Quote Originally Posted by MarineOne View Post
Oh, now THIS will make your head really thump.



Ah yes, I can see that. However there will be both a slowing of momentum from friction and curvature of the linear path due to gravity.

For example, a projectile (arrows, bullets, artillery shells, etc.) will eventually slow down from atmospheric friction which allows gravity to alter the projectiles course. This arguement can also be used for light, since light waves can be altered by gravity (red shift) and be effected by interstellar dust or other celestial bodies that the light would have to pass through.
Ahh... The ol' "throwing a projectile" argument. Clever...

Isn't the linear trajectory vector of the object not expressed in two directions? One force vector represented by the forward trajectory of the object, as well as the gravity force vector acting on the object's forward path? m x a = foward trajectory, m x a = force due to gravity ...each separate and distnct, and both linear vectors? ...at least that is conventional thinking.

Or - are they both truly linear vectors? After all - where does gravity come from? So could the vector representing the force due to gravity actually be a representation of an angular force (i.e. tangential acceleration) - typically expressed as a constant value (9.8 m/sec/sec) even though it's truly not constant.

In Quantum Mechanics (which is where the scientific community studies gravitational forces) states through the Heisenberg uncertainty principle that it is not possible for the six term, 2-form Noether charge to be measured simultaneously with arbitrary precision. Therefore, there are limits to what can be known or measured about a particle's angular momentum. It turns out that the best that one can do is to simultaneously measure both the angular momentum vector's magnitude and its component along one axis.

So - I think you'll agree - it is is capricious to think that an angular component becomes linear.