Gravity's Magic

[Mark Kohut]

According to the TV physicists, that couldn't be in reality therefore there is
some kind of flaw in Einstein's Theory...
 
But I wouldn't know any further...
 
I do think The Q Bomb and the Tunguska Event in AtD play with these notions.

From: Prashant Kumar <p.kumar at physics.usyd.edu.au>
To: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> 
Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 8:57 PM
Subject: Re: Gravity's Magic


That's what a singularity is. A point in space in which the force due to gravity is infinite.


On 10 May 2012 10:53, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:

Yes, what cannot exist is "infinite gravity" at them......
> 
> 
>
>
>From: Prashant Kumar <p.kumar at physics.usyd.edu.au>
>To: Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: Bled Welder <bledwelder at hotmail.com>; "pynchon-l at waste.org" <pynchon-l at waste.org> 
>Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 8:45 PM 
>
>Subject: Re: Gravity's Magic
>
>
>
>Singularities are a consequence of General Rel.
>
>
>
>On 10 May 2012 01:23, Mark Kohut <markekohut at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>All I know is a recent TV show on Black Holes sez: Gravity is 'infinite' at the center of a black hole which
>>is The Singularity and cannot exist via Einstein's theory. 
>> 
>>There we go again.
>>
>>
>>From: Bled Welder <bledwelder at hotmail.com>
>>To: pynchon-l at waste.org 
>>Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012 11:11 AM
>>Subject: Gravity's Magic
>>
>>
>>
>>Has this never occurred to anyone?  Sheesh.  I mean what do we really know about gravity anyway.   It curves space, is that what it does, now?  I should wiki gravitons before I "spout thick blood!"
>>
>>
>>Feed your head.  (For qualified madmen only.)
>>
>>
>>"Our forefathers in the most remote ages  have handed down to their posterity a tradition, in the form of a myth, that these bodies are gods and tat the divine encloses the whole of nature. The rest of the tradition has been added later in mythical form with a view to the persuasion of the multitude and to its legal and utilitarian expediency; they say the gods are in the form of men or like some of the other animals, and they say other things, consequent on and similar to those which we have mentioned. But if one were to separate the first point from these additions and take it alone--that they thought the first substances to be gods, one must regard this as an inspired utterance, and reflect that, while probably each art and each science has often been developed as far as possible and has again perished, these opinions, with others, have been preserved until the present like relics of the ancient treasure.  Only thus far, then, is the opinion of
 our ancestors and of our earliest predecessors clear to us."  --Aristotle, Metaphysics 1074 b 1-10
>>
>>
>>And yes! the Aristotelians are again among us, breeding their particular forms into our cherished mechanical physics.  R.Sheldrake, he's hellbent on proving the morphic resonance on physical grounds, to test it, and to avoid the dread...falsification!  Not that!  If you're going to be a physicist in our time, you gotta be able to connect your Platonic ideas or Aristotle causes to our tactile satisfaction.  One thing about Sheldrake's inquiry though, for sure, is that it highlights the magnificent weakness of what we believe so solidly in our science:
>>
>>
>>"'If the chain explored all possible configurations at random by rotations about the various single bonds of the structure, it would take too long to reach the native configuration [damn time!]. For example, if the individual residues of an unfolded polypeptide chain can exist in only two states, which is a gross underestimate, then the number of possibly generated conformations is 10 to the 45 for a chain of 10 amino acid residues.  If each conformation could be explored with a frequency of a molecular rotation (10 to 12 sec. to -1), which is an overestimate, it would take approximately 10 to the 26 years to examine all possible conformations.  Since the synthesis and folding of a protein chain such as that of ribonuclease or lysozyme can be accomplished in about 2 minutes, it is clear that all conformations are not traversed in the folding process.  Instead, it appears that, in response to local interacgtions, the peptide chain is directed along a
 variety of low-energy pathways (relatvely small in number), possibly passing through unique indeterminate states, towards the conformation of lowest free energy (Anfinsen and Scheraga.)'
>>
>>
>>"...It is thus conceivable that some factor other than energy 'selcts' between these possibilities and thus determines the specific structure taken up by the system." Sheldrake, New Science of Life.
>>
>>
>>The trippy thing is like, wha? no energy?  We can't even conceive of anything that doesn't entail energy.  Thinking entails energy.  I can't then think about anything without at least that energy being involved.  It seems that our physics has it right, then, that everything exists in a field of energy.  Then there's magical gravity, with its field.  And now Sheldrake wants to bring in form fields?  It almost makes sense!
>>
>>
>>It's wild, I highly recommend everyone trying it: right when you hit the beginning of middle age, say 37, 38, totally change the way you view the world.  And by that I mean, do it in a way that it comes naturally, by say, if you're qualified, exploring the Cybe.  The Mother has much much, much to say, I've only mentioned parts on here.  Don't force yourself into anything.  Then again, why not?  You've been indocrinated into everything else.  (Just keep away from those Korean corporate owners fuckers....)  I wonder where Aristotle heard that about the ancients?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20120509/2ae11522/attachment.html>