- #1
Tom McCurdy
- 1,020
- 1
Alright,
I as all students have heard the model of space and the idea of gravity as the sheet being pressed down by the bowling ball, which represents a fluxuation in space time which causes other objects to be attracted to it. The problem I have with the model is it really sells the theory short on what we are trying to get away from. The whole point of the model is to move away from our inherent belief that things just should go "down" and yet in the model itself what is it that "forces" the other objects surrounding the bowling ball down... its the same idea that things just should go down. Also a lesser problem is a the dimensional reduction of the model reducing it from 3 d to 2 d. I was wondering if there were any alternate models to describe gravity. It just seems to be missing the point with the current model.
I as all students have heard the model of space and the idea of gravity as the sheet being pressed down by the bowling ball, which represents a fluxuation in space time which causes other objects to be attracted to it. The problem I have with the model is it really sells the theory short on what we are trying to get away from. The whole point of the model is to move away from our inherent belief that things just should go "down" and yet in the model itself what is it that "forces" the other objects surrounding the bowling ball down... its the same idea that things just should go down. Also a lesser problem is a the dimensional reduction of the model reducing it from 3 d to 2 d. I was wondering if there were any alternate models to describe gravity. It just seems to be missing the point with the current model.