oldcoot <oldcoot7074@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Hey-a Jeffo. Got a question for you. First off, we do agree that a
>very REAL force is involved in the stellar collapse that culminates in
>a supernova, right? That is to say, gravity is not a 'fictititious' or
>psuedo-force, right? A very real force directly powers the collapse of
>a massive star.
But gravity can also create stars, what gives?
>
>A supernova is one of the most dramatic displays of gravity-in-action
>that Nature has to offer. As such, it provides a profound litmus test
>for various theories of gravity.
Um, gravity is not the sole force involved.
>
>SO, since "4-D fields" is your bailiwick of choice, kindly explain the
>literal _acting mechanism of causation_ by which your 4-D fields POWER
>the stellar collapse that powers the fusion that rebounds as supernova
>blast, leaving that massive star crushed down to a black hole. Please
>fill in the blank_____________.
Why should he bother? Unless he recites your dogmatic ideas
chapter-and-verse, you will automatically anything he takes the time to
write.
--
"Substantiation that you regard yourself as a God to be worhsipped [sic]
should be your concern, Deco."
-- David Tholen
|
