L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
All we have accomplished is that we fundamentally disagree, there is no common ground.So “no”. I think we are done with this part of the discussion - you’ve had plenty of chances to defend your assertion.
That, I think, is one half of the problem here. You are not thoroughly reading what other people say, but leaping to assumptions about what you think they are saying - at which point it seems next to impossible to get you to revisit that assumption.
Now, if you boys can’t play nicely you are all going to the naughty step until you are willing to shake hands and apologise to each other!
Also, you guys ‘started it’ at least as far back as killing Hypatia. This is no excuse for not engaging in reasoned debate rather than insults.
But you think I do, based on your assertion that these books would support your assertion about gravitons? :ehh:
Well, no. This is the other half of the problem - you are using technical terms such as ‘graviton’ without knowing what they mean.
Well, we won’t make a philosopher of you until you stop contradicting yourself like this.
All the fundamental forces ‘act at a distance’ - the only debate is whether that action is mediated by a field and associated virtual particles, or via something like space-time ‘curvature’.
Neither have the strong or weak nuclear forces. Also your claim is slightly debateable (see The Oracle of Wikipaedia for more info) but I have no real interest in defending Podkletnov or Majorana.
If anything it is more obviously a derivative of matter than the other forces, as it is caused directly by mass, which is arguably the defining quality of matter.
I wish you well.
Linus2nd