Gravity = In-falling Space?

http://www.wakkanet.fi/~fields/

This “theory” intrigues me. We are all familiar with Einstein’s idea of gravity acting like a bowling ball on a trampoline.

If gravity isn’t just a warpage of spacetime, but more like a fluid that goes down the drain (a massive object), Questions are:

Are verified observables (from gravitational laws formulated by Einstein…or even Newton) still observed with Falling Space?

What happens to the infallen space? Does mass/matter destroy space?
Where does “Fresh Space” spawn?
Is this theory equivalent to “Expanding” Matter/Mass?

I didn’t read the article. I suspect there are many ways one could describe gravity that mathematically equivalent. Perhaps the author has found one. But if gravity is “in-falling” space, then free-falling things right next to each other would presumably fall at the same velocity. But this isn’t the case, things next to each other, accelerate at the same rate.

I read some of that page. It’s a load of malarky.

He states that the nucleus of an atom is a black hole, and an electron is actually a spiral twist of infalling spacetime into that black hole.

He also says that the tides are unexplained.

It’s simple, really.

  1. Invent a new theory of gravity
  2. Point out that your theory does not correctly predict observations of the world
  3. Point and laugh at the soulless minions of orthodoxy.
  1. Profit!

The earth is still hollow, right? And we live on the inside?

There are some legitimate analogies for gravity which involve space “falling in” or being “sucked in”, which is presumably where this guy got the idea. Like the bowling-ball-on-the-rubber-sheet, it’s only an analogy, however, and neither of them is actually a particularly useful analogy.

Now I don’t see your signature…but,
Troilus and Cressida, III,3
Ulysses:

Time hath, my lord, a wallet at his back,
Wherein he puts alms for oblivion,

For time is like a fashionable host
That slightly shakes his parting guest by the hand,
And with his arms outstretch’d, as he would fly,
Grasps in the comer: welcome ever smiles,
And farewell goes out sighing. O, let not
virtue seek
Remuneration for the thing it was;
For beauty, wit,
High birth, vigour of bone, desert in service,
Love, friendship, charity, are subjects all
To envious and calumniating time.

Well, that one is easily handled if you think of the infalling space as imparting acceleration rather than imparting velocity. If you think of it like a boat in a river, then water sets the speed and not the acceleration, so you’d be right about the weakness of the theory. But if it imparts acceleration, like a space ship using a solar sail to catch a laser beam for propulsion, then the infalling space idea doesn’t have the weakness you describe.

Not that I’m defending the theory on any other grounds…

My only thought is that Wolfgang Pauli never met this guy, but was clearly thinking about him.