Total Posts:53|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

How gravity could work in a 4d spacetime.

glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2015 1:40:10 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
The current theory is that objects with a large mass bend spacetime... somehow. It seems to me, as uneducated as i am in this matter that this is like a gravitational force exerted on the fourth dimension. This sounds a lot like newtonian physics with an extra dimension.

Couldn't it just be the other way around? Say that the 4th dimension is already curved and that mass is pulled inward to form cosmic bodies. It seems like black holes would disprove this, but they don't. Stars exert a force outward that can expand them to their current size. Black holes form when this ends and the star succumbs to its own mass. As a matter of fact the thing that most clearly disproves this is the idea that it means that if a star were to suddenly vanish then planets would orbit around as normal, but can anyone prove that such a thing wouldn't happen. If anyone has more evidence of any kind to either prove or disprove my argument please submit it. I am looking for an actual answer and not the opportunity to prove how right i am.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 11:56:40 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/27/2015 1:40:10 AM, glory_lyfe wrote:
The current theory is that objects with a large mass bend spacetime... somehow. It seems to me, as uneducated as i am in this matter that this is like a gravitational force exerted on the fourth dimension. This sounds a lot like newtonian physics with an extra dimension.

You are very confused. The 4th dimension is normally understood to be time. How can gravity exert a force on time? (It can certainly affect time but it is not a force). Gravity is an attractive force between two bodies. Or, with Einstein's understanding, mass warps space-time so that the body with less mass 'rolls' towards the body with more mass down a gradient.

Couldn't it just be the other way around? Say that the 4th dimension is already curved and that mass is pulled inward to form cosmic bodies.

Ignoring the fact that the 4th dimension is time (and not spatial), your idea still begs the question. What causes the curvature in this other dimension? Also, shouldn't we observe empty regions of space which are attracting matter? Instead we only see gravity associated with matter. We never find matter which doesn't exert a gravitational force.

It seems like black holes would disprove this, but they don't. Stars exert a force outward that can expand them to their current size. Black holes form when this ends and the star succumbs to its own mass.

I fail to see your point in relation to your theory.

As a matter of fact the thing that most clearly disproves this is the idea that it means that if a star were to suddenly vanish then planets would orbit around as normal, but can anyone prove that such a thing wouldn't happen.

Sure. It would violate the laws of motion in relation to planetary bodies. These laws are based on the masses of the two objects involved.

If anyone has more evidence of any kind to either prove or disprove my argument please submit it. I am looking for an actual answer and not the opportunity to prove how right i am.

See above.
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 5:43:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Ok look i don't think you understand the rudimentary concept of general relativity... to understand better where i am coming from watch Pbs Spacetime's 4 part series on genearl relativity
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 7:10:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/28/2015 5:43:12 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
Ok look i don't think you understand the rudimentary concept of general relativity... to understand better where i am coming from watch Pbs Spacetime's 4 part series on genearl relativity

Perhaps, I can help you with that.

Newtonian gravity is based on a couple of misconceptions, that gravity is a force and that it actually pulls things towards the mass. General Relativity says that gravity is not a force, that instead it is an acceleration of the mass on the space surrounding it, that the surface of the mass is constantly accelerating upwards towards any free falling object. We are free falling objects, we feel no forces acting upon us, other than the acceleration of the surface of the earth on the bottoms of our feet.

Newtonian gravity would speculate that a force can move away from the mass, grab something in free fall and pull it back towards the mass. Clearly, this idea is silly, yet it was accepted for hundreds of years.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 7:26:58 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Lastly danneJe russe you say that gravity from an objective third party standpoint is silly. But let us compare it with general relativity which, is just as true as newtonian gravity. The idea that there is a fourth dimension in which all events already exist and time is merely us walking through this dimension. That is not all that more sensical
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2015 7:34:38 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/27/2015 1:40:10 AM, glory_lyfe wrote:
The current theory is that objects with a large mass bend spacetime... somehow. It seems to me, as uneducated as i am in this matter that this is like a gravitational force exerted on the fourth dimension. This sounds a lot like newtonian physics with an extra dimension.

Not really, the General Theory is a "geometric" theory of gravity, there is no "gravitational force", that gravity is a "force" is a Newtonian concept. Einstein's General Theory did combine the three dimensions of space and the fourth dimension f time into a single manifold, so I suppose you could call that "Newtonian Physics with an extra dimension", but gravity is not a "force" in General Relativity like it is in Newton's theory, so it isn't "like a gravitational force exerted on the fourth dimension".

The General Theory is a geometric theory of gravity, spacetime combines the three spatial dimensions with time, a single temporal dimension, and the mass of an object bends the four dimensional coordinate system called spacetime. Newton's first law of motion is that objects in a state of uniform motion will remain in that state of motion unless acted upon by an external force, the point of General Relativity is that orbiting bodies are not being acted on by an external force, they are traveling in a straight line through curved space.


Couldn't it just be the other way around? Say that the 4th dimension is already curved and that mass is pulled inward to form cosmic bodies.

No, matter isn't "pulled" inward; it's the energy and momentum of mass that curves the spacetime manifold, and because there is no "force" involved it isn't accurate to say that the mass is "pulled". It also would not be accurate to say the "fourth dimension is already curved", the fourth dimension is time and curvature is a spatial term, it applies to the three dimensions of space, curvature is not a temporal term, time can be dilated or delayed, it can't be curved or bent.

It seems like black holes would disprove this, but they don't. Stars exert a force outward that can expand them to their current size. Black holes form when this ends and the star succumbs to its own mass. As a matter of fact the thing that most clearly disproves this is the idea that it means that if a star were to suddenly vanish then planets would orbit around as normal, but can anyone prove that such a thing wouldn't happen.

Star's aren"t known to vanish of course, but they are known to explode from time to time and when that happens, it's a lot like the star vanished because the matter is redistributed into space over a very large area. When the matter of the star is redistributed, the effects of that redistribution on bodies that were originally being affected by the star"s gravitational field are as predicted by the General Theory, they do not "orbit around as normal" as your theory predicts.

If anyone has more evidence of any kind to either prove or disprove my argument please submit it. I am looking for an actual answer and not the opportunity to prove how right i am.

Hope this helps.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2015 12:43:05 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

The core of your idea is that mass doesn't cause the curvature of space-time but that the pre-existing curvature attracts mass. If that were true, the logical consequence is that we should expect to find no correlation between mass and gravity and there should exist matter which does not exhibit the property of gravity associated with it. Neither of these things are observed. That refutes your idea.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 1:31:47 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

It is curved. Since its part of the space-TIME continuum. Part of the same fabric as space. SO it's curved right along with Space. When they did the experiment to see the light rays from distant stars bending that confirmed Einstein's Genral Theory of Relativity it was also discovered that Time was bent as well. Something about the time it took for the photons from the light to bounce back to Earth. You might want to look that all up.

Back to the thread topic......asking about how Gravity might work in 4D spacetime is getting ahead of yourselves. Probly best to learn how it works in just our current Standard Model, since science has yet to explain it or even find the particle responsible for acting as the medium. Oh they call it and speculate it to be something called a Graviton but its hyper-thetical. Just a made-up name. They dont even know what 90% of the Universe is! LOL. Since Dark Matter and Energy make that much of it up and they have no idea what it is, except that the latter is a repulsive force oppostie of Gravity being a attractive Force. Its also smooth while the Matter is in clusters and more like Gravity.

As science learns more that they don't know what they thought I believe this is a paradox and a Sign that they are getting closer to knowing God is behind it all. We will call it Creator instead of God since the former has religious aspects and is too limiting. From here on I will use the term Creator--no "the"--when I speak of it here on Science.

CREATOR. Hmm..I sorta like it!! LOL

God, er, Creator Bless.
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 1:43:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

Time to learn Danger Mouse. here's some stuff from hawking backin up what I just toldja in my last post. http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ouch.

Creator Bless!!

http://www.hawking.org.uk...
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 2:49:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Sidewalker

I think that you are taking my word to literally. You are right that matter isn't pulled. However any matter that enters a warped are of space time won't really be able to leave. It will keep going forward in a straight line. Which due to the warped spacetime is basically a sphere. You are saying that time isn't curved but dilated. This isn't true. The only word in the English language able to describe the misshapenness of the fourth dimension is warped. Because it is so general. You also say that the planets don't orbit around as normal. But this could be because the stars DONT vanish. If the stars vanish then there is no other disturbance to the planets orbits... If a star orbits there is a massive disturbance.

Dee-em
What you say is true except that these warped areas attract mass to the extent they can't anymore when there warped shape no longer effects the outward mass enough.

And as for August burns red keep in mind that gravitons are not a part of general relativity but quantum theory which means everything should have a responsible particle. And that 4d spacetime is the standard model.

I also want to suggest that black holes don't have to exist. They are seen now as areas that have an affect on nearby objects with no visible mass of their own... A clear indication that spacetime could be warped.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 3:14:57 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 1:31:47 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:

It is curved. Since its part of the space-TIME continuum. Part of the same fabric as space. SO it's curved right along with Space. When they did the experiment to see the light rays from distant stars bending that confirmed Einstein's Genral Theory of Relativity it was also discovered that Time was bent as well.

Source?

Something about the time it took for the photons from the light to bounce back to Earth.

Bounce back from where? What are you talking about?

You might want to look that all up.

Do you mean this?

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Nothing to do with distant stars at all. Lol.

Back to the thread topic......asking about how Gravity might work in 4D spacetime is getting ahead of yourselves. Probly best to learn how it works in just our current Standard Model, since science has yet to explain it or even find the particle responsible for acting as the medium. Oh they call it and speculate it to be something called a Graviton but its hyper-thetical. Just a made-up name. They dont even know what 90% of the Universe is! LOL. Since Dark Matter and Energy make that much of it up and they have no idea what it is, except that the latter is a repulsive force oppostie of Gravity being a attractive Force. Its also smooth while the Matter is in clusters and more like Gravity.

And? Science doesnt yet know everything, therefore science is a fail. Is that your contention?

As science learns more that they don't know what they thought I believe this is a paradox and a Sign that they are getting closer to knowing God is behind it all.

Of course. A bare assertion built on argument from ignorance. That is what gullible, superstitious people have always believed. You carry on a long tradition which has been continually disappointed.

We will call it Creator instead of God since the former has religious aspects and is too limiting. From here on I will use the term Creator--no "the"--when I speak of it here on Science.

CREATOR. Hmm..I sorta like it!! LOL

You can call 'it' anything you like. A name doesn't make something real, unfortunately for you. I prefer Sky Fairy. It's more descriptive and accurate to your holy texts.
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 3:22:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 2:49:46 AM, glory_lyfe wrote:

Dee-em
What you say is true except that these warped areas attract mass to the extent they can't anymore when there warped shape no longer effects the outward mass enough.

That makes absolutely no sense and you haven't even attempted to address my objections.

I also want to suggest that black holes don't have to exist. They are seen now as areas that have an affect on nearby objects with no visible mass of their own... A clear indication that spacetime could be warped.

That spacetime can warp is not at issue. The cause is. There is a very good explanation for why black holes are not visible. There is also a very good explanation for how they form. You have an idea but no explanation for any of the phenomena we observe associated with spacetime curvature.
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 5:14:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Okay you said there couldn't be a ratio between mass and gravity. That isn't true. Say the area at which the sun is located had a set "maximum mass" the point at which the mass would no longer be held together by the warped spacetime. The force their is very strong but the Suns outward force is very strong. The energy outward allows the sun to hold its massive size. Once the sun reaches the maximum allowable mass you would find the ratio. If every celestial body held as much mass as it could then you would find a correlation and a ratio
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 5:18:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There is a very good explanation for why back holes are not visible. Well of course there is. I know the theory. But that is all that it is. It could be just as true that it is a celestial body which has not achieved its ratio because the maximum mass is infinite.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 6:23:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 1:31:47 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

It is curved. Since its part of the space-TIME continuum. Part of the same fabric as space. SO it's curved right along with Space. When they did the experiment to see the light rays from distant stars bending that confirmed Einstein's Genral Theory of Relativity it was also discovered that Time was bent as well. Something about the time it took for the photons from the light to bounce back to Earth. You might want to look that all up.

I should look that up? LOL. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, SoM, you didn't when you were SoM and you don't now. Time doesn't "bend" you idiot, it dilates.

Back to the thread topic......asking about how Gravity might work in 4D spacetime is getting ahead of yourselves. Probly best to learn how it works in just our current Standard Model, since science has yet to explain it or even find the particle responsible for acting as the medium. Oh they call it and speculate it to be something called a Graviton but its hyper-thetical. Just a made-up name. They dont even know what 90% of the Universe is! LOL. Since Dark Matter and Energy make that much of it up and they have no idea what it is, except that the latter is a repulsive force oppostie of Gravity being a attractive Force. Its also smooth while the Matter is in clusters and more like Gravity.

Yes, thanks for your totally misinformed and ignorant opinion.

As science learns more that they don't know what they thought I believe this is a paradox and a Sign that they are getting closer to knowing God is behind it all. We will call it Creator instead of God since the former has religious aspects and is too limiting. From here on I will use the term Creator--no "the"--when I speak of it here on Science.

CREATOR. Hmm..I sorta like it!! LOL

God, er, Creator Bless.

Marvelous, yet another believer spewing his religious garbage in the Science forum.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 6:26:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
August burns red is not spewing religious nonsense. He is just stating multiple irrelevant opinions.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2015 6:37:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 1:43:19 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

Time to learn Danger Mouse. here's some stuff from hawking backin up what I just toldja in my last post. http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ouch.

Creator Bless!!

http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ah yes, an article on time travel, SoM? Is that where you got your information about time warping? From a layman's article on time travel? LOL.

This is explained in the stress-energy tensor that shows how space curves in relation to time coordinates and how time "dilates" as space curves while moving in a gravitational field.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 12:18:23 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 5:14:52 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
Okay you said there couldn't be a ratio between mass and gravity. That isn't true. Say the area at which the sun is located had a set "maximum mass" the point at which the mass would no longer be held together by the warped spacetime.

So no further gravitational attraction? Do you see the problem?

The force their is very strong but the Suns outward force is very strong. The energy outward allows the sun to hold its massive size. Once the sun reaches the maximum allowable mass you would find the ratio.

So we should expect to find regions of space which hadn't yet reached their 'maximum allowable mass', right? Do you know of any?

If every celestial body held as much mass as it could then you would find a correlation and a ratio

Why do you make the ad-hoc assumption that every celestial body has its full 'quota'?

There are more holes in your idea than swiss cheese. Here's another to consider. All objects move through space. Is it coincidence that the curvatures in space-time you are postulating just happen to move in tandem with them? How do you explain this unless the objects themselves are causing the curvature?

What happens when two massive objects collide go form a larger object with a proportionate gravity increase? The space-time curvatures happen to merge as well?
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 12:28:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 5:18:59 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
There is a very good explanation for why back holes are not visible. Well of course there is. I know the theory. But that is all that it is.

Do you understand what a scientific theory is? If you do, I find it strange that you would say "that is all that it is".

It could be just as true that it is a celestial body which has not achieved its ratio because the maximum mass is infinite.

An infinite ratio? What does that even mean? Black holes have finite mass and it determines how big they are (technically the radius of their event horizon). You claim you know the theory but you demonstrate little to no grasp of the basics. I'm not sure why you are pretending otherwise.
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 12:41:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Dee-em
Spacetime warps may be afeected by and move through spacetime... In orbit persay. This is a shaky idea and perhaps the downfall of the theory. You say there would be no more attraction but this is just untrue. For example an Apple will fall. Why? Because the apple is part of the maximum allowable mass. It naturally tends toward the center of the earth. The earth loses gases from the upper atmosphere every day. So we are overflowing with mass.
You say there should be areas without maximum mass... Well we cannot say that there aren't. We can only look at our solar system with the accuracy to affirm the gravity laws. Other solar systems fat chance. Other galaxies, give me a break.
Scientific theories are THEORETICAL take for example the theory of gravity. Which Einstein refuted. We have so little information about black holes. You misunderstand my infinite ratio. If you observe the wording we are talking about m/Infinity an infinite denominator. And of course a black whole has finite mass. But it has an infinite potential mass
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
August_Burns_Red
Posts: 1,253
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 2:10:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 6:23:00 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/30/2015 1:31:47 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

It is curved. Since its part of the space-TIME continuum. Part of the same fabric as space. SO it's curved right along with Space. When they did the experiment to see the light rays from distant stars bending that confirmed Einstein's Genral Theory of Relativity it was also discovered that Time was bent as well. Something about the time it took for the photons from the light to bounce back to Earth. You might want to look that all up.

I should look that up? LOL. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, SoM, you didn't when you were SoM and you don't now. Time doesn't "bend" you idiot, it dilates.

Back to the thread topic......asking about how Gravity might work in 4D spacetime is getting ahead of yourselves. Probly best to learn how it works in just our current Standard Model, since science has yet to explain it or even find the particle responsible for acting as the medium. Oh they call it and speculate it to be something called a Graviton but its hyper-thetical. Just a made-up name. They dont even know what 90% of the Universe is! LOL. Since Dark Matter and Energy make that much of it up and they have no idea what it is, except that the latter is a repulsive force oppostie of Gravity being a attractive Force. Its also smooth while the Matter is in clusters and more like Gravity.

Yes, thanks for your totally misinformed and ignorant opinion.

As science learns more that they don't know what they thought I believe this is a paradox and a Sign that they are getting closer to knowing God is behind it all. We will call it Creator instead of God since the former has religious aspects and is too limiting. From here on I will use the term Creator--no "the"--when I speak of it here on Science.

CREATOR. Hmm..I sorta like it!! LOL

God, er, Creator Bless.

Marvelous, yet another believer spewing his religious garbage in the Science forum.

som yourself! LOL. what is so hard for you to understand about the bending or warping of the STC? I proved you wrong ONCE AGAIN (izzat four times now? LOL) with a link by Hawking, nonetheless. And here is another one. I thought you were a little better in science than this? Guess not.

Your time dilation refers to Einstein's SOL travel. you gotta get away from that when speaking of Time Bending due to Gravity; they're TWO different occurences of time getitng "mishapen."
Try this.................http://www.theguardian.com...
Tomorrow's forecast: God reigns and the Son shines!
dee-em
Posts: 6,446
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 4:36:30 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 6:37:46 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/30/2015 1:43:19 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

Time to learn Danger Mouse. here's some stuff from hawking backin up what I just toldja in my last post. http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ouch.

Creator Bless!!

http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ah yes, an article on time travel, SoM?

I think I owe you an apology, Danne. You're right, this has to be SoM. It's part and parcel of his inherent dishonesty. He first came here pretending to be an atheist. Now he has revealed his true nature as a lying Christian. I should have listened to you.

Btw, I notice he has a new tactic of abandoning threads where he has been made to look foolish. I think he has ended up with so much egg on his face that he is eating omelettes every day. Lol.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 2:51:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/31/2015 2:10:50 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/30/2015 6:23:00 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/30/2015 1:31:47 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

It is curved. Since its part of the space-TIME continuum. Part of the same fabric as space. SO it's curved right along with Space. When they did the experiment to see the light rays from distant stars bending that confirmed Einstein's Genral Theory of Relativity it was also discovered that Time was bent as well. Something about the time it took for the photons from the light to bounce back to Earth. You might want to look that all up.

I should look that up? LOL. You don't have a clue what you're talking about, SoM, you didn't when you were SoM and you don't now. Time doesn't "bend" you idiot, it dilates.

Back to the thread topic......asking about how Gravity might work in 4D spacetime is getting ahead of yourselves. Probly best to learn how it works in just our current Standard Model, since science has yet to explain it or even find the particle responsible for acting as the medium. Oh they call it and speculate it to be something called a Graviton but its hyper-thetical. Just a made-up name. They dont even know what 90% of the Universe is! LOL. Since Dark Matter and Energy make that much of it up and they have no idea what it is, except that the latter is a repulsive force oppostie of Gravity being a attractive Force. Its also smooth while the Matter is in clusters and more like Gravity.

Yes, thanks for your totally misinformed and ignorant opinion.

As science learns more that they don't know what they thought I believe this is a paradox and a Sign that they are getting closer to knowing God is behind it all. We will call it Creator instead of God since the former has religious aspects and is too limiting. From here on I will use the term Creator--no "the"--when I speak of it here on Science.

CREATOR. Hmm..I sorta like it!! LOL

God, er, Creator Bless.

Marvelous, yet another believer spewing his religious garbage in the Science forum.

som yourself! LOL. what is so hard for you to understand about the bending or warping of the STC? I proved you wrong ONCE AGAIN (izzat four times now? LOL) with a link by Hawking, nonetheless. And here is another one. I thought you were a little better in science than this? Guess not.

Sorry, to disappoint you SoM, but I get my information from physics books that have the equations that show and explain it, not some website for uneducated laymen.

Your time dilation refers to Einstein's SOL travel.

It refers to gravity, as well. Time dilates in gravity wells. That's how the GPS system works.

I'm know you love pretending, so I know you'll love to pretend you prove people wrong with that which is far above your understanding. it's comical, at best.

you gotta get away from that when speaking of Time Bending due to Gravity; they're TWO different occurences of time getitng "mishapen."
Try this.................http://www.theguardian.com...

Thanks, but I don't get my information from online newspapers about how physics works.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 2:54:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/31/2015 2:10:50 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
Try this.................http://www.theguardian.com...

Btw bozo, that article is on frame dragging.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,580
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 2:57:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/31/2015 4:36:30 AM, dee-em wrote:
At 8/30/2015 6:37:46 PM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/30/2015 1:43:19 AM, August_Burns_Red wrote:
At 8/29/2015 3:44:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 8/28/2015 7:23:36 PM, glory_lyfe wrote:
you also ask what causes the curvature in this fourth dimension. This is the entire idea of this thread. In order to better comprehend the idea of space time let me make an analogie imagine a 2d ant. It lives in a hilly area. Height is to this ant as spacetime is to us. We cannot comprehend it but surrounds us and defines our life.
This fourth dimensional spacetime is generally accepted by science. It is also accepted that objects with mass distort this spacetime. I am providing an opposing opinion to the latter idea.
You also seem to be clinging to some preconcieved notion of newtonian gravity. For the purposes of this thread that is entirely false. Gravity as you know doesn't exist. It is just the result of a curved fourth dimension. Saying that the spacetime is curved inherently is no different than saying that objects with mass cause this curvature. i am merely looking for somebody to prove or disprove my idea.

It sounds like all you're saying is time is curved, makes no sense.

Time to learn Danger Mouse. here's some stuff from hawking backin up what I just toldja in my last post. http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ouch.

Creator Bless!!

http://www.hawking.org.uk...

Ah yes, an article on time travel, SoM?

I think I owe you an apology, Danne. You're right, this has to be SoM. It's part and parcel of his inherent dishonesty. He first came here pretending to be an atheist. Now he has revealed his true nature as a lying Christian. I should have listened to you.

No need to apologize, Deem. (:

Btw, I notice he has a new tactic of abandoning threads where he has been made to look foolish. I think he has ended up with so much egg on his face that he is eating omelettes every day. Lol.

Yeah, but notice how he pretends feigned victories. Like most liars for Jesus, his mind works on a very elementary and childish level. However, with SoM, he loves to pretend.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 3:31:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Let's all agree that August burns red is not stating relevant ideas. Let's move back to the thread topic though. To explain space time though imagine you removed the pages but not the drawings from a flip book. Each drawing would be separated by a distance in spacetime. In real life this distance is infinitesimal and the number of drawings is uncountably infinite. But imagine you could warp the surface the drawing are on. That is the idea here. If they are already warped what will happen?
Also as I said earlier let's not get hung up on vocabulary. And the gps system doesn't work by time dilation needs to be adjusted to work through it.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 4:12:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/30/2015 2:49:46 AM, glory_lyfe wrote:
Sidewalker

I think that you are taking my word to literally. You are right that matter isn't pulled. However any matter that enters a warped are of space time won't really be able to leave.

That's not accurate; you are confusing all variations of curved spacetime with the so called infinitely curved spacetime of black holes. There are plenty of warped areas of spacetime that affect matter without capturing it.

It will keep going forward in a straight line. Which due to the warped spacetime is basically a sphere.

No, spacetime can be warped in a lot of ways that are not spheres

You are saying that time isn't curved but dilated. This isn't true.

Yes it is, taken alone the dimension of time is linear, it can be dilated or constricted, it can"t be curved.

The only word in the English language able to describe the misshapenness of the fourth dimension is warped.

Nope, there are plenty of words that can apply, dilate, constrict, contract, distend, shorten, lengthen, to name only a few.

Because it is so general. You also say that the planets don't orbit around as normal. But this could be because the stars DONT vanish.

They effectively do vanish, when stars explode their center of mass which was causing the curved spacetime does vanish, and when that happens the objects that were being affected by the curvature are no longer affected, which refutes your assertion.

If the stars vanish then there is no other disturbance to the planets orbits... If a star orbits there is a massive disturbance.

Yes there is a disturbance to the planets orbits, if a star vanishes so does it's gravitational effect. There are plenty of observed examples that demonstrate changes in the effect of mass on the curvature of spacetime, your assertions just don"t hold up in the face of evidence and observation, and it's a boatload of evidence and observation. The General Theory of Relativity is about the most tested and confirmed of all scientific theories, your idea that mass and gravity are not related is about as thoroughly refuted as any theory has ever been refuted.

Initially you said that you were "uneducated in this matter" and then followed with "I am looking for an actual answer and not the opportunity to prove how right i am" and yet, you've been given factual answers from people who are educated in this matter, and you are still trying to prove how right you are...even though you are dead wrong.

It's time to give it up and learn something.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
glory_lyfe
Posts: 59
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 11:45:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Side walker
You are right that I said I don' want to prove how right I am. I do want to make sure that somebody who refutes me does understand my idea in its entirety. I continue to learn more about spacetime and my theory must adapt. But keep in mind that spacetime is one thing. Also that dilation is a word that falls generally under warped but to dilate spacetime doesn't work. I am not saying there is no correlation. But if I am right there would be areas in the universe that are simply not full.
You have enemies? Good that means you have stood up for something in your life.
-Winston Churchill