[A mind experiment--Therefore, if
 you do not have a mind, forget it.]

Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity.
That is its only quality. (Therefore
it can travel inside the Sun without
being destroyed.) Now...

This ping-pong ball is approaching
the surface of the Sun. As it does so
the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
increases on the ping-pong ball.

  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
  the ping-pong ball will be at its
  maximum.]

The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
will begin to decrease.

  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
  travels closer and closer to the center
  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
  that there will be a growing amount of
  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
center of a great hollow).

     Conclusions from the above
         thought experiment:

There is either a huge cavity at the center
of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
therein where there isn't as much Sun-
matter as there must be surrounding it.
According to the current laws of gravity.

However, current theory says that the center
of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
fact: It is at the center of every star that the
fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
place--exactly because this is the region of
the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

 These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximun
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

******************************

On Oct 8, 6:56 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:

Meanwhile, understand this: Newton
had no idea whatsoever what made the Sun
(or any star) burn the way they did/do/does:

It was not until around Einstein's time that
astrophysicists would at last able to put together
a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
furnace--and all the data says that this is only
possible at the most central portion of the core:
there just isn't enough pressure outside it to
bring matter close enough together to produce
the required sustained fusion. Look it up.

The problem, of course, is that all the theories
of gravity produce NOT the greatest pressure
at the Sun's (and any other star's) core but a
great big hollow (or, at the least, a horrific
decrease of the gravitational "concentration
of matter" required to "push it/bring it together"
close enough for fusion to occur!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newton never gave this a thought (it never
troubled him in the least that his theories of
gravity said that the Sun could not possibly
be working--turned ON--) for the simple
reason that he did not KNOW that the Sun
worked by means of nuclear FUSION and
that the only way nuclear fusion can be
produced inside the Sun is if the greatest
(not the least, but the highest) possible
pressures are concentrated at the Sun's core.

Had he known this, it would have blown
his mind--until he went on the Internet, of
course, and visited:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

learning there, from Mister Rodrian, the
correct way in which the universe works.

It would not have changed his theories of
motion/gravity. It would simply have made
them actual. Hoorah!

********************************

On Oct 8, 1:12 am, Virgil <Vir...@home.esc> wrote:

If you propose that there is ANY pressure
at all at the Sun's center, then you will
need to explain where such pressure
comes from... considering that the "left
inner wall surface" [of my proposed
hollow at the Sun's center] is under MORE
gravitational pull from the left wall than
from the right wall (on the other side of
that hollow): There may be as much mass
in the right wall as in the left wall, yes,
but the mass of the left wall is obviously
closer to the "left inner wall surface."

You may stuff as much mass as you
like at the Sun's center--just explain
the mechanism which does the "stuffing."

For what's the use of merely noting one
has spotted a phenomenon--without also
attempting to explain it, when explaining
phenomena is the highest aim of science.

  NOTE: Einstein's mind was of a clever
  but lazy nature, thereby (the moronic
  mathematical fudge factor so-called
  "cosmological constant"). You have
  to understand that relativity only
  describes gravity in the way it is seen
  to work; Einstein too never goes so far
  as to even try to explain by what means
  it might be working. And so it remains.
  [The so-called "graviton" is merely a
  theoretical proposal ... it is a physical
  impossibility, but it's the only thing
  they have--It is in Einstein's mind that
  it is a physical impossibility because it
  would require instantaneous action
  at impossible distances, a problem
  which itself drove Einstein to come up
  with gravity as a strictly geometrical
  description instead of a "real" (physical)
  solution as might be provided by a
  possible graviton. Like Newton, Einstein
  recognized that explaining what gravity
  actually was... was quite beyond his field
  of knowledge.]

Today we can see the problems of lacking
a real/actual understanding of what gravity
actually is when everywhere we look gravity
seems to misbehave; The galaxies do not
behave as if they were perfectly observing
the laws of gravity (acording to which they
should all be flying apart). Not to mention
the problem of the Sun & the Ping-Pong ball.

*******************************

On Oct 7, 11:07 pm, Sam Wormley wrote:

If you really don't believe that the acceleration due to gravity can
increase as you move closer to the centre of the sphere, and what I say is
wrong, I can easily produce a counter example.

OTOH, many other posters have also pointed this out, and I believe that one
even provided a link which shows the value of g actually increases for a
period of time as you go further underground on the earth, which shows the
earth itself is a counter-example to the assertion that the force of gravity
always decreases as you go close to the centre.

You, and other posters, obviously do not
believe in magic. And for your benefit I then
provided a way for my "magical ping-pong
ball which is only affected by gravity" to stop
at the center of the Sun's Great Hollow:

START QUOTE

  Actually no: I imagined that, according to
  Newton, once it reached the exact center
  of the Sun it struck an identical ping-pong
  ball coming at it with the same force (where
  they both magically combined into a single
  bigger ping-pong ball). I'm used to dealing
  with these questions: When I told my little
  nephew the story of Pinocchio he seemed
  much more interested in knowing WHY the
  toy-maker had made him with a bellows-
  mechanism for talking; How did he know
  Pinocchio was going to be doing any talking!

END QUOTE

I hope this satisfies you. But if it doesn't
then please by all means do cite how it is
possible for my "magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity" to move
otherwise than however I say it does.

It will be interesting to hear it, I'm sure.

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3s.sdrodrian.com

RE:

  The Ping-Pong Ball and The Sun.

 [A mind experiment--Therefore, if
 you do not have a mind, forget it.]

Imagine a magical ping-pong ball
which is only affected by gravity.
That is its only quality. (Therefore
it can travel inside the Sun without
being destroyed.) Now...

This ping-pong ball is approaching
the surface of the Sun. As it does so
the pull of the Sun's gravity gradually
increases on the ping-pong ball.

  [When it is at the Sun's surface,
  the pull of the Sun's gravity on
  the ping-pong ball will be at its
  maximum.]

The instant the ping-pong ball plunges
past the surface of the Sun, the pull of
the Sun's gravity on the ping-pong ball
will begin to decrease.

  [This is because as the ping-pong ball
  travels closer and closer to the center
  of the Sun: the mass pulling on the
  ping-pong ball is decreasing, all the time
  that there will be a growing amount of
  Sun-mass behind it pulling back on it.]

Once the ping-pong ball reaches the center
of the Sun it will achieve gravity equilibrium
and lie forever suspended there (at the exact
center of a great hollow).

     Conclusions from the above
         thought experiment:

There is either a huge cavity at the center
of the Sun, or certainly a cavernous region
therein where there isn't as much Sun-
matter as there must be surrounding it.
According to the current laws of gravity.

However, current theory says that the center
of the Sun (of every star) is the place where
the greatest amount of pressure exists. In
fact: It is at the center of every star that the
fusion that keeps a star "going" is taking
place--exactly because this is the region of
the highest amount of gravitational pressures!

 These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximun
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

******************************

On Oct 8, 6:56 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:

Meanwhile, understand this: Newton
had no idea whatsoever what made the Sun
(or any star) burn the way they did/do/does:

It was not until around Einstein's time that
astrophysicists would at last able to put together
a cohesive theory of how the Sun is able to
ignite and sustain a self-perpetuating fusion
furnace--and all the data says that this is only
possible at the most central portion of the core:
there just isn't enough pressure outside it to
bring matter close enough together to produce
the required sustained fusion. Look it up.

The problem, of course, is that all the theories
of gravity produce NOT the greatest pressure
at the Sun's (and any other star's) core but a
great big hollow (or, at the least, a horrific
decrease of the gravitational "concentration
of matter" required to "push it/bring it together"
close enough for fusion to occur!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newton never gave this a thought (it never
troubled him in the least that his theories of
gravity said that the Sun could not possibly
be working--turned ON--) for the simple
reason that he did not KNOW that the Sun
worked by means of nuclear FUSION and
that the only way nuclear fusion can be
produced inside the Sun is if the greatest
(not the least, but the highest) possible
pressures are concentrated at the Sun's core.

Had he known this, it would have blown
his mind--until he went on the Internet, of
course, and visited:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

learning there, from Mister Rodrian, the
correct way in which the universe works.

It would not have changed his theories of
motion/gravity. It would simply have made
them actual. Hoorah!

********************************

On Oct 8, 1:12 am, Virgil <Vir...@home.esc> wrote:

If you propose that there is ANY pressure
at all at the Sun's center, then you will
need to explain where such pressure
comes from... considering that the "left
inner wall surface" [of my proposed
hollow at the Sun's center] is under MORE
gravitational pull from the left wall than
from the right wall (on the other side of
that hollow): There may be as much mass
in the right wall as in the left wall, yes,
but the mass of the left wall is obviously
closer to the "left inner wall surface."

You may stuff as much mass as you
like at the Sun's center--just explain
the mechanism which does the "stuffing."

For what's the use of merely noting one
has spotted a phenomenon--without also
attempting to explain it, when explaining
phenomena is the highest aim of science.

  Superman and The Sun Experiment.

[A thought experiment--further simplified
now for those who just cannot get past the
ping-pong ball of the original experiment.]

NOTE: This is happening in an universe
in which gravity behaves as everybody
thinks it does (Newton, Einstein, & you):

        And, why Superman?
        Because not only is
        Superman immune
        to gravity, while still
        able to feel it (we've
        often seen him just
        floating about in many
        of his movies but
        we've never seen him
        floating away every
        time he closes his
        eyes)... but he is also
        actually strengthened
        by the rays of our
        yellow Sun--Therefore
        he actually becomes
        most superest of all
        INSIDE the Sun!

The problem, of course was: getting a
hold of him. Luckily I knew where Lois
Lane worked and gave her a ring, in
exchange for which she quickly agreed
to help me meet him (Superman--By
the way, his name is Super Man not
"Joey Superman" or other, it's just that
he's not uppity and never insists he be
called MISTER Man): I very quickly
explained the nature of my experiment
to Super Man, and he agreed to undertake
to travel to the center of the Sun for the
sake of those poor souls who would
never grasp the meaning/purpose of
this thought experiment because they
had been struck dumb by the only thing
they were able to see from that instant
onwards, namely the bouncing ping-
pong ball.

--Your announcer is Mr. Maxwell Smart:

  BEGIN THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Now: Imagine Superman approaching
the surface of the Sun.

As he does so he feels the pull of the
Sun's gravity gradually increasing.

  [When he is at the Sun's surface, or
  pretty near it, Superman will feel the
  pull of the Sun's gravity to be at its
  maximum.]

The instant Superman plunges past the
surface of the Sun, he will feel the pull
of the Sun's gravity begin to decrease.
And it will continue to decrease as he
flies towards the Sun's center.

  [This is because as Superman travels
  closer and closer to the center of the
  Sun: the amount of Sun mass pulling
  on him is decreasing, all the time that
  there will be a growing amount of Sun-
  mass behind him pulling back on his
  super body. We can set aside the Sun
  mass to the sides, but we must still
  subtract it from the "pulling" mass.]

Once Superman reaches the center of the
Sun he will feel either no gravity there (or
very little if any); and, if he so wishes, he
can lie there forever just floating about
impervious to all INCLUDING gravity (at
the exact center of a great hollow which
the laws of gravity tell us will be found
thereabouts because most of the matter
at the center of the Sun will have been
"pulled" away from its center [there may
remain a single hydrogen atom at the exact
gravitational center of this hollow... but
certainly during 5 billion years of "pulling"
most other atoms will have been pulled
aside because they could NOT also be at
the exact gravitational center unless they
were one system, of course. If there is a
perfect hollow it is because its "left inner
wall surface" is under MORE gravitational
pull from the left wall than from the right
wall (on the other side of that hollow):
There may be as much mass in the right
wall of The Great Hollow as in the left
wall of The Great Hollow, yes, but the
mass of the left wall of The Great Hollow
is obviously closer to the "left inner wall
surface" [to quote a certain Mr. Rodrian].

Or Superman can, as he did, leave the
inside of the Sun to report on his findings.
I am sure that many posters here would
have wanted me to ask Superman why he
wears his yellowing underwear on the
outside of his pants and neat-o stuff like
that--but he suddenly had to fly off, as
he saw that Lois, in reaching for an aspirin,
had swallowed a suicide pill she was
doing a story on instead and died. Now
Superman would have to travel back in
time a couple of hours to save her... yet
again! [Thank you Mister Smart.]

     END THOUGHT EXPERIMENT

Now, what are the implications of this
thought experiment? [Hint: They have
nothing whatever to do with Superman,
and, nor with Lois Lane either.]

1. From the size of the Sun brainiacs've
    calculated that the only place in it
    where there's enough gravitational
    pressure to produce fusion is in a
    relatively compact central core. Most
    of the Sun is just plasma so loosely
    flying about that it's hard for enough
    matter to be brought close enough
    for atoms & stuff like that to smash
    together in order to sustain a fusion
    chain-reaction.

2. The only method brainiacs know of
    to produce the required pressures is
    if gravity is trying to push all the
    mass of the Sun into its very core.

3. And yet, as illustrated by Superman's
    voyage, the very laws of gravity tell
    us that once you start getting closer
    and closer to such a central core, the
    gravitational pressure should steadily
    decrease rather than increase: a very
    substantial mass of the Sun ought to
    be moving away from its central core.

Now, most posters here will probably
wish to know if I asked Super Man for
his autograph or something like that.
But, not for those posters but, for those
persons with a mind, some very deeply
fundamental questions about reality will
now have to be addressed:

1. Is the Sun the result of gravity, as
    we have heretofore understood gravity?

2. Obviously there exists the required
    pressure at the Sun's core for fusion
    to occur, or the Sun would not be ON.

3. How does that pressure come to be,
    if the laws of gravity as we understand
    them tell us it ought not exist there!

This is certainly a self-contradiction
the existence of which is telling us
something very profound about the
nature of how we understand reality
(apparently we are misunderstanding
it somewhere/somehow).

CONTINUANCE:

These are two self-excluding viewpoints:

One of them can be correct while the other
one is not. But both of them cannot be
correct at the same time: Either gravity exists
AND the center of the Sun (of every star) is
hollow. Or fusion DOES indeed take place
at the center of the stars because the center
of every star is its region of maximum
pressure--and therefore the effect of
gravity is "somehow" negated/voided
inside the stars.                               *

Which is it? SEE:

http://thesolutionisthis.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

* Of course, once The Great Thinkers
(who once thought the world was flat,
that the universe revolved around the
Earth, that Dark Matter and Dark Energy
explained the observable deficiencies
of gravity, that the entire universe
erupted from a magic bean, and that
it was constructed of vibrating strings
tuned into existence by unimaginably
tiny mathematicians)... once The Great
Thinkers think on this self-contradiction
awhile I'm sure they will be able to
come up with any number of their usual
outrageously reality-denying/logic-
twisting solutions to this puzzle.

... when they could just visit:
http://physics.sdrodrian.com

And WHY have none of them even
thought about this self-contradiction
(when it's so impertinently obvious)...?

Well, because we teach our so-called
Great Thinkers to learn by rote: "2times3
is33...2times4is104...4times5is55..."
and so on. And we not only require
that they do not challenge the validity
of what we are "teaching them" but
we actually demand that they accept it
all as The Indisputable Truth Eternal:

Can you imagine what would happen
if when the Great Professor is mumbling
"7times3is859..." to his class a student
were to get up and exclaim: "Professor,
you, sir, are an ignorant baboon: 7 X 3
is 21." Now: What grade do you believe
such a mere student would get? And
what student does not understand this?

By the way: The dramatization above is
an exaggeration for purposes of illustration
only. [This disclaimer is always required
when addressing former students of all
such universities, I'm sorry to say. SDR]

Ah! O well ...

*******************************
IN THE FOLLOWING REPLIES TO POSTERS
I HAVE SOME HARMLESS FUN PLAYING
PING-PONG. HOPE YOU ENJOY THEM TOO:
*******************************

On Oct 9, 9:08 am, Frederick Williams wrote:

********************************

On Oct 8, 6:56 am, "Peter Webb" wrote:

But that doesn't in any way change the pressure placed on the center
of the Sun by the mass in the regions of the Sun further out, where
the gravity is pulling it in.

Pressure is transmitted by the characteristics of the fluid material
of which the Sun is made. The transmission of pressure has nothing to
do with gravity.

If I take a 100 pound iron weight and put it on top of a piece of
plastic foam, will it make sense for me to say, "oh, well, the foam is
a very light substance, so there isn't much gravity on it, so there
won't be pressure there"? No. The foam won't add much to the pressure
from the iron weight, but that doesn't diminish the pressure applied
by the iron weight.

The Sun is not solid but a plasma ball. This
means it can expand (or contract) as much as
it needs to in order to accommodate behaving
as the laws of gravity say it ought to behave:

This means that every particle in it is free to
move to its region of the greatest gravitational
field strength from its region of lowest
gravitational field strength (even in its core,
which may be 10 times denser than lead, but
is still a plasma).

Are you suggesting that every one such particle
will move to the area of the least gravitational
field strength from the area of the highest
gravitational field strength? That's the whole
point of this series of posts right there.

There is no question that the Sun works exactly
as we all believe it does and that the highest
pressure exists at its core (I just told you how
much pressure there is there producing a
density 10 times greater than that of lead).

The question to consider is NOT how the SUN
actually behaves, but how would a plasma ball
like the Sun behave were it indeed obeying the
classically delineated laws of gravity (that say the
strength of gravity acting on a body descending
to its center decreases. Do you understand now?

I guess it's true: no one understands sarcasm.

A solid ball may convey pressures from one point
to others, but a plasma ball like the Sun would
(were it only under the design of gravity alone)
eventually describe in space the field(s) of gravity
acting upon it ... exactly like iron filings describe
the fields of a magnet acting on them.

And then you would have to "see" its mass (the
equivalent of the magnet's iron filings) describing
a "more massive" shell around a "less massive"
center.

We don't see that (in fact, it is a physical
impossibility because then the Sun would not
be ON).

Don't miss the forest for the trees.

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

This monkey, unlike the other poster, may
be able to stand upright, but he's still a
poor ole monkey, pure & simple...

The ongoing fusion reaction proves that
in the Sun sphere Gravity could NOT be
working as it OUGHT TO BE working:

There is NO MECHANISM in a gas/plasma
ball (large enough for 1,300,000 Earths
to fit in it) for the outer shell mass to
transmit enough cumulative pressures
to the core ... since gravity is actually
declining the closer one gets to the core:

There are too many earth-masses around
every earth-mass at, say, 1/4 of the way
to the core pulling out towards the surface
for it to "press" all its mass towards the
core: In the end, once you start getting to
98/100th of the way to the core those earth-
masses are pressing more against core-
wards than core-wise [or, negative gravity
--at the core itself there should be no
gravity pressure at all]. Not being ONE
SOLID BALL the earth-masses in the Sun
have no way to add their gravitational
pressure towards the core. SINCE they
are obviously not falling towards the center
like Newton apples but existing in place. Or:

Imagine not an earth-mass but one given
atom "existing" inside the Sun sphere:
ANYWHERE YOU PLACE IT it will always
"feel" less and less "pull" towards the center
the closer to the center you put it. THE SUM
RESULT being:

The Sun is undergoing the pressure it's
undergoing at its core NOT because of
"gravitational pressures" but due to some
other mechanism--And that mechanism...
a velocity pressing towards center(s) ever
since the beginning of time, is explained
here:

 http://physics.sdrodrian.com

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com
http://islamisbad.com

 "Give it up. Dude:
  We are monkeys."

   Oh, yeah. Sorry.

"Eat our feces, dude."

Fortunately the universe doesn't look
inside the craniums of men to learn
how it's permitted to work (or not):

Eventually men LEARN the Earth isn't flat.
That the universe does not revolve around
their itty bitty planet. And that the reason
why gravitational anomalies suffuse the
universe everywhere they look is NOT
because "God likes lo create complex
puzzles with wandering planets, and
gravitational forces that don't act on the
parts of a mass just on the whole of it"
BUT because they have yet to fully grasp
(understand) exactly how perfectly simple
the workings of the universe really are.

You can learn a bit of it by traveling to:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

You will have to shut your mind to the bunk
more primitive monkeys than you have come
up with throughout theis ascent from more
primitive ages... to our howling day. But it
can be done (by most monkeys, if not all).

Good luck!

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

I do not claim that the universe works
in any way differently from how we
know it works.

I do  know that if gravity were producing
"the effects of gravity," then the universe
could NOT work the way we know it works
(from the way gravity should work if it were
to work according to its own laws).

ERGO my scenario of a "less dense core"
for the Sun... if the universe worked according
to the laws of gavity.

The Sun does not actually have a less
dense core BECAUSE (see Newton's laws
of motion) since the beginning of the
universe everything in it has been
accelerating towards ITS CENTER(s).

NOTE: Not towards "a" center because
the sum total of its matter IS its center.
THERE is no other matter in the universe
than matter---I know this simplicity
is hard for monkeys to grasp. And I have
great sympathy for you, believe me.
But eventually you will all understand it;
just as you now understand that the math
that proved Ptolemy's earh-centered notion
didn't really prove anything except perhaps
the over-cleverness of us monkeys.

In affect, the universe is acting like
THE MOTHER OF ALL BLACK HOLES
with every "bit of matter in it" being
its "point of infinite density" (the very
obviously misnamed "singularity").

EVERYTHING about us is telling us
this is the case, but we are not yet
prepared (as a monkey society) to see it
(only I can see it--others may see it as
well, or perhaps blurrily, sooner or later).

THAT is why denser (the more mass, given
the same space) stuff "moves" toward center
with "greater weight" (more impetus) than
less massive matter (and why nearly mass-
less particles like the photon seen to shoot
about AT AN ALMOST INCREDIBLY CONSTANT
SPEED regardless of where in the universe
they are). And without knowing each other.

And why, the photon, after it slows down
while passing through a denser medium
suddenly re-speeds up after it hits a less
dense medium, and WITHOUT having to fire
any after-burners!

It's all explained from several different angles
at:

http://physics.sdrodrian.com

and in a plain/simple English language
which even a six year old can follow.

See if you can,

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

   [The Sun is not a bowling ball: If it were,
   we'd know where the pressure was coming
   from--But since the Sun is a ball of gas/plasma,
   it should perfectly "describes" the impression
   of gravity upon its matter ... exactly like the
   magnetic fields of a magnet's poles "describe"
   themselves on iron filings spread out on
   a sheet of paper under which you move said
   magnet. Do the experiment yourself. Remember:
   There is NO WAY for one of the Sun's "filings"
   (or: atomic particle) to "push" another anywhere:
   They should all travel towards where they are
   "pulled" by gravity. ERGO: If the Sun were
   indeed being "shaped" by gravity, there would
   be no/little pressure towards the core to carry out
   any fusion reaction. That is a physical fact which
   nothing in your philosophy can dispute. THERE
   IS fusion going on at the Sun's core, otherwise
   it'd be a big ole bowling ball.] Therefore, Tommy

Trust me: The Sun (and every other heavenly body)
is being shaped/worked by "something" other than
your laws of gravity. Go read all about it at:

     http://physics.sdrodrian.com

The answer is PAINFULLY simple: It HAD to be,
otherwise IT COULDN'T BE--Even Einstein knew
this, when he said that "God does not play dice."
("Physicists have suggested that the laws and
constants of physics are too good - as if the
universe were set up to favour life's evolution.
It is as though there were, say, half a dozen dials
representing the major constants of physics. Each
of the dials could in principle be tuned to any of
a wide range of values. Almost all of these knob-
twiddlings would yield a universe in which life
would be impossible. Some universes would fizzle
out within the first picosecond. Others would
contain no elements heavier than hydrogen and
helium. In yet others, matter would never condense
into stars (and you need stars in order to forge
the elements of chemistry and hence life). You
can estimate the very low odds against the six
knobs all just happening to be correctly tuned,
and conclude that a divine knob-twiddler must have
been at work" IF you do not understand that the
sequence is not one of six disparate/unrelated
knobs but one of one leading INEVITABLY to
the next. In other words: The explanation to
Existence is always 1,2,3,4,5,6 ... inevitably.

If any other sequece is proposed the proposal is
as wrong as proposing your nephew created the
universe: No proof of that can ever be right. And
regardless how elegant the math may be.

The pressure towards center can NOT be
the result of gravity for an universe of
reasons (no pun intended).

For the reason why everything is always
moving towards center, go thou read it at:

  http://physics.sdrodrian.com

You know, when the Ptolemy System was
drawn up... it all fit together perfectly. The
math was mavelus! Except, of course, that
a few "stars" (planets, actually, like Venus)
would suddenly seem to come to a dead stop,
and then go back the way they'd come!!!

But that was just a few planets--Why scrap
a beautiful system like Ptolemy's just for a few
lousy planets that refused to obey its laws?

Well, because it told you the system was rotten.

Well the system of Gravity we have today to
explain the way the universe works doesn't
just have a few wandering planets, it has
scientists losing their sanity and proposing
science fiction solutions at almost EVERY turn:

Time-travel (Yes: they're now quite SERIOUSLY
blaming the failure at CERN on "the notion that
the troubled collider is being sabotaged by its
own future: A pair of otherwise distinguished
physicists have suggested that the hypothesized
Higgs boson, which physicists hope to produce
with the collider, might be so abhorrent to nature
that its creation would ripple backward through
time and stop the collider before it could make
one, like a time traveler who goes back in time
to kill his grandfather.")... and a myriad other
idiotic physical impossibilities like "dark energy."

And yet these idiots refuse to accept that their
extire system is rotten. Believe Einstein on this
one: The solution is not 1, 483, 43, 9, 1999, 2
but 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6

Inevitability is ALWAYS the correct solution.

S D Rodrian
http://sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://mp3.sdrodrian.com

Back to cores. We have a similar dilemma with the core of our earth. We feel
pretty ceertai n that there is a lot of iron down there, but the
distribution of that, and ligher, and havier substances is still
undtetermined by our collective scientific society. Trouble is that if we
(they) know very little about it, then Mim's the word, and nothing gets
done.

Continuing on that  thought experiment, It seems that gradients and
stratification is for the mid and upper levels, but not for the lower levels
toward the center. So all heavy atoms are down there, mixed in a soup. Radon
gas is the only tracer from those environs besides heat and magma (the light
stuff) This indicates residual decaay. Originally, I was of the opinion tha
there is a farly large dose of heavier atoms that are still on their decay
curve from original earth coalescence. This seems seems unhandy from the
standpoint that because of the mesured age of the earth (hundreds of
millions of years), it's incredible that any decay tails at all are still
meaningful. But it is a long way from a nuclear exposion to just some melted
iron. Has anyone made the calculation? The only other option is that there
are daisy chain reactions in play;  where "This" begets "That", and now
"That" has a new lease on life. Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

Angelo Campanella