how about the idea of Newton's equation of finding the gravitational constant, doesn't the distance from the center point of each particle change it? the further from mass you get, the less pull it has, right?
would the idea change the way the motion, or lack thereof, of particles, is conceived; where as all particles are motionless, only space-time warps, muli-dimentionally. (i.e. - "my arm is not moving my fingers to my nose, but the amount of space time is curving or moving so there is less between...
in my ideas defense
the idea behind asking this question would be challenging the original idea of the bowling ball and the feather in a vaccum. my comment about Aristotle was only to say that he was on the right path in realizing that there would be a difference. All other aspects are...
this is going to sound dumb, but here i go.
through out my schooling i was preached " in a vaccum, a feather and a bowling ball would fall at the same rate".
-thinking about the difference in theories with Aristotol, Galileo, and Newton, something didn't make sense to me. Talking about...
what would be the difference between the idea of being at point A and moving toward B in space-time; and being at point A and not moving and B not moving but the space-time between them moving and warping out of the way?