A Test to Prove Gravity Has Mass

[maw2432]

Some of you may already have read this but worth reposting if not already posted.

http://www.space.com/11570-nasa-gravity-probe-einstein-theory-relativity.html

You can get.... free .... real data about the effects of gravity paid for by your taxes.

Interesting the study takes many years of data to confirm.   

Bill

[onthecuttingedge2005]

Anyone want to talk about the proposed test, or can you only post gibberish?

I will ask the question again. Why do you believe something so daum as the mass of a particle changes when it moves?

Show me one thing that changes in mass because it is moving.

Hi Brian.

I am not at all trying to be interruptive here at all, but I think these other people would use your same questions against you, in the fact, how would you prove to us that Gravity has mass or not and can you prove it physically otherwise?

I personally would not spend my money on such a project. oh, wait, sorry, I forgot about tax dollars. my bad. please continue.

I personally, Gravity is a tensor field period. no mass, just displacement which can and has already been proven in theory.

I also wanted to ask you, if an object was traveling in space at the speed of light or close to it that it wouldn't absorb energy as it travels? in fact it would be absorbing a lot of energy at 186,283 miles a second traveling just through electromagnetic energy as an antenna. at that speed your spaceship becomes a powerful antenna.

Just wanted to hear your views on such subject matter.

Jerry

[quantumtangles]

Anyone want to talk about the proposed test, or can you only post gibberish?

I will ask the question again. Why do you believe something so daum as the mass of a particle changes when it moves?

Show me one thing that changes in mass because it is moving.

Photons have zero 'rest' mass, but mass when moving.

The mass of a photon is proportionate to its velocity.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

[WilbyInebriated]

Photons have zero 'rest' mass, but mass when moving.

The mass of a photon is proportionate to its velocity.

Quod erat demonstrandum.

fail. you can't use a theoretical thing...
photons are theoretical particles... a theory in which the foundation rests upon a 'massive' particle called the higg's boson, which somehow eludes discovery by science. i hardly think that qualifies as demonstrating...

[brian334]

If a particle traveling at the speed of light has infinite mass, and light travels at the speed of light. Than why doesn’t light have infinite mass?