|
|
Post by Original Admin on Dec 11, 2004 19:15:35 GMT -5
Ok,
I think that Einstein is wrong to conclude that space is warped by gravity, and that our orbit around the star is a result of the **warping** of space.
There is NO warping of space.
Its about time that the sad monkeys who make up and then re-invent and then re-invent and then re-invent and then re-invent and then re-configure the sadder equations which they insist describe the universe woke up to the fact that their very thoughts and silly calculations are part of their own evolution.
They should - if they are so bright - realise that their very thoughts were nothing short of that which **had to be**.
Tomorrow - we will see the so called **bending of space** as the dream it was.
But moreso - and very importantly - that **maths** was also a very sad mistake.
Mathematics is for the scumbags of the Earth, those scumbags tell us that its the "universal language" and that any "intelligent" being would recognise it.
I tell you this - math is for baby planets - if it were so superior - we would be colonizing the galaxy by now. But we arent - so (and) math is bollocks.
No - mankind is sweating it out on this little dustball because all they think on is E=MC2 and math this and math that.
Thats why we are still only here and nowhere else - cos of that stupid nasty man called albert.
|
|
|
|
Post by hermatite on Dec 12, 2004 7:44:24 GMT -5
I hear he hated cats too!
|
|
|
|
Post by Toad on Dec 12, 2004 20:08:51 GMT -5
I hear he hated cats too! That doesn't make him all bad. |
|
|
|
Post by krazydiamond on Dec 12, 2004 20:19:23 GMT -5
Herr Plonker was righter than he even thought he was, he added a factor that he later in life said was not necessary.......
what about the time space thing do you have a real problem thing with? (besides 42)
KD
|
|
|
|
Post by docone31 on Dec 12, 2004 22:17:55 GMT -5
Makes me wonder if the Ga-oul planted him to keep us from joining our brothers in the stars. A lot of things make me wonder. Like how come tinfoil hats are so comfortable, especially when the electricals are sparking.
|
|
agatenut
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since August 2004
Posts: 127
|
Post by agatenut on Dec 14, 2004 6:40:27 GMT -5
As a physics teacher I just had to put in my $.02 worth. hehehe ;D Actually, experiments have shown that space is indeed warped by gravitational fields. Einstein was, like Newton, a person who completely changed our view of the universe, but, he was also an "old school" classical physicist who could not come to terms with the relatively newer idea of Quantum mechanics. Throughout his later life he fought this new view and consistently lost every argument. He got the Nobel price in physics, not for his theory of relativity, but for his explanation of "the photoelectric effect", which helped promote the idea of quantum mechanics. Oh, the irony!
ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Original Admin on Dec 14, 2004 9:46:52 GMT -5
Ok, Which experiments are the ones which proves space is warped agate? I am prepared to listen (I suppose - grump grump huff)  Gravitational Lensing doesnt prove that space is warped BTW - just incase thats what you may be referring to. (Well I dont **think** it does anyroad) Also - anyone any ideas just what it is thats "warping" when "space" gets warped? The warping of space to me would have to mean that Gravity can act upon pure nothingness - unless we are all floating in a jelly (ether) which we cannot see, and that this ether would also have to have mass in order for it to warp. An experiment. Lets say we placed a small section of space in an olympic swimming pool instead of water. Lets assume that the vacuum is present as the pool has been completely sealed. To do this, we take the pool up into space, seal it, then bring it back down to earth. This pool is pool a) We now get another pool - and we fill it with air at the same pressure as the atmosphere at sea level. Just to keep things nice. This pool is pool b), and it is not sealed - as this is how we maintain a given pressure, however there are not many (nothing to worry about) outside influences acting upon the air molecules inside this pool, as both pools are inside a large structure which shields them from the wind. So - inside the big building we have two nice steady pools - pool a) - total space. Pool b) total earth air - with slight variations in pressure due to the weather beginning to change - but this is incidental. We dye all the air molecules bright red. We now instantly create two small black holes which fit into the pools, one black hole in the middle of pool a and one in the middle of pool b. The event horizon on each black hole is 1 meter in diameter - so they easily fit inside the pools - there is no worry there. (Im using black holes because they are dense enough to cause a reaction within a confined space - such as a swimming pool.) What would a person looking at both pools observe - given that we create our black holes instantaneously. |
|
agatenut
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since August 2004
Posts: 127
|
Post by agatenut on Dec 15, 2004 6:27:12 GMT -5
Space itself warps, Andy. Our universe has more than just three dimensions. Gravity bends space into a fourth dimension. Sort of like considering the surface of a trampouline as a model of "two dimensional space" and then laying a bowling ball on it. The trampouline surface bends into a third dimension. A marble though, won't bend the trampouline surface much. I know it is difficult to think of space as something tangible, but in the Beginning, when the universe came into existence, not only matter, but space/time was created as well. And if that isn't weird enough, the most favored theory among physicists today favors a "multiverse". (untold numbers of parallel universes)
|
|
181lizard
Cave Dweller 
Still lurking :)
Member since December 2005
Posts: 2,171
|
Post by 181lizard on Jan 14, 2006 14:56:29 GMT -5
My lord...this is toooo deep for me! I'm feeling light headed here...please someone get me a rock...I must have a rock!!!
Oh my...now I feel better. Thank you dear husband for the rocks.
OK boys...continue with the dialog!
liz
|
|
|
|
Post by xenaswolf on Jan 14, 2006 15:03:36 GMT -5
God this is like watch Numbers when Charlie starts going off on mathmatical theory. Um as long as 2 + 2 is 4 I'm ok with it. Otherwise I leave it to greater minds to figure out LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by shelbeeray on Jan 14, 2006 15:14:45 GMT -5
Soooooooooooo...if space is warped....hummm...if we throw a rock in a black hole...or at least on the rim - would it shape it.
Hey, it might break it into smaller pieces...
OR mebbee I could export my rocks to another dimension - have THEM do the shaping and send them back...great experiment...I wonder if I could get a government grant...
I need a really big rock shaper....enough of this grit and tumbling malarky...
|
|
thehawke
freely admits to licking rocks
My Lord and Master
Member since January 2006
Posts: 866
|
Post by thehawke on Jan 14, 2006 15:43:46 GMT -5
I hear he hated cats too! That doesn't make him all bad. It most certainly does TOO! |
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jan 14, 2006 16:02:35 GMT -5
There's enough warped people and crap to deal with on planet earth without looking for more in space.
His hair alone proves the theory.
Rich
|
|
KG1960
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2008
Posts: 512
|
Post by KG1960 on Jan 14, 2006 20:26:00 GMT -5
I agree with Agatenut. The two major works of physics in the 20th century were the Relativity and Quantum theories. One of the first proofs of Relativity was observtions of the precession of the orbit of Mercury. The orbit is an ellipse but not quite a perfect one in that the path of the ellipse revolves around the sun. Each orbit is not on the same exact ellipse but is a little different each time around. Previous to Relativity no theary very well accounted for this orbit, but Einstein's theory, based on warpage of spacetime near large massive object, accounted for it perfectly.
Mathematics is simply a tool to describe the behavior of the universe and parts of it. Just because you are holding a wrench doesn't mean that you understand how an automobile engine works. You must investigate it and discover it using tools perhaps, and that is all math is.
Agatenut - Like you said, if spacetime seems weird what about multi-universe, or string theory with up to 11 dimensions. Or more down to earth, quantum's wavefunction that make a particle appear to be in multiple locations simultaneously or to travel all possible paths from source to detector simultaneously?
|
|
KG1960
has rocks in the head
Member since August 2008
Posts: 512
|
Post by KG1960 on Jan 14, 2006 22:18:27 GMT -5
Actually I'm curious - what brought this thread on? It seems like out of the clear blue a comment about Einstein was made. I didn't agree with it but, so what! One can go and have a happy, fulfilling, and product life without worrying one bit about Relativity or Quantum theory. Niether theory directly effects one's day to day activities. For me, I find the study of the subjects very fascinating, but others don't - so what? Each to his own.
|
|
|
|
Post by LCARS on Jan 15, 2006 4:18:46 GMT -5
Mark, you make sure to stay away from those P.Cubensis OK  They have a nasty tendancy to promote free thought...  Now you just be a good boy & conform to contemporary beliefs about the nature of the universe. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by pinemountaintrader on Jan 15, 2006 21:09:05 GMT -5
I am fascinated by physics and many other scientific fields, and I am a very interested observer and recognize the brilliance of those whose works have been key to our progress as inhabitants of this universe. However, I also have a general distrust in man's intellectual arrogance. We are great and wonderous works and have almost limitless potential but I believe that we think too much of ourselves as a species, that we overestimate our current level of understanding as well as our ability to decipher the infrastructure of our existence. We too often treat our "proven" theories as fact, only to have to modify our postion later. Countless times we have had to back down, rethink and repostulate, sometimes with catastrophic results when we are faced with evidence that the result of our work was somehow faulty, relying too much on our previous store of "proven facts". Mathematics is a special science with somewhat clearer evidence for accuracy, however there is still plenty of controversy amongst those who are knowledgeable about such things and we have had amazing "revelations" in the past that changed some very basic tenants of mathematics. How can we be sure that we've finally got it right? Will we look back in 50 or 100 years and feel slightly foolish that we were so adamant about our assertions when we discover the thinking or processes that led to them was clearly faulty? Imagine, quantum mechanics as archaic (might the Wu Li Masters stop dancing?) Just my $.02. Owwww, brain hurts now, why on earth did Mark start this, just a random brain cell that suddenly sparked?  ... |
|
|
|
Post by pinemountaintrader on Jan 15, 2006 21:09:45 GMT -5
PS I am equally fascinated by the term "plonker" and plan to use it often from now on...
|
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Jan 16, 2006 0:47:21 GMT -5
And don't forget Plonkers and Wankers are not mutually exclusive.
Rich
|
|
|
|
Post by driftwood on Jan 16, 2006 0:51:10 GMT -5
We currently have a couple robots on Mars, its a start !
|
|
...
