Talk:Ergosphere

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The more I ponder the ergosphere, the more I'm intrigued and pushed in the direction of - the physics inside and near the ergosphere are fundamental to core principles of our Universe. If indeed frame-dragging is confirmed (as seems likely by Gravity Probe B), this indicates the inextricable link between mass and space-time; that the former is a distortion in the latter, so that masses are actually stable distortions in space-time. There is the conventional approach - which asserts that these distortions are probability waves. And there are varied unconventional approaches - one of which asserts that particles are mini-dynamical systems - that are actually stable vibrations in space-time. Historically, convention has dismissed all attempts to explain atomic/nuclear phenomena from a deterministic perspective. But automatic dismissal of those various proposals is not helping science move forward. As many famous scientists have shown - just because you propose some successful ideas - does not make all your ideas true. And conversely, just because many of your ideas may seem "fringe" - does not make all of your proposals untrue. What I'm trying to say in a roundabout manner is that there is value in the perspective: particles are stable distortions in space-time. A viable alternative to convention has been developed with that premise - all based on the inspiration of physics within and near the ergosphere. This can be viewed at your leisure at: http://www.unc.edu/~gravity/roadmap.xml (save locally and open with Explorer), sam micheal&Delta (talk) 03:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)