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.

 

The Speed Of Gravity - Why Einstein Was Wrong

page: 8
18
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 

I don't think I understand what you want to say. Are you trying to prove that FTL comm is possible or that the ether exists? Or both?
In either case, I don't think those can be proved to be true, because there is a huge list of experiments proving otherwise.
If you concider gravity as a sort of information system, it is easy to understand that gravity can't be faster than light, because information can't be transmitted faster than light.




posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by mrwiffler
 

The presence of mass creates a gravity well, ie an energy mismatch. This energy moves things around. It has been proven that gravity is not a neutral force, because it adds to the energy potential of a region of space.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Don't worry Phractal Phil , your not gettin off topic in the slightest.

So just to be clear in my rude hypothetical...

Your saying there would be a "lag" so to speak, and it would "not" be instantaneous; correct?

That would be for Einstein and against OP.........right?



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by masterp
 


I do believe the ether exists and the force of gravity is as fast as TVF said it is. Proof that FTL communication is possible, or that the ether exists, will require experimentation. At this point, I am only trying to debunk some alleged proofs that FTL communication implies paradoxes.

I believe those experiments you refer to have been misinterpreted—perhaps because of a false belief that the results were paradoxical. Michaelson-Morley, for example, was intended to discover which of two ether-dragging theories was true. Both proved to be false. The conclusion, that there is no ether, is not supported by the experimental result.

If matter did drag the ether, that would falsify my own ether model. I believe fundamental particles are composed of pairs or groups of ethereal shear waves, orbiting each other at the speed of light. Why would a shear wave in a solid drag the solid with it?

I do believe there is information present in gravity. Whether gravity can be harnessed to transmit other information is doubtful. However, I believe the speed of gravity is also the speed of electrostatic force, which is perhapse 10^40 times stronger than gravity, so there is a much greater chance we may find a way to send information on the electrostatic force, rather than on electromagnetic waves. Quantum entanglement seems even more promising. Perhaps people would be more willing to accept those experimental results, once they are disabused of the idea that the results are paradoxical.

The maxim that information can't be transmitted faster than light is what this thread is meant to question. If your mind is closed to the possibility, then no argument to the contrary will shake that belief.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Come on guys, just because something causes a paradox doesn't mean it is impossible.

It just means we don't know how the universe reacts when the so called paradox happens.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by mrwiffler
 

The presence of mass creates a gravity well, ie an energy mismatch. This energy moves things around. It has been proven that gravity is not a neutral force, because it adds to the energy potential of a region of space.


As I have said before, I am not fluent in general relativity. I agree with you on this point, but I would state it a bit differently. The concept of force seems to be foreign to GR, but gravitational potential is not. I believe the GR equivalent of force is the 3D gradient of gravitational potential energy at given place and time. (That is not quite the same as force in Euclidean space, because the warp of space-time results in a mismatch between the Euclidean distance and the space-time distance.)

A gradient of potential energy is a force, but it does not explain why there is a gradient of potential. The warp of space-time is a mathematical description of the effect of gravity. A description of an effect is not a cause.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mrwiffler
 


just a thought cause this ain't my subject

Ever watch an ant climb out of a funnel...
if he gets traction he climbs
if he gets no traction he stays at the bottom
I use a funnel to gas up my outboard...

If there was a mountain high enough we could walk right out of this gravity well

Phractal Phil
if I'm not mistaken:
Sub luminous information transphere theory
They can make electrons from a pair both change spin instantly
when they change the spin of one of the electrons no matter what the distance the change in the second is instantanious


[edit on 6-6-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 6-6-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Software_Pyrate
Your saying there would be a "lag" so to speak, and it would "not" be instantaneous; correct?


I'm saying that (in the reference frame of the ether) the force of gravity communicates the location of a mass with a time lag which is a tiny fraction of the light-speed time lag.

In other reference frames (due to the way clocks are synchronized to light pulses in special relativity), the speed of gravity is not the same in all directions. In the direction of the reference frame's motion relative to the ether, the speed of gravity may have a negative value, meaning that a speed-of-gravity signal in that direction (upwind, so to speak) may arrive before it is sent. So motion relative the ether may turn the delay into an advance. When I say the signal arrives before it is sent, I mean the message gets a time stamp when it is sent (according to the clock on the sender's desk) and an earlier time stamp when it is received (according to the clock on the receiver's desk). An acknowledgment message is then returned to the sender, who receives the acknowledgment after a delay. The acknowledgment is received by the sender after he sent the original message, so he can't send a message to himself and receive it before you sent it.


Originally posted by Software_Pyrate
That would be for Einstein and against OP.........right?


Wrong. I believe Einstein tacitly assumed zero time lag between the position of a mass and the warp of space-time at all distances.

I believe "OP" is a violation of "T&C". Acronymfinder.com lists 106 meanings for "OP". I'm making a wild guess that you mean "original post". What I'm saying is FOR the original post.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by mrwiffler
 
They can make electrons from a pair both change spin instantly
when they change the spin of one of the electrons no matter what the distance the change in the second is instantanious


I'm not sure what distances and times have actually been tested, but I'm quite sure they are not enough to prove instantaneous communication. At any rate, that which is instantaneous in one reference frame is not instantaneous in another reference frame. If such quantum entanglement can communicate instantaneously in the reference frame of the ether, it might be possible to demonstrate a negative time lag in the direction of Virgo. Clocks will have to be very precisely synchronized in Earth's reference frame, and the distance will have to fairly large. As I mentioned earlier, the gamma factor for Earth's motion thru the ether is probably about 1.0000022. The math section of my brain is registering overload from trying to work out the details of the experiment. I'll have to get back to you after I figure it out.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by sirnex
 


I did not say that darkness is an autonomous entity or a wave. It is an event though, and therefore it has a rate relative to other events.


Darkness is not an event, it's a state of absence, just as a vacuum is a state of absence. You don't say a vacuum's speed is 0mph, nor do you call a vacuum an event either. You can't be serious, are you?



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


When a light is turned off or when the sun hides behind a mountain, we have a 'darkness event', i.e. light becomes absent.

Darkness comes when light leaves, and therefore the speed of darkness is the speed of light.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


Do you have any evidence that the ether exists?

en.wikipedia.org...

I think it is clear that the Michelson-Morley experiment disproves the existence of ether. There are also other experiments that followed that further disprove the existence of ether.

So, if we assume there is no ether, as the experiment verifies, then SR follows through, and then GR; all of them proving information cannot travel faster than light, including gravity, of course.

Gravity is a signaling machine: if you stand still relative to the Sun on Earth's orbit, when Earth passes by, you will feel the gravity. This means that gravity is information, and therefore subject to the speed of light limitation.

If gravity was instantaneous, you would feel it way before the light from the gravity source reached you, and it would create a paradox similar to the one in the barn thought experiment.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


There are "ultimate" questions that we cannot answer. One of them is what energy is. Another one is why matter creates gravity.

There is no theory that answers all questions; it is proven by Godel through the incompleteness theorem:

en.wikipedia.org...

Therefore, even if we admit Relativity is wrong and the Electric Universe theory is correct, we can ask "what is electricity" and not get an answer.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:35 PM
link   
What's funny is that we know you don't understand the speed of gravity and darkness because you don't understand gravity or darkness.

Darkness is the absence of light.
Gravity is the depression of spacetime caused by mass.


Darkness is instantaneous because once there is no light it is automatically called darkness. Darkness is NOT AN ACTUAL THING.

It is similar for gravity. Gravity is a depression caused by mass. Apply that to what you said about a photon. When the last photons goes then darkness follows INSTANTANEOUSLY.

So since mass bends spacetime when the mass is gone so is the bend.

IT IS MASS CAUSING THE BEND. IF THE CAUSE IS GONE THEN SO IS THE EFFECT.(Note that this is usually only applied to spacetime being affected by mass and energy)

If there is a change in the mass then spacetime changes as mass changes. INSTANTANEOUSLY.

Is that simple enough for you?



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:36 PM
link   
I was wondering:
If you view light as a particle it's traveling at the speed of light.
but as a wave its propagating at a vector that is in relation to its direction and frequency...
Does that mean that the wavefront energy within the particle is traveling the speed of light of the particle plus the speed of the angular wave as it propagates?

The reason I'm asking is because as a large mass moves through space
it is a collection of tightly packed vibrations in the density of the energy of space like a moving gravity well not independent of space like a ball through the air...
energy equals mass..
mass creates a gravity well?
so your gravity well would be traveling faster then the speed of light
as it propagates in relation to the changes in density of the energy propagating in the photon because of the speed of the particle or wave plus the vector?

the change in density of the fabric of space time is travelling faster than the wave.

A planet would have a lop sided gravity well flattened in the direction of travel proportional to the direction and speed of travel if there was a lag in the speed of gravity
all orbits of moons would have elipses in the direction of travel of the body they are orbiting which would be more pronounced according to how closely they are orbiting to right angles to the direction of travel...

if thats a dumb question just say so i'll shut up and read
I love physics but I am a rookie



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 
Do you have any evidence that the ether exists?

I think it is clear that the Michelson-Morley experiment disproves the existence of ether.


It only disproves ether models (specifically those of Fresnel & Stokes) which require that matter must drag the ether. Ether dragging is the only thing the experiment looked for. The fact that they found no ether dragging is evidence in favor of my ether model.


Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 
There are also other experiments that followed that further disprove the existence of ether.


Name one, and I'll respond to it.



Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


So, if we assume there is no ether, as the experiment verifies, then SR follows through, and then GR; all of them proving information cannot travel faster than light, including gravity, of course.


SR follows equally well from my model, perhaps even more convincingly. GR provides no speed of gravity delay between the motion of a mass and the resultant motion of the warping of space-time. That amounts to a tacit assumption that the position of a mass is communicated instantaneously to all other masses in the universe. However, one could argue that the present postion of a mass was predestined, so no present time communication is necessary to communicate its position. I am not a big fan of predestionation.



Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


Gravity is a signaling machine: if you stand still relative to the Sun on Earth's orbit, when Earth passes by, you will feel the gravity. This means that gravity is information, and therefore subject to the speed of light limitation.

If gravity was instantaneous, you would feel it way before the light from the gravity source reached you, and it would create a paradox similar to the one in the barn thought experiment.


So we are back to the original post. If you read it, you obviously did not understand it. If gravity had a speed of light delay, then yes, we would feel the gravity pulling us in the direction where we see the sun now, which is in the direction of stars which were directly behind the sun 8 minutes ago. This would pull us into higher and higher orbits and eject us from the vicinity of the sun in a fairly short time.

And I have already dealt with the barn paradox. I refer you to the SR time formula: t' = γ(t-(vx/c²)). This means that clocks in the +x direction show earlier times than those in the -x direction. It means that, from the pole vaulter's point of view, the clock attached to the back of the barn shows an earlier time than the clock attached to the front of the barn. When you take this fact into consideration, there is no barn paradox.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by masterp
 


I agree that we can never know everything. Every time we expand our knowledge, new question arise. If we take a defeatest attitude toward the new questions, they will not be answered, and the next layer of question will never occur to us.

Mainstream science took a defeatist attitude toward the cause of gravity when it decided the mathematical description of the effect of gravity is the cause of gravity. Until we shake off that defeatism, we shall never understand gravity, and we shall not have any inkling of what mysteries lie beyond an understanding of gravity.



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
reply to post by sirnex
 


When a light is turned off or when the sun hides behind a mountain, we have a 'darkness event', i.e. light becomes absent.

Darkness comes when light leaves, and therefore the speed of darkness is the speed of light.



Err, no.

your thinking very simplistically and very very very naively.

'Darkness' is not a thing that can have an 'event' of sorts. It's nothing but an absence of light. Before light enters an unlit room, it is already void of light. When light enters, it doesn't magically banish the darkness, it fills the medium throughout the room. Not sure how to explain it.


Hey, whatever makes you happy. You continue believing that an absences of something has super magical speeds. Who knows, maybe you'll overturn everything we know about physics when you wow the world with your theories of darkness travels at C velocity and a vacuum travels at 0mph.


Keep up the good fight man!



posted on Jun, 6 2010 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


Okay, I replaced the blown fuse in my brain's math section and did some calculations. Let's hope I got it right.

In Earth’s reference frame, a signal sent toward Virgo, which is instantaneous in the reference frame of the ether, should be received a kilometer away about 7 nanoseconds before it is sent. If speed of gravity is 3.3 x 10^10 c = 10^16 km/s, the speed-of-gravity delay is then 10^-16 s/km = 10^-7 nanosec/km. For purposes of this experiment, the speed-of-gravity delay is negligible.

Seven nanoseconds per kilometer should be easy to detect in an Earth-based lab experiment. But Michelson-Morley type experiments are two way, and the delay of the return signal cancels the advance of the original signal. So it has to be a one-way signal, based on previously synchronized clocks.



posted on Jun, 7 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Phractal Phil
 


After a good night's rest, I tripple checked, and kept getting the same result. The relativistic time adjustment for an signal sent toward Virgo at infinite speed relative to the ether is definitely about 7 nanosec/kilometer.

So Phractal Phil's quantum entanglement experiment is this:

1) Set up a lab where a message may be sent over a distance of 1 kilometer. The lab should be in a location which will, at some future time have motion relative to the CMB approximately in the direction of Virgo.

2) Determe the velocity, v, of the lab relative to the CMB. Calculate the relativistic time adjustment, using t’ = λ(t-(vx/c²)).

3) Synchronize clocks at the sending and receiving ends of the communication. This should be done by splitting a laser pulse at the midway point, so that it travels precisely the same distance to opposite ends of the course (in the reference frame of the lab).

4) Send the quantum entanglement signal from one end of the labe to the other, recording the precise time at the sending end when the signal is sent and at the receiving end when it is received. Repeat the procedure in the opposite direction.

5) Result: You should observe that, according to the lab clocks, the signal sent toware Virgo arrives approximately 7 nanosec (as calculated in step 2) before it is sent, and the signal away from Virgo shold arrive about the same amount of time after it is sent.

Conclusions:

If the result is as predicted, that will prove:

a) The quantum entanglement signal was many times faster than light, relative to the ether.

b) The ether is stationary relative to the CMB.

Evaluation of a null result can only be accomplished in retrospect, but it would most likely indicate that quantum entanglement communicates only at the speed of light.

Obviously, a longer course will provide greater accuracy. Since I presume the course will need to be in a vacuum, it might be best to set up the laboratory in orbit above Earth, or perhaps on the moon.




top topics



 
18
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join