Jones Beene wrote: > Harry Veeder wrote: > >> the push theory has some serious theoretical difficulties > to overcome. If gravity is a push why don't the planets spiral > into the sun because whatever is doing the pushing would also > have a drag effect on the planets. > > > I am not well-versed in the details, but do have 'cut-and-paste' > functionality ;-) ... but the superficial answer is that the drag effect > in one vector is balanced by a boost in the other IF the system lacks an > *arrow of time* WOW (am I mis-stating that conclusion)! > > Are we essentially in a "timeless" orbit?
That would be kind of ironic, since classical mechanics and quantum mechanics already depend on time symmetric laws of motion. > Here is the first paragraph from the Ibison paper, which Terry mentions, > and Xavier has his own explanation, which seems a bit less provocative: > > "This document presents some results that provide support for the > existence of time-symmetric electromagnetic interactions involving equal > positive combinations of advanced and retarded fields. According to > common experience however, electromagnetic interactions are exclusively > retarded. Retardation establishes an electromagnetic arrow of time, > which, coincidentally, agrees with the thermodynamic arrow of time the > direction of increasing entropy. Since these two could be interrelated, > a conservative application of a time-symmetric theory with no danger of > conflict with observation should be confined to systems lacking any > arrow of time thermodynamic or electromagnetic." END of Ibison quote > > WOW. Those are some heavy duty implications, no? ... or else, this > proves the point as stated at the start: "I am not well-versed in the > details" > > ...yet > > Jones > Harry
