I first want to thank you for reopening this thread. I'd not seen it before now. It's a good thread.
It's a funny old thing isn't it?
As elliptical as it is, I recognized this bit as rhetorical, and; by consequence, didn't answer it. The rest is not rhetorical. It is a disassociated jumble that is very hard to respond to because it calls for bits and pieces rather then a smooth narrative.
In a later post you state that
it's up to some one smarter than me to educate me, not critacise me for looking to find out the answer quicker than reading a book.
Even were that true, do you not think you should at least do the work of making it easy for them? There is no royal road to knowledge.
Anyhow,
imagine this for a second,,, we say that space fabric is non excistant but oly to obey the 4th demention of space, when you thnk of it this way, who has ever proved that space doesn't excist?
Space exists ” no one of note is claiming that space doesn't exist. The "fabric" is a metaphor, not non-existent. The "fabric" stretches and bends in response to matter and energy. This can be observed and measured. "What is the fabric of space made of?", may not even be a legitimate question; but, some kind of known "stuff" is clearly not the answer.
If one opens a capsule of air anywhere the contents dissipate. In a vacuum this is faster because there is nothing occupying the space into which it dissipates.
why does this not happen to the earh on a day to day besis then?
It does, but it is counterbalanced by the return of those "air bits" being almost as quickly pulled back by Earth's gravity. Some does escape; a la, Mars .
surely if the space vacume is so vast and strong then you would think all the air would have been sucked out a long time ago, but it has't been.
Mars.
i'll tell you what,,, go up to space and open a capsule in the vacumous space then close it, the same vacume of space should be contained in this, then bring it back to earth and let it go, just like when you trap air in a ball under water,
Air is a substance. Vacuum is not a substance. There is no substance of a vacuum to hold together or to dissipate as there is with air. There is no reason to believe that the two would behave alike.
Vacuum and space are not synonyms. Space exists everywhere. Even inside matter. Vacuums exist in the absence of matter. You are not returning the space in your capsule, only the vacuum.
Anybody care to elaborate on that?
Only marginally.
Stop talking about light bending, you can bend light with mirrors, plus time travelling is impossible, why you ask?
[rhetoric]Remember what I said about disassociated jumble?[/rhetoric])
There is a significant difference between light following the shortest space-time path and light reflecting off a mirror. And refraction would have been a better example anyway.
but lets face it, what's heavier gravity?
I'm at a loss.
if you want to travel at the speed of light then good luck trying to piece your molecules back together .
You're traveling at the speed of light now. How are you molecules doing?
you seriously think i'd enter a conversation without knowing my stuff?
Some people ask "why?"; I ask "why not?"
it's imparetive when replying to me to remember that i'm looking for easiest less complicated answer because it's usually the best.
God did it.
are you gonna start punching holes in the fabric of the universe?
Only if it's wet.
and for those of you who don't know, thats my term for people who wondered like plato.
I did know that. I read it in a book about you.
and why would my speculations on the subject "not" be correct?
Because there are 3.786 ” 10
84 ways to speculate and no one has that kind of luck.
. you don't learn anything unless you speculate .
One does not learn from the speculation. One learns by the examination of speculation compared with reality.
It wouldn't hurt if one of those books were a grammar.
Kindly
When I was young I loved everything about cigarettes: the smell, the taste, the feel . everything. Now that I’m older I’ve had a change of heart. Want to see the scar?
™ Version 4.2
