Ignorance of available data is a problem. But we do not know enough about the universe to describe it's makeup and creation accurately.
B: What is wrong? And according to who? You?
Stephen Hawking admitted that his concept about black holes, which was widely accepted by the scientific community, wasa entirely wrong, based on recent observations. Many of our theories currently accepted, will prove to be wrong. Just as many in the past were.
Einstein explained gravity as result of the distortion of space-time by the presence of mass.
Another theory. Represented by a three dimensional graph. Which is cool if the universe can be mapped as a flat plane, which it isn't. The term space-time is convenient, but used wrong. Ignoring the principle elements that are a part of 'empty' space, just what is being distorted, since space (in our concept) is the antithesis of matter? And distortion of time? Causing Gravity?
But your statement, taken at face value is wrong and numerous studies have been performed which show that Einstein's view of how gravity works is correct.
Perhaps INCOMPLETE is a better description than WRONG.
And never ceases to amaze how people believe every fool thing they read in a newspaper or on a bumper sticker is gospel.
Explain magnetism. Why does Earth have the Van Allen Radiation Belts? Why is the surface of the sun cooler than the photosphere? What is the core of the Earth made of? Why doesn't the moon rotate with respect to the Earth?
These questions and answers are not in newspapers or on bumper stickers, and not my source of information.
B: No the biggest problem is ignorance.
Ignorance of available data is a problem. But we do not know enough about the universe to describe it's makeup and creation accurately.
B: What is wrong? And according to who? You?
Stephen Hawking admitted that his concept about black holes, which was widely accepted by the scientific community, wasa entirely wrong, based on recent observations.
B: Lets be very clear, Steve Hawking admitted was that his claim regarding Naked singularities was wrong, not the concept of Black Holes. Also, it appears his so called "no-hair" conjecture may also have problems. However, these were for the most part esoteric theoretical issues, and considered controversial. Hawking lost a bet to Kip Thorne over it, as Thorne disagreed with him from the get-go.. Concepts such as event horizons and things of that nature are just fine, and form part of the mainstays of contemporary astrophysics.
To be clear, Black Holes are not Hawking's concept. Schwarzchild was the first. The term "Black Hole" was coined by John Archibald Wheeler in the late 60's.
Hawking is famous for the "Hawking Radiation"
Many of our theories currently accepted, will prove to be wrong. Just as many in the past were.
B: Science is by its nature provisional. Thats why it improves our knowledge through time. On the other hand, you still have your facts wrong. People seem to have this nonsensical idea that every time a scientific theory is shown to be wrong, science takes a step backwards. Actually, it is quite the opposite.
Einstein explained gravity as result of the distortion of space-time by the presence of mass.
Another theory. Represented by a three dimensional graph. Which is cool if the universe can be mapped as a flat plane, which it isn't.
B: OK, now I know you don't know anything. Einstein's point was, that in the vicinity of matter, space is not Euclidian, i.e., flat.
I'm sorry, but your pontificating from ignorance. My guess is, is that you've seen a Nova program or too, without really understanding it.
The term space-time is convenient, but used wrong. Ignoring the principle elements that are a part of 'empty' space, just what is being distorted,
B: THe very geometry of space itself.
since space (in our concept) is the antithesis of matter?
B: Excuse me? "In our concept" Who's *our*? Speak for yourself, not scientists.
And distortion of time? Causing Gravity?
B: Indeed. Incredible... ain't it?
But your statement, taken at face value is wrong and numerous studies have been performed which show that Einstein's view of how gravity works is correct.
B: I said Eisntein's result have been born out by many an experiment and observation. It only remains to be tested in the strong field limit. Google "LIGO".
Perhaps INCOMPLETE is a better description than WRONG.
B: You can say that about any theory. But so far we have no hard evidence that it is incomplete.
B: And never ceases to amaze how people believe every fool thing they read in a newspaper or on a bumper sticker is gospel.
Explain magnetism. Why does Earth have the Van Allen Radiation Belts?
B: Beacuse the Earth has a magnetic field, and that magnetic field interacts with the solar wind. That is what results in the Van Allen Radiation Belts. The magnetic field is generated by a *dynamo* process. Google "Geodynamo". I'm sure you'll find lots of stuff.
Why is the surface of the sun cooler than the photosphere?
B: Good question. Ask a heliologist. I'm a geophysicist, sorry. My guess is ohmic disspation of some sort.
What is the core of the Earth made of?
B: Mostly and Fe,Ni mixture with 15% S to boot, plus perhaps other minor constituents like K.
Why doesn't the moon rotate with respect to the Earth?
B: Tidal Locking
These questions and answers are not in newspapers or on bumper stickers, and not my source of information.
B: Well, you need a new source.
Hmmm, why is the surface of the sun cooler than the surface of the sun? I'll have to think about that one. Or maybe you'd care to reframe your question.