Le Sage Gravity - some questions

[Ad_Absurdum]

"Le Sage" Gravity - some questions

In "pushing" gravity of the "Le Sage" kind, caused by some type of low mass particles,

1. Would light still be bent by gravity?

2. Would the light be dispersed (each frequency bent to a different extent), thus differentiating it from the bending caused by curved space?Thanks in advance!

 

[pervect]

Since Le Sage gravity has been falsified already (i.e. shown to be inconsistent with experiment) why would one care? The Wikipedia has some references to the (very early, 17th century) articles when Le Sage gravity was still considered interesting (i.e. it hadn't been falsified yet.) However, I doubt that they knew enough about the properties of light to have a definitive prediction.

 

[Meatbot]

Since Le Sage gravity has been falsified already (i.e. shown to be inconsistent with experiment) why would one care? The Wikipedia has some references to the (very early, 17th century) articles when Le Sage gravity was still considered interesting (i.e. it hadn't been falsified yet.) However, I doubt that they knew enough about the properties of light to have a definitive prediction.

Would the drag effect that doomed Le Sage gravity still be an issue if instead of the all-pervasive corpuscles he mentions, you had spacetime in the absence of mass be curved in the opposite way that we now assume it is around mass? Then mass would shield it by "uncurving" spacetime. You'd have the same effect as Le Sage but there are no particles pushing to cause drag. It's just the shape of the universe that does the pushing. It would be like spacetime is a plateau above the minimum (zero spacetime curvature) and mass creates valleys in it that can only go as deep as the minimum (a black hole). But that seems to me to be indistinguishable from Einstein's view to me as far as the observed results. Only what would this version say about singularities? They don't have infinite gravitation, but instead have 100% "uncurving".

I'm probably completely off on some obvious thing but I don't know what it is - so don't flame me. I just want to know what's wrong with this idea.

 

[pervect]

I don't understand the sudden resurgence in interest in LeSage theory, which has (as I mentioned) been falsified.

Since this is a necropost (reopening a very old post), and we already have a new thread on LeSage gravity under another name, I'm locking this thread.