|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Unbended Curved Bar Space Slugout Thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Hey Cavediver, just to let you know, I never studied physics or anything (I'm an economics type) I must say the analogies brought up in this thread make perfect sense to me, and I can't really figure out why Buzsaw isn't seeing them.
Further this "the r=3m null orbit around the Schwarzschild black hole" you mention, care to explain a bit about that? It looks interesting, though I must say I'm baffled about this at the moment.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
First of all thanks for the welcome
Now to the matter at hand:
Buzsaw writes: Come, let us reason together. Suppose, Huntard, that you came to America and we stood at the foot of the straight and tall Washington Monument at Washington DC. Do you think that if there were enough matter and energy to extend that rigid straight and tall monument up into the cosmos that the tip of it would go full circle around the alleged finite universe to form a circle to have the pointed tip top of it protrude up through planet earth and crash into the base of itself WITHOUT BENDING? Well, the way I understand in is that the 3d property of space comes back upon itself, meaning that if I were to travel in a straight line fast enough and far enough, I would at one point come back to where I started from. So I conclude the same would be true for the monument, if the tip of it would travel fast enough and far enough through space it would indeed at some point come and crash into the exact opposite position on the earth, now I don't know how all this works, I don't understand the math, but that is what I understands happens. You seem to be sure it bends, I don't see a need for it, for it cannot do anything but follow the straight line through space, which ends up meeting itself. Perhaps this analogy helps: Imagine a glass bowl everything within this glass bowl cannot leave it, they also do not perceive the "glass" they can only move around on the inside surface of the bowl. Now, if one of them were to make an infintely long bar, along this surface, which they cannot leave, nor can they imaginge such things, then it would follow the glass all around and eventually meet up again, to the observers inside the bowl, it is not bent, it continues on straight as ever, but we observers outside the bowl, indeed see it form a full circle. Now we are the beings inside this bowl, for us, the bar is straight, for an "outside" observer the bar is in a circle. So in our bowl/universe the bar is straight, for anyone outside the universe, the bar is a circle. I expect to be told soon my analogy sucks by Cavediver or someone else who knows far more about this then I do.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Wow great explanation there Cavediver. Makes perfect sense to me, also, could this help Buz understand that straigght in space is a relative understandig? I mean, for the guy present in the spacestation, the corridor is perfectly strqaight and infinte, yet for someone further away from the black hole, it is in fact encricling the black hole. Relative to his bar, we would be the guy inside the station and someone not in our spacetime would see it as encircling the universe.
Just one thing:
Cavediver writes: Finally, what happens if we build the space-station at r<3M??? We look down the corridor, and what do we see? This is hard for me to picture, if at r=3m we see into infinity, and ourselves recurring infinitely, does that mean we would see more into infinity as we get closer to the black hole? Don't make sense to me....more infinity...But chances are I am wrong
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Hey Buzsaw, there is something I don't quite understand. What do you mean by:
a bar or line of which all dimensions are unbended and absolute straight. Doesn't a bar have only three dimensions, and a line only 2? What do you mean by "unbended in all dimensions".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Hello Buzsaw, glad I could help clear things up.
I still don't understand why you can't see this? Why wouldn't a perfectly straight bar be unbended and yet meet up with itself again? I know this isn't logical, but who ever said this stuff is. Don't say you want to know what property of space allows the bar to meet up with itself and yet not bend. That is the same as asking why an apple tastes like an apple. That's how space works.
Buzsaw writes:
This "space" we're talking about here is not the space as in everything beyond the atmosphere of the Earth. But more like the fabric of spacetime that makes up the entire Universe. Including the Earth and everything on it.
1. Forces are not a property of space. They are forces existing in space. That the forces, electromagnetism and dark energy exist in space does not make them properties of space. Electromagnetism is no more a property of space than are radio waves, light rays or heat waves, etc. They all exist in space. 2. I know that this is contrary to conventional science but that's how I see it and I'm not alone on that.
This alone should tell you enough. I don;t pretend to know more then scientists in there particular field of study. If I don't understand something, I ask them questions about it. If I don't understand there answers, I'll ask more questions. If after a long talk I still don't understand it, I shrug, and continue on with my life. There is nothing wrong with not understanding this "higher physics" stuff. I don't understand how it works myself, however, I can imagine it happening. Logical or not, this does not matter.
3. I do not deny that curvature of something is observed. PaulK says mass curves space. I say mass, forces and energy are curved in the unbounded static space/area of the universe. Imo, it is the forces, gravity, electromagnetism etc operational which affect mass, one or more of these applied to things existing in the universe which are observed as being curved and not space perse.
So, instead of accepting General Relativity on this fact, you rather say it's not true and make up your own theory, which I'm pretty sure you can't even begin to express in mathematical equations.
All I can say is that if it's the numbers which allow for stuff like causing the two ends of a 3D absolute straight non bended bar to connect themselves without bending and other miracle mystery claims like that, count me out on learning about that.
I'm beginnig to see where people's frustrations are coming from. Did you just actually say you're not willing to learn? How can you be serious? If the math provide an answer as to how this is possible, then surely it is within you're interest to study them. Even if you don;t think it's correct, wouldn't learning what it actually says then help you in formulating a different equation that is closer to your ideas? (for so far as that is possible). Fruthermore, they are not "miracle mystery claims" as Cavediver has pointed out, within the math it is perfectly logical for this to happen, since you don't know what the math say, you can't critisize them. So you just shout "Nuh-uh!" and then claim you are right, even though you have no math, or anything else, to back it up.
Imo, time will show many of those predictions to become falsified.
Since you have nothing to base this on, it os my oppininon you are simply wrong.
It's dishonest, deceptive and bogus science to use it with the public at large, deceiving the public at large to the point that they consider mavericks like me to be totally kooky when we call you people on the fallacy. Since the universe has three basic observed spatial dimensions, imo, only 3D models should be applied to explain the universe and not bogus models such as geometric lines, 2D balloon surfaces, etc.
So, you'd rather have we teach the actual math that goes with this? I've got a video for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_6uKZWnJLCM. Skip to about 6:25 he will show you an equation there. This is an actual equation physicists use. Do you think anyone except for these physicists (and some mathematicians) is able to understand what this thing says? That's why we use analogies to teach these things, the actual stuff is way to complicated to begin with, it would scare everybody off.
I can accept what does not become nonsensical, illogical and imo, utterly impossible, magical and mystical such as the 3D bar connect thing. I know it can't happen and no amount of complicated scientific jargon is going to ever make me believe the two ends of my bar will connect without bending.
As I've said in the beginning of this post, why is it so hard for you to understand that some things just don't make sense or are not logical? Edited by Huntard, : No reason given. Edited by Huntard, : Changed thread to post in last paragraph I hunt for the truth
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Huntard Member (Idle past 2326 days) Posts: 2870 From: Limburg, The Netherlands Joined: |
Buzz, perhaps this will help as to why space is able to curve, since you don't seem to understand something very basic.
What property of an apple allows it to taste like an apple? In case anyone thinks "what a strange question" Yes, it is, but it's exactly the same the question as "what property of space allows it to curve" Hope this helped clear things up, but I doubt it. I hunt for the truth
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024