It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: KrzYma
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
If he and the mirror could move at the speed of light, then he would never know if his light reached the mirror or not, because he would be frozen in time.
from your point of view, not his !
for him the speed of light is C according to Einstein
and it doesn't really matter what you are observing, for his reference of frame he is standing still and you are moving !
originally posted by: Box of Rain
originally posted by: krash661
a fourth and very important condition also exists,
it is the one bordering on the sphere of influence or plasma realm
a controlled transformation or an elevation of the frequency of matter and the stable existence of this fourth aggregate condition of matter exists at a very primitive level.
there are simply five states of matter.
plasma, i don't mean just "hot gas" (as the concept is generally simplified),
but rather i mean a higher aggregate condition of matter.
the plasma state of matter is a special form of matter which lies between its real existence and the sphere of influence,
that is,
a complete loss of mass and pure accretion of energy of various form whenever matter is "pushed or shoved."
the fourth state of matter is very important for certain physical conditions which can be used to generate antigravity.
I'm not sure how the "spheres of influence" you mentioned are involved, but "Plasma" can be more easily defined as simply being matter that has had its electrons in its atoms disassociated from the nucleus of the atoms.
This can be achieved by running an electrical charge through gas, such as in a neon sign. The visible stuff in a neon sign would be the plasma.
If you have a different definition for plasma than the standard one, then I like to hear it. Also, could you explain what this other state of matter (you called it the fourth state, with plasma being the fifth)? What are the physical characteristics of this state of matter?
For example:
Solid: Matter with not enough energy to break its intermolecular bonds (bonds holding the molecules together) -- Therefore the atoms can not move around freely.
Liquid: Matter with enough energy that atoms do move around freely, but still not enough to completely break free of the intermolecular bonds.
gas: Matter with enough energy that atoms break free of the intermolecular bonds.
plasma: Matter with enough energy that the electrons break free of (or at least they become disassociated with) the rest of the atom.
Other state of matter: ??? Please describe.
originally posted by: krash661
instead of doing the typical flawed interpretation of my words,
try to actually understand my words.
It may be impossible to move an observer and his mirror at the speed of light, but we have a similar situation when one observer enters the event horizon of a black hole where time theoretically stops.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
So in one frame of reference, the light does NOT hit the mirror, but it does in the other frame of reference. And that, to me, seems like a paradox...a paradox created when the person did the impossible -- move at the speed of light.
originally posted by: krash661
again,
it's like an elementary student attempting to do graduate level work,
without knowing or understanding anything in between.
every question you had asked has answers.
i had enough of these shenanigans.
originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
originally posted by: ImaFungi
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
To have fun with a thought experiment, lets suppose matter can travel the speed of light.
If he and the mirror could move at the speed of light, then he would never know if his light reached the mirror or not, because he would be frozen in time.
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
But as stated earlier, most doubt the theory about an infinitely dense singularity in a black hole is precisely correct, instead favoring the idea of some kind of quantum gravity theory to be determined offering a better explanation and in that yet to be determined model, who knows if time will actually stop completely at the event horizon, to an outside observer?
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
a reply to: Mon1k3r
It's trying to inflate everywhere, but the force causing the inflation is offset by gravitational forces where there are gravitational forces......
Someone calculated what the expansion of our solar system would be due to inflation, which turned out to be a non-zero number, but it was too small to actually measure.
originally posted by: Arbitrageur
It may be impossible to move an observer and his mirror at the speed of light, but we have a similar situation when one observer enters the event horizon of a black hole where time theoretically stops.
In this situation, an observer on Earth wouldn't be able to see the clock of the observer entering the black hole actually stop, because as they got closer and closer to the event horizon, the light would get more and more red-shifted until it was so red-shifted it just wasn't visible anymore. If you could still see the light it would show an observer on Earth a stopped clock, if theory is correct, but theory says you wouldn't be able to see the light due to red-shift.
The observer just outside the event horizon would have an interesting perspective, as they would see billions of years go by when they watched the outside (to them, blue-shifted) universe.
So if we want to talk about time stopping between frames of reference, entering a black hole may be a more realistic scenario than a mirror traveling the speed of light, while the apparent paradoxes are similar. But as stated earlier, most doubt the theory about an infinitely dense singularity in a black hole is precisely correct, instead favoring the idea of some kind of quantum gravity theory to be determined offering a better explanation and in that yet to be determined model, who knows if time will actually stop completely at the event horizon, to an outside observer?
The observed motions, and expansion or lack of expansion would be the result of assuming dark energy expansion occurs uniformly everywhere, and then adding gravitational forces where matter exists.
originally posted by: Mon1k3r
I say that gravitational forces are a RESULT of that non zero number, not offset by it. Matter influences the RATE OF INFLATION.
See the first property of dark matter listed in that quote. As it says, we can't rule out there may be some interaction of matter we haven't observed yet, and maybe we will find this in future observatons (or maybe we won't). Given this, I think it's premature to say "Matter influences the RATE OF INFLATION" if there's no evidence for this as such, rather, matter creates gravity, and gravity affects the observed inflation. To put it another way, if you subtract gravitational and other fundamental interactions, expansion from dark energy might be the same everywhere, but we admit we need more precise measurements to say this definitively.
Dark energy has three crucial properties. First, it’s dark: we don’t see it, and as far as we can observe it doesn’t interact with matter at all. (Maybe it does, but beneath our ability to currently detect.) Second, it’s smoothly distributed: it doesn’t fall into galaxies and clusters, or we would have found it by studying the dynamics of those objects. Third, it’s persistent: the density of dark energy (amount of energy per cubic light-year) remains approximately constant as the universe expands. It doesn’t dilute away like matter does.
Someone needs to explain that to mainstream science in a credible fashion that will convince scientists, because the current models are somewhat complicated.
Things are more simple than we've been told.
I said a lot, not sure which part you disagree with.
originally posted by: KrzYma
I don't think so... definitely NOT !
In his frame of reference, yes he measures the normal speed of light even when just outside the event horizon of a black hole.
This imaginary Black Hole is accelerating the space ship, I agree on that scenario, even to the speed of light -1, OK.
but in his frame of reference speed of light must be constant Einstein said.
I said nothing about his velocity, and am considering only the effects of the gravitational field here. He could approach the black hole quickly or slowly in this scenario, but I don't ask him to reach the speed of light which we said is not possible for matter as it would take an infinite amount of energy.
So the rocket pilot sees the Universe behind him time stopped by reaching the speed of light
There is no paradox here just like there was never any "twin paradox" but people still talk about a twin paradox.
Just outside the event horizon he would see red-shifted slow motion of the Universe
According to Einstein even a Black Hole must have it's own reference frame where light propagates with constant C.
can you see the paradox ?
If you can figure out why the twin paradox isn't a paradox then you will have an idea why this also is not a paradox, in both cases there is a lack of symmetry:
The outside world appear to speed up and huge amounts of outside time would elapse in the short time the spaceship would take to reach the event horizon.
There is also no symmetry between the spacetime paths in the above black hole example, thus no paradox. Just as with the twin example approaching the speed of light, the observer who approaches the black hole event horizon and returns to Earth would age less than the observer who stayed on Earth without any paradox, but the idea that there is a paradox here is a common misunderstanding.
the travelling twin's trajectory involves two different inertial frames, one for the outbound journey and one for the inbound journey, and so there is no symmetry between the spacetime paths of the two twins. Therefore the twin paradox is not a paradox in the sense of a logical contradiction.
Time dilation.
originally posted by: ImaFungi
So, exactly what is the reason that an outside observer, would be able to see the space ship for the outside observers entire life?
It doesn't really matter in this example.
Are we imagining the event horizon is rotating or not?
No, but you're closer to a paradox there than KrzYma was. The outside observers never see the ship destroyed for two reasons.
So. In reality, the ship is 'sucked in' and passes beyond the event horizon and is likely materially annihilated. But, you are claiming though the real, material, ship no longer exists as a ship, it is still seen as a ship, even after it is destroyed, by outside observers.
For the sake of this thought experiment, let's say the spaceship has a window, and a light inside the spaceship shining on a clock which is visible through the window to an outside observer.
You are assuming the light that is reflected off the ship just before being sucked fully into the hole is coming from, where? And you are assuming this light, can get that close to the black hole, and still be reflected off the ship and travel backwards?
As I said if the black hole is large enough, the ship need not be annihilated when crossing the event horizon. But even crossing the event horizon is not visible to an observer on Earth, so what happens to the ship after it crosses the event horizon is irrelevant to the Earth observer. The light from the ship will redshift to invisibility as it approaches the event horizon, and of course once the event horizon is crossed the light from the ship cannot escape.
Once the ship falls past the event horizon and is annihilated, and in reality no longer at the event horizon, there is no way light can still project to an observer the existence of a ship at the event horizon (for the entirety of the observers life, or even half that time), because if the observer were to shine a light every where along the event horizon in hopes of reflecting off the ship to see the ship, which you claim should be visible even after it falls in the black hole, the ship will not be there, because it is not there, so the light will not reflect off the ship, so an observer will not see the ship.