SRT* (an another interpretation)


OmegaOm
#61
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

Aren't Mass and Matter not the same?



Higgs found no boson and the BB is pure invention. What medium did Einstines Bing Bang expand into?

Matter is the stuff that fills space, and mass is a measure of quantity of that stuff.

Higgs predicted the higgs Boson and they discovered a particle with the exact same properties at the LHC a few years ago. It does something like slow energy down from the speed of light.

IT is not known what the big bang exploded into. If anything, it would be in another un reachable dimension.

There could be only one big bang. but the multiverse theories are becoming more likely. Due too how our physical constants happen to be perfect for the universe to evolve life.

Think as the multiverse, like a glass of ginger ale. Each bubble can be considered one universe. and our planet would be riding on the surface of one bubble. The medium you are talking about would be the fluid in between our space time bubble.
 
socratus
#62
Quote: Originally Posted by OmegaOm View Post


Think as the multiverse, like a glass of ginger ale.
Each bubble can be considered one universe.
and our planet would be riding on the surface of one bubble.
The medium you are talking about would be the fluid in between our space time bubble.


I think you know enough scientific theology / pompous phraseology to be a good priest.
Why do you write about ''bubbles'' without physical formulas ?
Why are you talking about '' the fluid in between our space time bubble''
without physical formula ? (an absolute, infinite, eternal fluid (!) )
Are we in the church ?

===========================
 
OmegaOm
#63
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

I think you know enough scientific theology / pompous phraseology to be a good priest.
Why do you write about ''bubbles'' without physical formulas ?
Why are you talking about '' the fluid in between our space time bubble''
without physical formula ? (an absolute, infinite, eternal fluid (!) )
Are we in the church ?

===========================

I write about bubbles, because that is the metaphor taught to me. I can assure you I do not have the physical or mathematical knowledge to explain these bubbles with a formula. If you do. I would like to see. And also why post it here, no one would be able to understand it anyway, that is why you use a metaphor. The other guy was asking questions trying to understand. I was simply telling him what science has taught me.

I think your sarcastic rebuttal is because the multiverse may be considered non scientific because there would be no way to test this hypothesis. But non the less. Ideas have to start some where, and many famous cosmologists have stated what I just said as a possible scenario, a scenario I seem to sway too. None including me have stated it as fact. Only as a possible explanation for things to ponder. Can you for certain state the big bang was the only one. We do not know, we can only ponder for now. These questions are on the fringes of science.

I also stated that is was unknown what the big bang exploded into. I was just giving one of the latest science explanations.

And I am definitely not in a church.

But isnt the analogy of our universe as a bubble in a glass of ginger ale, so perfect as to visualize the multiverse hypothesis. You can leave the formula to the professionals, but when it comes to explaining it to the common Joe, you need something familiar.
Last edited by OmegaOm; Dec 7th, 2017 at 04:35 AM..
 
socratus
#64
a) SRT describes physics in the absence of gravity,
It means that stars, planets, galaxies cannot be SRT subjects.
It means that SRT is interesting in situation around gravity-masses.
And the ''object'' that surrounds all billions and billions galaxies.
is an absolute , infinite, eternal*Minkowski 4D spacetime - ''space fabric'' .

b ) All material inertial reference frame like stars, planets, galaxies . . .*
are approximately inertial systems.
The laws of physics are the same in all*inertial reference frame
( Galileo transformations ) and therefore all different observers
on different inertial reference frame (planets) will see that the speed of quantum of light
as constant,* independently of who measures this speed and how fast the observers move
with respect to the absolute , infinite ''space fabric'' .

c) All physical laws change when we try to unite inertial and absolute references frame.

============================
 
darkbeaver
#65
(Finally, in 1915 he proposed what we now called the general theory of relativity.) Hawkins- A Brief History of Time pg40


If Space Time is curved it must have a material structure. What material is space made of? There is no space between my ears, that well defined area is completely full of sawdust. Perhaps that is why I cannot understand curved space time, niether is material in my understanting. How a concept may be warped in the physical sence escapes me entirely.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flagellar Motors

Stephen Smith December 15, 2017 picture of the day
How a rotating flagellum anchors to the cell wall. Credit: David DeRosie

Dec 15, 2017
Rotating motors propel some bacteria.
Editor’s note: The Picture of the Day will be on a brief holiday until December 19. In the interim, please enjoy these articles from the archives.
Some bacteria can swim through their tiny worlds. They accomplish this feat with the aid of spinning helical propellors called “flagella”. The species of bacteria with this capability that is most familiar to readers is probably Escherichia coli, or E-coli. E-coli possesses a number of flexible, helical filaments, each driven by a rotary motor composed of 40 unique proteins. Remarkably, the individual motors are constructed on the molecular scale, at 45 nanometer diameters. These tiny drive systems are able to move the bacteria over ten body lengths in one second; the human equivalent to running a hundred meters in less than six seconds.
Flagella are about 15 nanometers in diameter and 15 micrometers long. They are made up of a protein called flagellin that gathers into long-chain sub-assemblies, winding into a helical structure with a hollow core. E-coli grows flagella by adding new sub-assemblies that pass through the hollow core and attach to the end. Eventually, there can be as many as 30,000 sub-assemblies making up the left-handed, whip-like structure.
One of the more amazing aspects to flagellar motors is that they do not require ATP for power. ATP, or adenosine triphosphate, is the molecule that energizes most cellular functions. It acts like a battery for living organisms, giving up one of its phosphorus groups in the mitochondria so that the cell can transpire. This results in the formation of an ADP molecule (adenosine diphosphate), that is then “recharged” by the oxidation of glucose through glycolysis. Eating food makes this happen.
However, the motors that spin flagella do not receive energy through this process. Rather, they are driven by an ion flux that captures and releases protons, thereby creating an alternating charge in nearby molecules. Although, since they are so small and so little understood, the way that they operate is somewhat speculative.
According to researchers, there is a charge gradient in the cell wall of E-coli. The molecules that make up the stator, or stationary, portion of the flagellar motor, anchored in the peptidoglycan layer of the bacterium’s cell wall (see illustration) contain two proteins called MotA and MotB. A high concentration of protons exists outside the cell, while a lower concentration exists inside, so the positively charged protons flow into the MotB protein, binding to aspartic acid. This creates a change in the charge balance between the MotA and MotB proteins, causing a vertical repulsion between them, resulting in the first stroke of the motor. The protein is thought to engage a toothed gear-like structure as it moves downward, advancing the rotor step-wise each time the MotB protein receives a positive charge.
Once the first stroke is completed, the aspartic acid releases its protons into the bacterial cytoplasm, causing a conformational change in the charge balance between MotA and MotB. This initiates the second stroke of the motor because the molecules have re-established their “original” charge states. After the second stroke, MotB again receives a charge input that ionizes aspartic acid, endlessly repeating the cycle.
How can proton flow across a membrane drive mechanical rotation? As the book, Biochemistry 5th Edition (Berg J.M., Tymoczko J.L., Stryer L. W H Freeman pub. 2002.) notes: “MotA-MotB may form a structure having two half-channels. One model for the mechanism of coupling rotation to a proton gradient requires protons to be taken up into the outer half-channel and transferred to the MS ring [see above]. The MS ring rotates in a counterclockwise direction, and the protons are released into the inner half-channel. The flagellum is linked to the MS ring and so the flagellum rotates as well.”
In other words, E-coli and its fellows are driven by electric motors.
Last edited by darkbeaver; Dec 16th, 2017 at 06:17 PM..
 
OmegaOm
+1
#66
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

(Finally, in 1915 he proposed what we now called the general theory of relativity.) Hawkins- A Brief History of Time pg40


If Space Time is curved it must have a material structure. What material is space made of? There is no space between my ears, that well defined area is completely full of sawdust. Perhaps that is why I cannot understand curved space time, niether is material in my understanting. How a concept may be warped in the physical sence escapes me entirely.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This I do not understand myself. Maybe Socrates can shed some light on it for us.

I can only speculate with an analogy like our universe rests on a full balloon filled with water and the mass on the balloon curves the fabric of the balloon. But what is this balloon that is curved.

Again I can only speculate that this may be a barrier to another dimension.
Space is not really empty, there are virtual particles coming in and out of existence continuously.
This property of space may be the property of the barrier that can bend with mass and energy.

IF this may be true then the solution ,might possibly be some hidden interaction of mass and energy with the virtual particles of space time.
Last edited by OmegaOm; Dec 17th, 2017 at 02:38 AM..
 
socratus
+1
#67
Quote: Originally Posted by darkbeaver View Post

(Finally, in 1915 he proposed what we now called the general theory of relativity.) Hawkins- A Brief History of Time pg40


If Space Time is curved it must have a material structure.
What material is space made of? There is no space between my ears,
that well defined area is completely full of sawdust.
Perhaps that is why I cannot understand curved space time, niether is material
in my understanting. How a concept may be warped in the physical sence escapes me entirely.

Perhaps.
The space-time (as whole ) is cold continuum.
The light travels in this continuum in a straight line.
But near the hot masses of stars light can be curved.
Not spacetime curves but movement of light is curved by hot masses.
#
Sun changes the road of light like a car changes its movement by road
but Euclidian geometry of Earth remains unchanged.

=====================
 
darkbeaver
#68
Quote: Originally Posted by OmegaOm View Post

This I do not understand myself. Maybe Socrates can shed some light on it for us.

I can only speculate with an analogy like our universe rests on a full balloon filled with water and the mass on the balloon curves the fabric of the balloon. But what is this balloon that is curved.

Again I can only speculate that this may be a barrier to another dimension.
Space is not really empty, there are virtual particles coming in and out of existence continuously.
This property of space may be the property of the barrier that can bend with mass and energy.

IF this may be true then the solution ,might possibly be some hidden interaction of mass and energy with the virtual particles of space time.

I like to think that the universe is the infinite (ONE PLACE) and only one place, I also hold to the idea that a tiny insignfigant organism like me cannot ever understand infinite except as an unalienable law that I must obey if I am to approximate sanity. As humans it seems we are uncomfortable without defined borders. I,m uncomfortable thinking about an edge or boundry of this universe.
 
socratus
#69
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

Perhaps.
The space-time (as whole ) is cold continuum.
The light travels in this continuum in a straight line.
But near the hot masses of stars light can be curved.
Not spacetime curves but movement of light is curved by hot masses.
#
Sun changes the road of light like a car changes its movement by road
but Euclidian geometry of Earth remains unchanged.

=====================

Local Curvature of Space
According to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, massive objects warp
the spacetime around them, and the effect a warp has on objects is what we call gravity.
So, locally, spacetime is curved around every object with mass.

Curvature of Space | Is space flat or curved?

Only '' around every (local - hot) object with mass.'' light is curved.
The mass-objects in the universe (as whole) is very few.
Therefore the universe (as whole) is a flat spacetime (vacuum) continuum.

===================================
 
socratus
#70
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

Local Curvature of Space
According to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, massive objects warp
the spacetime around them, and the effect a warp has on objects is what we call gravity.
So, locally, spacetime is curved around every object with mass.

Curvature of Space | Is space flat or curved?

Only '' around every (local - hot) object with mass.'' light is curved.
The mass-objects in the universe (as whole) is very few.
Therefore the universe (as whole) is a flat spacetime (vacuum) continuum.

===================================

a)
The fourth dimension (an absolute spacetime) is the
negative two (-2) dimensions flat negative Pseudo Euclidian spacetime.
( + 4-D = -2D )
b)
We know only one system where apace and time are united and this
is Vacuum. Spacetime = Vacuum.
c)
From this absolute spacetime (vacuum) our three dimensions + time
Earth - gravity existence were created.
d)
We don't need 5-D, 11-D, 27-D . . . etc. to explain the Existence.

==========================================
Attached Images
Quantum of Light.png (8.2 KB, 1 views )
 
socratus
#71
Is Spacetime Flat or Curved ?

'' A world without masses, without electrons, without an
electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty
world is flat. But if masses appear, if charged particles
appear, if an electromagnetic field appears then our world
becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.''
/ Book 'Albert Einstein', the page 116, by Leopold Infeld. /
#
Masses (like Sun's) can appear only in local places and therefore
the curvature can appear only in local places.

=======================
Attached Images
Local space-time curvature.jpg (15.4 KB, 0 views )
 
Curious Cdn
#72
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

Is Spacetime Flat or Curved ?

'' A world without masses, without electrons, without an
electromagnetic field is an empty world. Such an empty
world is flat. But if masses appear, if charged particles
appear, if an electromagnetic field appears then our world
becomes curved. Its geometry is Riemannian, that is, non- Euclidian.''
/ Book 'Albert Einstein', the page 116, by Leopold Infeld. /
#
Masses (like Sun's) can appear only in local places and therefore
the curvature can appear only in local places.

=======================

Doesn't the presence of anything create some degree of curvature and therefore, you can never observe and Spacetime that is not curved?
 
socratus
#73
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

Doesn't the presence of anything create some degree of curvature
and therefore, you can never observe and Spacetime that is not curved?


the presence of gravity-masses create some degree of curvature
and the vacuum (as unity of space+time) surrounds these masses.
This picture you can observe watching the far stars.

==============
Attached Images
Two different systems.jpg (10.8 KB, 1 views )
 
Curious Cdn
#74
Quote: Originally Posted by socratus View Post

the presence of gravity-masses create some degree of curvature
and the vacuum (as unity of space+time) surrounds these masses.
This picture you can observe watching the far stars.

==============

Is vacuum vacuum?
 
socratus
#75
Quote: Originally Posted by Curious Cdn View Post

Is vacuum vacuum?

====

Mathematical definitions of spacetime:
a) Plus 4D is spacetime.
b) Light-cone world is spacetime.
c) Minus 2D (pseudo Euclidian space) is spacetime.

And all these definitions is used to explain the space and time
(spacetime) where light is traveling.
#
Physical definition of spacetime:
the velocity of light in the vacuum (!) is constant and independent of its source,
#
Vacuum (!) is frictionless continuum.
All mathematical definitions of spacetime also must be frictionless continuum.
#
Without unity these definitions the SRT debates have no end.
==============
Attached Images
SRT = 4D.jpg (6.5 KB, 0 views )
 
socratus
#76
Book: ''What we cannot know'' by Marcus du Sautoy.

'' Gravity is actually the distortion of this space-time surface.
If something has mass, it curves the surface. The classic way to imagine
this is to consider space-time as a two-dimensional surface, and the effect
of mass as that of placing a ball on this surface. The ball pulls the surface
down, creating a well. Gravity can be thought of as the way things get
pulled down into this well.
This distortion of space-time has on interesting effect on light.''

''So in order to find the shortest space-time path. light will
follow a trajectory . . . .''

/page 270 /

'' . . . light would be bent by presence of a large mass.''
''. . . a curved space-time was provided by the British astronomer
Arthur Edington's observations . . .''
'' . . . light from distant stars would be bent by the gravitational
effect of the Sun.''
''The fact that the light did indeed seem to bent round objects of large mass
confirmed that the shortest paths weren't Euclidean straight lines but curved.''

/ page 271 /
===============
It seems that everything is correct.
Author, a British mathematician Marcus du Sautoy,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_du_Sautoy
only forgot to say that '' objects of large mass'' (like our Sun) in the
Universe as whole are very few and therefore the gravitations effects
are only local effects. Light is curved only near (!) the '' objects of large mass''
The gravity of our Sun doesn't have influence out of the solar system.
Gravity doesn't work in the Milky Way and therefore was invented so-called
''dark matter'' and ''dark energy'', a new words, a new speculations to prove
that ''gravity'' do indeed is fundamental (not local) effect for all the Universe.
#
If you see on the gate of lion the inscription ''cat'' . . . would you go inside?
The facts say: the absolute space-time (the Universe as whole) is flat
but modern ''scientific'' inscription is said '' Universe is +/- curved'' or
''spherical'' after '' the big-bang''.

===============
Attached Images
Perception.jpg (7.9 KB, 0 views )
 
OmegaOm
#77
Energy bends space time. For what is mass, but a combination of all its energies held together in one spot.
As Einstien said in his paper it is Mass that equals energy divided by the speed of light squared. Or M = E/c^2
The speed of light is the speed of light cause that is the limit of causality of space time. Thats is why it can only go that fast.
Last edited by OmegaOm; Jan 11th, 2018 at 05:43 AM..
 
socratus
#78
The world began not with a Bang, but with a Black Hole
Scientists challenge the Big Bang Theory of origin of the universe
By Adrita Biswas
Updated January 10, 2018 13:01 +08

The world began not with a Bang, but with a Black Hole

===========================
Scientists have come up with a new theory about the origin of the universe,
and it does not involve a Big Bang! Instead, they are saying that the universe
was formed from the black hole of a previous cosmos.

Researchers from the Perimeter Institute have claimed that the Big Bang Theory,
which states that the world burst into existence from a singularity, seems unlikely.
"The big bang hypothesis has our relatively comprehensible, uniform,
and predictable universe arising from the physics-destroying insanity of a singularity
It seems unlikely," they say, as reported by Outer Places.

Instead, according to them, it is more likely that black hole is at the bottom of the matter
as they have the capability of creating as well as destroying celestial bodies, majorly stars.

According to the new theory, our universe has been formed by a fourth-dimensional black hole
that is a part of another universe. In that case, we are living beyond the horizon of the event
and it is also possible that other universes have been created by black holes in the 'parent universe.'

This theory solves the 'information paradox' related to black holes that have been confusing
scientists for many years. It states that all information and physical matter disappears permanently
into the black hole, where all physical states devolve into the same state.

If we apply this explanation to this theory, it would seem that the matter going inside a black hole
is not destroyed after all. Instead, it forms a part of a new universe.

The world began not with a Bang, but with a Black Hole

===========================
Where does the matter for '' a fourth-dimensional black hole'' come from ?
Where does matter for ''previous cosmos.'' come from ?
The matter came from '' another universe''.
And the matter for ''another universe'' came from some ''another fourth-dimensional black hole''
And so down - down . . . .

The Earth stands on tortoise and this tortoise stands on another tortoise
and so down - down . . . to infinity.

========================
 
OmegaOm
#79
I heard about this before socrates. Does this mean that our universe was created by a white hole, that is opposite a black hole in another universe. Like the black hole kind of rips a door way into another dimension.

But if we got our mass from a black hole in another universe would not the mass of that black hole diminish while its mass fills up our universe. And so our black holes in our universe should lose mass more quickly then from just hawking radiation.

Also you would need a black hole with a mass of our whole universe to make our universe. In our universe our biggest black hole is just a 17 billion solar mass black hole, and there is no way for these black holes to grow bigger cause the universe is expanding.
 
socratus
#80
Quote: Originally Posted by OmegaOm View Post

I heard about this before socrates.
Does this mean that our universe was created by a white hole,
that is opposite a black hole in another universe.
Like the black hole kind of rips a door way into another dimension.


Yeah, you are correct,
''our universe was created by a white hole, that is opposite a black hole in another universe''
and a black hole was created from a red hole that is opposite to green universe.
=============
 
socratus
#81
"On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" - 2018
1 - The speed of objects in Newton / Galileo / Descartes system is relative
and transform by the laws: v=d/t, v(2) - v(1) =at or v(2) ^2 - v(1)^2 = a2d.
Classical physics uses Galileo transformations to explain this situation.
2 - The speed of light in a vacuum is constant regardless of the motion
of the source of the light / - Michelson experiment /
However:
This fact is contradict with the idea of “transformation theory”
Lorentz transformation theory violates constant speed of light.
Lorentz transformation theory says: the light speed is not always constant.
The speed of quantum of light sometime can be c=1 and sometime cannot be equal 1.
3 - '' . . . the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" explains behavior
of quantum of light in the vacuum (in Minkowski an absolute space-time)
====
Attached Images
Question.jpg (4.1 KB, 1 views )
 
socratus
#82
"On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" --- 2018
===
1 - One SRT postulate says: all laws (including laws of motion )
in all inertial systems ( it means in planets where Newton / Galileo /
Descartes laws work) are equal.
2 - Another postulate says: the speed of light in a vacuum is constant
regardless of the motion of the source of the light / - Michelson experiment /
3 - In all inertial systems the speed of objects / particles is relative and never
can reach the constant speed of light and therefore to compare one postulate
with another postulate is nonsense.
4 - But the fact of constant speed of quantum of light contradicts the idea of
“transformation theory”. Then it possible to say:
Lorentz transformation theory violates constant speed of light.
Lorentz transformation theory says: the light speed is not always constant.
The speed of quantum of light sometime can be c=1 and sometime cannot be equal 1.
5 - Maxwell introduced light as EM subject and Lorentz introduced
an electron in Maxwell's EM theory.
Questions.
'' Could not an electron transfer a part of its energy to light ?''
''What is connection between a quantum of light and an electron?''
'' What mechanism works between an electron and quantum of light ?''
6 - Just as electrons jump from one atomic orbital to another
(by emitting or absorbing light) in the Bohr model of the atom,
so also in electromagnetic events electrons can jump from event to event
by emitting or absorbing quantum of light
7- '' . . . the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" explains behavior
of quantum of light in the vacuum (in Minkowski an absolute space-time,
in the flat continuum without gravity-masses)
====
P.S.
"One might still like to ask:
'How does it work?
What is the machinery behind the law?'
No one has found any machinery behind the law. . .
We have no ideas about a more basic mechanism from which these results can be deduced."
- Richard Feynman
======
Attached Images
186000.jpg (10.5 KB, 0 views )
 
MHz
#83
Sounds more like the 'old timers' had to publish something or they didn't get paid.


If the speed of light varies at all there would be 'spots with no light' as well as spots with 2x the normal light. Were the stupid of hanging onto their income??
 
socratus
+1
#84
Quote: Originally Posted by MHz View Post

Sounds more like the 'old timers' had to publish something or they didn't get paid.
If the speed of light varies at all there would be 'spots with no light' as well as spots with 2x the normal light.
Were the stupid of hanging onto their income??

If the speed of light is constant - no EM waves
If the speed of light varies - there are EM waves
==========
 
Danbones
#85
Light slows down when it hits the atmosphere and bends.


or
Nature's Lens: How Gravity Can Bend Light Like a Telescope
https://www.space.com/39999-how-grav...nses-work.html

no gawd about it.
 
MHz
#86
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

Light slows down when it hits the atmosphere and bends.


or
Nature's Lens: How Gravity Can Bend Light Like a Telescope
https://www.space.com/39999-how-grav...nses-work.html

no gawd about it.

By slowing down do you mean the distance is longer and the speed remains the same or the speed slows down also. ie light is going a certain speed and it reflects off your face and that slows it down a certain amount to when that light reaches your face again it is going even slower?? I don't buy that at all, . . . sorry.
Not sure what God has to do with the topic. Being immortal and beings in the universe are also immortals means the universe and earth are less that 100 hours old before the garden was shut down. How about the earth was a ball of liquid magma 4BYA and the matter that is in the universe today started to be gathered 40BYA and the 'bang' was 15BYA. Using some numbers from the Bible the earth being melted would be 3.5BY from when the 1,000 year reign starts. That works out to 360,000 of our years in that version. The Bible's version has the 24 Elders having close to 2,000 years of being taught about the Kingdom of God, the people alive at the start of the 1,000 years has that and when the GWT is happening they are inside New Jerusalem for another 1,000 years since 'Judgment Day' is a 'full day'. Then people are free to set up their home in the universe as that is the New Earth. The Book if Enoch has lots of visions about what the realm of the angels is like. We should be able to 'track them' when we get there. As such the vision inspired by those trips should be God's version of what the new earth will look like. So far I am unaware of any pics or vids that are accurate representations of the words written down.
The people that are resurrected for the 1,000 years are all done within a few hours. The start of the new earth is supposed to include all flesh that was ever conceived on this earth. That could all be done in 100 hours as the people will all be alive already and they just need to step out if the City to be in their new home. That isn't in the book, the time part, who gets resurrected at that time is.


When you read an article like this does anything 'stand out' as being 'true or false' as far as following 'what is reasonable' and what is obviously 'snake oil', sounds good but has no real scientific foundation. (such as gravity bending light rather than the light shed by itself is being reflected by some 'ice' that is acting the same way that is the cause of 'sun-dogs' and 'moon-dogs' as witnessed from the surface of the earth. Here is an example of what I mean.









Space-time can bend, flex and warp under the influence of mass and energy, and it's this rugged geometry that gives us the force of gravity.
Gravity exists anytime two pieces of matter get within a certain distance of each other. Positive and negative charges are parameters, nothing is flexing and warping.

I don't think we even have enough real data to say there is a black hole at the center when the path the stars are taking seem rather lazy when the gravity is so strong light can't even escape. If our speed is known and we can tell how much the solar system weighs the ratios should show a path that we would follow as we got closer the path should get closer to being a straight line into the core. If the core is very hot mass will be trying to expand and that always overcomes gravity. It would be like the core of the earth having so much force on the atmosphere that it was pulled past the 'crust'.


And nothing knows how the difficulty of that terrain better than light itself. Forced to follow every hill, valley, bump and wrinkle in the universe, light's path is constantly jostled back and forth as it tries, in vain, to follow a straight and narrow path.

When that happens we call that diffused lighting, not even shadows exist. When there is nothing in focus it would be like looking at stars during a cloudy night and then writing a paper about how much you learned.
Why not use out own sun to show that the stars that go behind it have their light sucked into the sun faster than if the light was not bent.



The presence of a nearby massive object will deflect light from its original path. Even though the photon, the carrier of light and the electromagnetic force, has no mass of its own, the influence of gravity is universal.

Gravity now acts on more that just mass, what a crock of shit, lol.



Once that space-time terrain is shaped, everything in the universe must work to navigate the geometry.

Once the check clears we'll say anything if it means another check is coming.



Perhaps the most visually striking example of this effect is the curious phenomenon of gravitational lensing, in which a massive object can … well, act like a lens. This effect can bend the path of light to such a supreme degree that background objects take on a fun-house mirror appearance, their images distorted to the point that they're almost unrecognizable.
Total science, that is why finding one is such a rare event. The lights you can see inside the ring seem to be in focus, why are they not distorted?


By pure coincidence, the base of a typical wineglass is a good approximation to the gravitational lensing behavior of a simple, (relatively) small, spherical object like a star. If you look through a (hopefully empty) wineglass at the room around you — and you may want to do this sober so it makes more sense — you'll see a very distorted picture. If you point the wine glass straight at an object, you'll see the object stretched into a ring surrounding the center of the glass's base. In less extreme cases, you'll see arcs or the same image repeated on multiple sides of the base.
Maybe not, maybe they are the very same principle, just like water vapor can cause a mirage on the earth. Ice in space, such as when out oceans biol away in one event are blown into deep space rather than being sucked into the sun. The opposite happens at the core of every galaxy that exists though.




When we look deep into the universe, sometimes we come across a chance alignment. Something truly massive, like a giant cluster of galaxies, will lie in front of many unassociated background galaxies. The light from the distant background must follow the twisted and warped gravitational path set by the cluster, and the result is a curiously beautiful set of images. Like looking through a giant wine glass, we'll see multiple images of the same galaxy, bent in long thin arcs, odd blobs and sometimes even perfect rings.
The circular pattern is caused by the light that is visible in the center of the circle of light.



These warped and distorted images give us important clues about the contents of the cluster — the massive object between us and the background that's providing enough gravity to make a decent lens. By comparing the grotesque images of the galaxies behind the cluster to normal galaxy images, we can build a fairly reliable estimate of the mass of the big cluster. We can even estimate how that mass is distributed within the cluster.

From photo to artistic inspired picture. Fact and fiction is the real change going on.


It is science fiction from there, if you see something I missed point it out.
 
petros
+2
#87  Top Rated Post
Megaplotz, this is out of your league. Socrates bowls on Tuesdays.
 
DaSleeper
+2
#88
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Megaplotz, this is out of your league. Socrates bowls on Tuesdays.


The poor forum fool is famous for his mindless rants.....
 
petros
+1
#89
We need a "Stupid Shit MHz Said" thread.

There are some doozies that'll get you blowing root beer out your nostrils.
 
DaSleeper
+1
#90
Most of his posts are stupid shit......It wouldn't be hard
 

Similar Threads

33
1
Two ways of displaying the interpretation
by selfsame | Jun 21st, 2016
2
The Lost Light AN INTERPRETATION
by darkbeaver | Mar 30th, 2011