### Re: ZetaTalk and Spaceguard UK (D8) <= Graviton

```In Article <f4aad97f.0108012236.51e5dd28@posting.google.com> Quantum Certainty wrote
> Seeing gravity as a particle phenomenon allows us to explain
> failures of GR like singularities. I am not saying that GR is
> wrong, just that it is incomplete.

Quantum, can you explain to uneducated Nancy, briefly, what GR is? I'm
reading this as G=Gravity and R=Repulsion, which I suspect is wrong. What
is the failure situation you mention?

> So 1) if gravity is composed of particles that interact with
> bodies by pressing through them and 2) the repulsion force
> moves with a greater velocity than the regular, constant
> speed, attractive gravity, then we can do some thought
> experiments to determine the nature and consequences of
> this new theory.

Then you go on to explain the current human theory as two DIFFERENT
particles, moving at different speeds, and the problems encountered with
this theory, as follows:

> Suppose following Einstein's example that we are in an
> elevator sitting STILL on the surface of the earth. Gravity
> particles flow through us pressing us down toward the floor.
> ... Now if we take the elevator and make move at a constant
> velocity upwards we run into problems. By experience we
> know that we feel NO more gravity AT A CONSTANT
> UPWARD VELOCITY in the elevator than simply sitting
> still on the earth. If we did it would contradict relativity.
> The gravity particles, now, are pressing through us with a
> greater velocity and should exert more force (addition of
> velocities according to SR). This however cannot be the
> case.

Isn't one of the big problems in putting man into space the G force that
must be overcome when rocketing upward?  High blood pressure, flesh
pulled back taut against the face, etc.  Here again I'm sure I don't
understand what you mean by "contradict relativity" and what SR is
(Single Repulsion particle?)  How does the increased G force "contradict
relativity"?```