Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm
-
What does it mean? David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
What does it mean? David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
:-D Well what I meant is that I did not have physics lessons in English... I don't know what "Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm" means. David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
:-D Well what I meant is that I did not have physics lessons in English... I don't know what "Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm" means. David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
This might help...[^] essentials: Einstein's 1916 predictions about both the origin and the magnitude of the gravitational redshift have been confirmed by a variety of general relativistic experiments, so as to obtain the following conclusions: (1) there is only one gravitational redshift between two points at different potentials... (2) this redshift does not originate with photons exchanging energy with gravity during transit through a potential gradient, but instead originates in precisely the way that Einstein stated it in 1916, and again in 1952 - namely, An atom absorbs or emits light of a frequency which is dependent on the potential of the gravitational field in which it is situated." Absolute faith corrupts as absolutely as absolute power Eric Hoffer The opposite of the religious fanatic is not the fanatical atheist but the gentle cynic who cares not whether there is a god or not. Eric Hoffer
-
Are you talking about Einstein's idea that space is static (not expanding?). That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Are you talking about Einstein's idea that space is static (not expanding?). That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
OHH. Maybe if you wrote it like "What DOES it mean?", I would have got it. I understand what your saying. I'll let you know when somebody dumbs it down for me! /\ |_ E X E GG
-
Yeah, the person that asked me about it was kept saying something about "space expanding".... It's just theory or something saying space doesn't expand? /\ |_ E X E GG
Einstein didn't like the thought that space was expanding (it raises all sorts of difficult questions such as "from what is it expanding"). Once Hubble completed his observations showing space was indeed expanding Einstein retracted his opposition and removed the concept of a cosmological constant and said it was the biggest mistake of his career. Subsequent work, though, has shown the constant may actually have a non-zero value and be relevant to cosmology. So: space is expanding and Einstein's theory of general relativity is correct (to current observable limits), but his initial thought that space was static is wrong. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Yeah, the person that asked me about it was kept saying something about "space expanding".... It's just theory or something saying space doesn't expand? /\ |_ E X E GG
eggie5 wrote: It's just theory or something saying space doesn't expand? Just as Chris said, plus a number of other things. If space is expanding, matter and energy are getting scattered farther apart, it will either continue endlessly, the expansion exceeds the gravity potential of mass such that it expands until matter is so far separated that it is like the vaccuum of space (death by "nothing" a fearsome thought for anyone trying to imagine the future), or collapses back in until it grows to a mass so large it cannot contain itself and blows back out again. But the latter asks how long it has continued. Such thought patterns generate more questions than they answer. Einstein was convinced that there was an ultimate answer to everything, a formulae where all mass and energy converged into one general purpose equation, of light, sound, mass, gravity, everything. This was a portion of his unified field theory, but to find that answer it would be easier if it were all static. But having it all in motion asks where is the energy of that motion coming from, how much energy is there, what came before, where it is going, and the head hurts. There have been some more modern restatements of static-spacetime, in which energy exchanges take place through wormholes (Einstein-Rosen Bridge), or classic echanges of energy across large mass objects of less/more than 3D space (superstrings). This allows for the perception of volume expansion, with a constant flow of energy around the system, preserving mass/volume/energy in a super-scale flowing, but ultimately "static" model. Thus even with red-shifted obects that are seen and measured it's more like looking at a super large fountain in super-slow motion from the inside, a closed, static system of exchange, but one that has constant motion around us. Thus bringing back the Einstein idea that everything is somehow related in a "holy grail" explanation, that everything is closed in a loop if we can just find the "key" that is holding all that movement from being seen as ever-expanding. Although there have been many theories and evidence on each side, you are talking about a process so massive that I think we will be measuring for a very long time and still have no answers... but what do I know, i am just a country hick with a nack for graphics. ;) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Are you talking about Einstein's idea that space is static (not expanding?). That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote: That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. Gosh! Talking like that in Trivandrum ensures a girl-friend-less existence :D But then, I guess most Loungers prefer a compiler to a girl friend :rolleyes:
-
Chris Maunder wrote: That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. Gosh! Talking like that in Trivandrum ensures a girl-friend-less existence :D But then, I guess most Loungers prefer a compiler to a girl friend :rolleyes:
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: Gosh! Talking like that in Trivandrum ensures a girl-friend-less existence :D Is that guaranteed?????????!!!! ;) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: Gosh! Talking like that in Trivandrum ensures a girl-friend-less existence :D Is that guaranteed?????????!!!! ;) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote: Is that guaranteed?????????!!!! I don't wanna find out please ;)
-
Yeah, the person that asked me about it was kept saying something about "space expanding".... It's just theory or something saying space doesn't expand? /\ |_ E X E GG
eggie5 wrote: "space expanding".... Of course space is expanding. This is readily proved by observing fat people; over time, they tend to get fatter. It can also be directly observed on a personal basis by noting that, as one grows older, loose change on the ground gets farther away. As a corollary, "Stuff" expands, too. Your "stuff" always expands to fill the space available. Note that the coefficient of expansion, Kexp, is larger for "stuff" than for "space," and is inherently non-linear as it tends to a limit as Vstuff approaches Vavailable. The proof is left as an exercise for the student. Boredom, Bull$^%&, Baggage, Bar - all start with 'B'
Coincidence? -
Chris Maunder wrote: That's why he put the cosmological constant in his equation of general relativity to enforce this notion. Gosh! Talking like that in Trivandrum ensures a girl-friend-less existence :D But then, I guess most Loungers prefer a compiler to a girl friend :rolleyes:
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: most Loungers prefer a compiler to a girl friend I will gladly trade you my compiler...;) Boredom, Bull$^%&, Baggage, Bar - all start with 'B'
Coincidence? -
eggie5 wrote: "space expanding".... Of course space is expanding. This is readily proved by observing fat people; over time, they tend to get fatter. It can also be directly observed on a personal basis by noting that, as one grows older, loose change on the ground gets farther away. As a corollary, "Stuff" expands, too. Your "stuff" always expands to fill the space available. Note that the coefficient of expansion, Kexp, is larger for "stuff" than for "space," and is inherently non-linear as it tends to a limit as Vstuff approaches Vavailable. The proof is left as an exercise for the student. Boredom, Bull$^%&, Baggage, Bar - all start with 'B'
Coincidence?:-D So true! Roger Wright wrote: The proof is left as an exercise for the student. You must be a teacher ;)
Ryan
"Punctuality is only a virtue for those who aren't smart enough to think of good excuses for being late" John Nichol "Point Of Impact"
-
Nishant Sivakumar wrote: most Loungers prefer a compiler to a girl friend I will gladly trade you my compiler...;) Boredom, Bull$^%&, Baggage, Bar - all start with 'B'
Coincidence?Roger Wright wrote: I will gladly trade you my compiler... ;P :rolleyes:
-
Why am I getting voted ones an crap?!?! I wasn't being mean... THIS IS BAD FOR MY REP!!!!! /\ |_ E X E GG
eggie5 wrote: Why am I getting voted ones an crap? Because David's reply made perfect sense, and your suggested version of it doesn't?
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flickrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
-
eggie5 wrote: Why am I getting voted ones an crap? Because David's reply made perfect sense, and your suggested version of it doesn't?
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flickrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen
It makes perfect sense to me. Saying "What does it mean?" implies, to me, that David wanted Alex to tell him what it was so that he could summarize it. Alex' version was more like saying "Oh yeah, what does that mean?" That being said, I find it funny that Alex gets voted down for being terse. And this on a programming site...home of the most terse group of people on the planet. ;P
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
-
It makes perfect sense to me. Saying "What does it mean?" implies, to me, that David wanted Alex to tell him what it was so that he could summarize it. Alex' version was more like saying "Oh yeah, what does that mean?" That being said, I find it funny that Alex gets voted down for being terse. And this on a programming site...home of the most terse group of people on the planet. ;P
[Cheshire] I can't afford those plastic things to cover the electric sockets so I just draw bunny faces on the electric outlets to scare the kids away from them... [RLtim] Newsflash! Kids aren't afraid of bunnies. [Cheshire] Oh they will be... -Bash.org
Emphasising the 'does' doesn't change it into that though. It DOESn't make any sense. If anything, emphasise the 'it'. "What DOES Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm mean?" doesn't make sense to me, "What does 'Einstein's static-spacetime paradigm' mean?" does. Way too many does's round here... :suss:
Ðavid Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum
Audioscrobbler :: flickrDie Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen