> > Agreeing or disagreeing and getting away with it are independent. I noted > > previously that I disagree with the law of gravity. I never get away with > > it! But I still disagree. I'm looking forward to someone discovering some > > other law which explains why we are allowed to move mass off planet(s) more > > easily than Sir Isaac's law currently allows. > Yes, but discovering a new law would merely make the current "law of gravity" > a special case (or an approximation that holds under certain conditions), > just as Newton's "laws" are merely a good approximation which holds > under conditions much lower than the speed of light under general relativity. I'm aware of all that, but my point is that I DISAGREE with it. It's not that I disbelieve it (although it may in fact be or not be entirely true), feel it's only a special case (hopefully it is) or have any better ideas that actually work. I just DISAGREE with it. It's rude and arrogant, it insists that we have to spend more energy than I want us to getting things off planet, and I don't like its face. It's still a law. ie it specifies how things are; like it or not (I don't). It does have the advantage of being quite important for holding things together. If the inverse square law were to vary by the minutest skerrick all planetary systems (and no doubt much else besides) would be in deep trouble - decay inwards or outwards. Inverse Square Law is not gravity per se but they seem intimately tied together. If anything in nature joins with me in disagreeing with gravity it must do it in a very circumspect and orderly manner- if such disagreement ever got out into the minds of average matter the universe would be a troubled place. Doesn't lead me to having too much hope that my disagreement will spawn any sort of revolution any time soon. One would be more liable to success in disagreeing with road rules :-) RM -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads