Jump to content

Things you often Wonder


mjmooney

Recommended Posts

Everything moves at the speed of light through time and space, a stationary object is moving only through time and an object that is moving at the speed of light doesn't move through time at all. So the faster you move through the space dimension the slower you move through the time dimension and vice versa. Also gravity has it's role in time dilution as well.

 

But obviously nobody should take my word for it I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read and only half understood.

I like your first two sentences, however there is no such thing as gravity, what we perceive as gravity is deformations in space time caused by accumulation of condensed energy. Gravity isn't a innate property of a system, it's a useful tool for explaining some macro-scale effects when you really don't need to be doing field equations to explain the attractive force that it appears to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Everything moves at the speed of light through time and space, a stationary object is moving only through time and an object that is moving at the speed of light doesn't move through time at all. So the faster you move through the space dimension the slower you move through the time dimension and vice versa. Also gravity has it's role in time dilution as well.

 

But obviously nobody should take my word for it I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read and only half understood.

I like your first two sentences, however there is no such thing as gravity, what we perceive as gravity is deformations in space time caused by accumulation of condensed energy. Gravity isn't a innate property of a system, it's a useful tool for explaining some macro-scale effects when you really don't need to be doing field equations to explain the attractive force that it appears to be.

 

in light of Einstein being wrong about Black holes  ( see Stephen Hawkings recently) ..could his theory on Gravity that you mention also be wrong ?

 

I reckon in another 100 years Einstein will be exposed as a fraud :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I like your first two sentences, however there is no such thing as gravity, what we perceive as gravity is deformations in space time caused by accumulation of condensed energy. Gravity isn't a innate property of a system, it's a useful tool for explaining some macro-scale effects when you really don't need to be doing field equations to explain the attractive force that it appears to be.

in light of Einstein being wrong about Black holes  ( see Stephen Hawkings recently) ..could his theory on Gravity that you mention also be wrong ?

 

I reckon in another 100 years Einstein will be exposed as a fraud :)

Is Newton considered wrong now that we know that we know that the laws named after him don't work at quantum scale? :)

 

Einstein was wrong about some things, Hawkings will be too, that's what science is all about. Think of an idea, think about how to prove it wrong, do the experiment, publish to your peers. It would have been as big a deal if we hadn't found the Higgs boson as that we did.

 

I thought that my description of gravity post-dated Einstein considerably, but as I say, I'm not an historian. People don't matter as much as knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Everything moves at the speed of light through time and space, a stationary object is moving only through time and an object that is moving at the speed of light doesn't move through time at all. So the faster you move through the space dimension the slower you move through the time dimension and vice versa. Also gravity has it's role in time dilution as well.

 

But obviously nobody should take my word for it I'm just regurgitating stuff I've read and only half understood.

I like your first two sentences, however there is no such thing as gravity, what we perceive as gravity is deformations in space time caused by accumulation of condensed energy. Gravity isn't a innate property of a system, it's a useful tool for explaining some macro-scale effects when you really don't need to be doing field equations to explain the attractive force that it appears to be.

 

 

I wont' pretend to understand that, maybe if I look it up I'll get a very basic intuition for what you mean

 

I only brought up gravity because I'd written 'a stationary object is moving only through time' and then I remember I'd read the once that gravity and motion are the same thing or at least they both have the same affect.on time and space. So I wasn't sure if a stationary object would be moving through time only, if you were to take 'gravity' into account.

Edited by useless
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I like your first two sentences, however there is no such thing as gravity, what we perceive as gravity is deformations in space time caused by accumulation of condensed energy. Gravity isn't a innate property of a system, it's a useful tool for explaining some macro-scale effects when you really don't need to be doing field equations to explain the attractive force that it appears to be.

in light of Einstein being wrong about Black holes  ( see Stephen Hawkings recently) ..could his theory on Gravity that you mention also be wrong ?

 

I reckon in another 100 years Einstein will be exposed as a fraud :)

Is Newton considered wrong now that we know that we know that the laws named after him don't work at quantum scale? :)

 

Einstein was wrong about some things, Hawkings will be too, that's what science is all about. Think of an idea, think about how to prove it wrong, do the experiment, publish to your peers. It would have been as big a deal if we hadn't found the Higgs boson as that we did.

 

I thought that my description of gravity post-dated Einstein considerably, but as I say, I'm not an historian. People don't matter as much as knowledge.

 

 

I thought Einstein added the  "Space-time" bits together  , rather than just "space"  ? but i have no real knowledge in this area so any false claims quoted are mine not Einstein's :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Einstein added the  "Space-time" bits together  , rather than just "space"  ? but i have no real knowledge in this area so any false claims quoted are mine not Einstein's :)

I'm fairly sure that Einstein still considered gravity as an innate field and that's why he couldn't finish the Unified Field Theory, but I would need to go and read up on it too :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why humans are able to think freely and question things (e.g. their existence) but other animals aren't.

What's the gain of us being able to? Why have we evolved into it? Or is it just an experiment gone wrong by Mother Nature?

Edited by myko
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We took a leap that other animals didn't, perhaps because we were faced with greater problems during our early travels that needed a degree of higher thinking. Perhaps something 'clicked' when we became death aware, something which does separate us from the rest - we know we have limited time, and perhaps that gave us the motivation necassary to get on with things.

 

It's hard to say, from what I've read on it anyway. Never liked asking 'why' though. Why implies there is a reason to all this when there isn't.

Edited by CarewsEyebrowDesigner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if James did want to play football with troon?

 

Today he said "yeah, I want to play but I need to go to Sports Direct tomorrow and get new boots 'coz the ones I have are falling apart; they look as though they are shouting whenever I run!".  I faked a laugh and said "cool, I'll come with you if you want..."

 

I have no intention of going with him.

 

 

EDIT - This was my 2000th post! I often wonder if you edit a post; does it add another post?  Surely not.  Hold on........

 

EDIT(2) - No! It didn't add another post.  Not sure why I wondered that tbh, that wouldn't make any sense!

Edited by troon_villan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â