step and go to task no. 2.

Task 2, Derive a proof showing that it is impossible for a neutral
object to exert electromagnetic forces on other neutral objects that
are proportional to the masses of those other objects.  Until you
derive this proof there are those who will continue to regard this
problem as merely unsolved, rather than as being an impossibility.

Task 3, define "mass".