is space/time warped? or is space time just like a liquid?

page: 2
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


Don't feel bad, X. I don't get frame dragging, either. It's got something to do with huge masses spinning really fast. I don't believe the aether, itself, is dragged. It must be a perception of light bending because of time dilation in the reference frame of the spinning mass. Seems like gobbledygook to me.




posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 

It's easy to get confused when talking about something (space time) which is, in a way, nothing.

Mass bends space time. Let's look at the classic 2 dimensional representation. Now try to imagine that classic "dent" in space time as gravity really works, extending equally in all directions (I know, ouch, my brain hurts).

Frame dragging does something else. A rotating mass "pulls" space time with it as it rotates. Take that "dent" and twist it around the axis perpendicular to the rotation. But don't keep twisting it, just give it a bit of a twist. Space time can only bend so far and it doesn't move (there is nothing for it to move in relation to). The dent has a "bottom" (in most cases) and the twist has a limit too. Space time is bent in two directions now (ouch). The amount of twist depends on the mass and rate of rotation of the object.

So what Gravity B observed was similar to what Eddington observed in 1919. In effect, the light from stars is "bent" as it moves through the twisted region of space time. But for a different reason, not because of the bending effect of another mass (the Sun) but because of the localized bending caused by frame dragging.

Understand, I'm not a physicist. This is how I've distilled it from reading a bunch of different explanations for laymen.

Excuse me now, I'm going to find some ibuprofen.
edit on 6/3/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by XPLodER
 

It's easy to get confused when talking about something (space time) which is, in a way, nothing.

Mass bends space time. Let's look at the classic 2 dimensional representation. Now try to imagine that classic "dent" in space time as gravity really works, extending equally in all directions (I know, ouch, my brain hurts).




if we were to use light as a measure and record the bending and twisting of light around a source to measure its "mass distortion" de we see this "twisting" in the light?
is light when "bent" in these feilds, "twisted" on its course to the observer? as it passes the most twisted space?
is this frame draging causing a sperical type aboration in the light as it passes through "twisted" space?
because the mass induced bending of light could be detected along the correct angle to the twisted space


is light a way measure this twisting or is light uneffected by the "twist" compaired to mass which "dents" space time and "bends" the light?

xploder
edit on 3-6-2011 by XPLodER because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:28 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 

Yes, as demonstrated by Eddington.

Light is not really bent. It travels in straight lines through space time. When space time is bent light appears to bend.

As I understand it the frame dragging effect is not spherical but planar. The effect would vary according to the latitude at which the observation was made.

Gravity B was able to measure both geodetic (the dent) and frame dragging effects. It used the "bending" of light from a star to do so. The results were very close to the effects (well within experimental error) predicted by general relativity.
edit on 6/3/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Sounds like they ought to call it frame twisting, not frame dragging. And yes; light must follow straight lines in space-time because the path of light is Minkowski's definition of a straight line in his space-time. Illustrations of light bending around a gravity dent in space-time are actually drawn in Euclidean space, where gravity actually bends the path of light. Unfortunately, it is impossible to illustrate the warp of space-time the way it really is, because our brains are wired to perceive 3D only.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 12:41 AM
link   
phage is right.i saw a documentary with that japanese guy on channel 170 a month ago..about this subject. forget his name..he always has a crowd of freinds in halloween costumes near end of his show. Einstein, wanted to prove this..space time bends. it wasnt easy at all. In order to prove his theory, he had to have a solar eclipse. In theory, the light from behind ths stars, would sho up on film as bending* the first 3 trys went bad..and 1 showed almsot nothing.mostly due to poor weather. then one day, an eclipse happened, and einstien had a freind take the picture..and thier it was the stars, 92 of them or something like that, all appeared to bend. the clouds cleared just enough to re write astronomy and physyics books..
Thins of space as a piece of paper. place a basketball on it. the paper bends inward* apparently, thats what stars do, the true nature of space.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 01:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ziggy1706
 



There was an experiment done by Douglas Torr, I believe, back in the early 2000's. He was supposed to release the data, and never did (stealing, basically, the information from the people paying for the experiment). But it was taking some data anomoly measurements during an eclipse.

I came across it while digging into Ning Li. Would make a great thread of its own, if someone cares to do it.

ETA: I was wrong. It was David Noevers, when he was trying to confirm the Allais effect:

www.allais.info...
edit on 3-6-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 


as always its an interesting post so far

but there is an issue with it
As you already stated there are about 0.015 atoms per m³ in a specific environment where there are 0.5 or whatever in some other place in space.

whatever it is, but how can you conclude that the laws of hydrodynamics can be applied to that.
allowing you to refer to 'viscosity'

HEY in best case you have a gas
IF one can already call that a gas.

because most people go along with thr term VACUUM if they talk about space.

--
Now having a deeper look into the matter i feel like you like to discuss viscosity along with the gravity which can be observed throughout the whole environment.
if you ask me: difficult and more or less fruitless

as far as i understood this: space as 3D environment as we experience it is BENT by gravity in a way which modifies time a little.
Now one of the predictions about einsteins formulars says, we should expect to find time somewhat dragged a little the more it comes in the vincinity of a (rotating) mass.

The effect should have been tiny, and in fact those people operating Gravity Probe B had a hard time getting into the results due to some glitches along with the gyros of that spacecraft.

excuse me but viscosity .. is just ... hmm ... wrong here



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by TMJ1972
reply to post by XPLodER
 


{quote]as always its an interesting post so far


thanks



but there is an issue with it
As you already stated there are about 0.015 atoms per m³ in a specific environment where there are 0.5 or whatever in some other place in space.


it is my view that even in low density situations the particles act like an "electrically" connected liquid


whatever it is, but how can you conclude that the laws of hydrodynamics can be applied to that.
allowing you to refer to 'viscosity'


that as the atom or electron density is electrical it should exibit a "binding force" between particals that allow the "viscous" term to be used when describing the medium density.


HEY in best case you have a gas
IF one can already call that a gas.

because most people go along with thr term VACUUM if they talk about space.


i would like to use the term "medium desity" to explain both the "thickness" of empty space
and to the amount of atoms or electrons in that area of space

--

Now having a deeper look into the matter i feel like you like to discuss viscosity along with the gravity which can be observed throughout the whole environment.
if you ask me: difficult and more or less fruitless


and yet my understanding has been increased by the responces garnerd from members

as far as i understood this: space as 3D environment as we experience it is BENT by gravity in a way which modifies time a little.
Now one of the predictions about einsteins formulars says, we should expect to find time somewhat dragged a little the more it comes in the vincinity of a (rotating) mass.


i think this is where im having trouble visualizing what is acually happining (
)


The effect should have been tiny, and in fact those people operating Gravity Probe B had a hard time getting into the results due to some glitches along with the gyros of that spacecraft.

excuse me but viscosity .. is just ... hmm ... wrong here


well you may be proved correct that hydrodynamics is the wrong way to try and model the motion of stars in a spiral galaxy

i had just noticed the parallels with liquid and was trying to apply the theory using alternative "tools"

it is a real posability that i am incorrect


xploder




edit on 3-6-2011 by XPLodER because: fix quotes



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ziggy1706
 



There was an experiment done by Douglas Torr, I believe, back in the early 2000's. He was supposed to release the data, and never did (stealing, basically, the information from the people paying for the experiment). But it was taking some data anomoly measurements during an eclipse.

I came across it while digging into Ning Li. Would make a great thread of its own, if someone cares to do it.

ETA: I was wrong. It was David Noevers, when he was trying to confirm the Allais effect:

www.allais.info...
edit on 3-6-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)


well that is simply amazing

the atlas effect is very interesting in the perspective of gravatational influences



this effect is interesting to me for a number of different reasons
including the effect is changed "depending on latitude"

the pendulum can record the rotational angular effect of the twisting at the equator and stay aligned with the reference plane
while at higher latitudes the angular rotation is "twisted" away from the reference plane
is this similar to the "twisting" effects as observed
by grav probe B?

wow this has really got my attension
thanks bigfatfurrytexan

xploder



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


ok so here is a helio sphere pic



it does look a lot like the image used for visual aid
and i wounder if a similar thing would occour at a galactic scale?

xploder



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by XPLodER
 

The plasma sheet is formed by the magentic field of the sun. The folds represent the regions where the magnetic polarity of the solar wind reverses. It is not related to density.
adsabs.harvard.edu...

It doesn't seem that the galactic core would be emitting anything like the solar wind.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ziggy1706
 



There was an experiment done by Douglas Torr, I believe, back in the early 2000's. He was supposed to release the data, and never did (stealing, basically, the information from the people paying for the experiment). But it was taking some data anomoly measurements during an eclipse.

I came across it while digging into Ning Li. Would make a great thread of its own, if someone cares to do it.

ETA: I was wrong. It was David Noevers, when he was trying to confirm the Allais effect:

www.allais.info...
edit on 3-6-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)


take at look at what i found

thanks to you







Total eclipses of the Sun by the Moon reach maximum eclipse about 40 seconds before the Sun and Moon's gravitational forces align. If gravity is a propagating force, this 3-body (Sun-Moon-Earth) test implies that gravity propagates at least 20 times faster than light.

The Earth accelerates toward a point 20 arc seconds in front of the visible Sun, where the Sun will appear to be in 8.3 minutes. Thus, the acceleration now is toward the true, instantaneous direction of the Sun now, and is not parallel to the direction of the arriving solar photons now.


links to source and list of gravity anomoly nasa page


When Allais won the Nobel in 1988 at age 77 he had all but given up hope of acknowledgement, but as a commentary on his prize remarked at the time: "It was not till now that we discovered his greatness. Allais has been studied by us for many years and we are now certain he is a giant."






Demonstration of Foucault effect; Kremsm端nster Observatory, Austria, August 11, 1999. Rotation is shown at the maximum in pendulum (shown as round shadow with smaller laser target; back and forth swing motion not shown). The marks shown radiating beneath the pendulum itself are hourly tick marks for ideal pendulum behavior. This particular set of images shows the approximately doubling of the forward rotation (30 minutes per tick mark). Universal time is shown at lower right. The thirty-minute image separation demonstrates that the floor is moving underneath the pendulum which always keeps its initial swing direction while the earth rotates. At this latitude, the rotation from right to left in the image is approximately 11.2 degrees per hour.


this is some very interesting info
star thanks


xploder

edit on 3-6-2011 by XPLodER because: add you tube



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Well, the entire thing could be compared to a orgainism, or the inner workings of a cell, maybe brain cell even, or atom.

But to me its very simple, though we perceive endless space, all those perceptions, sight, sound, touch is taking place on a screen at the back of your brain, which is like a computer, that picks up and limits the signals of what is metaphorically like a radio station holographic universe, with infinite signals, frequencies. And your computer brain interprets and limits the signals to your channel that you see, though neighboring channels can stargate in if enough (lets just say for annanuki or negative type channels) your frequency is lowered by a corrupt elite who runs fear, anger, wars, starvation and abuse, and puts alot of sacrifices down leylines, giving access to the planet by more negative neighboring channels. Because in this very tiny box within a this radio station school, (metaphor), the ones these bullies are big fish in, is a tiny little box, and the only way they can be seen as big fish, feel important, lord it over others, is to attempt to hault the students progression in the school and keep them in even a tinier box.

The energy in the system, we see condensed energy waves, lower frequency ones, as matter, on that screen, but all of it can be compared to the energy inside a computer or the radio frequency waves, basically TECHNOLOGY.

In fact, this energy system has entanglement so we're not really all separate.

Time itself is a program in our minds, there is No Time, infinity does not do measurements, its one eternal day, infintie one, all at once. We perceive movement in the school, ie. orbits around the sun, but is it really moving?
Or do the infintie clips merely move ahead for the scenes?

The time program is based on orbit of planets around their star. Every planet and moon and body in this percieved universe has its own clock.
edit on 3-6-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by ziggy1706
 



There was an experiment done by Douglas Torr, I believe, back in the early 2000's. He was supposed to release the data, and never did (stealing, basically, the information from the people paying for the experiment). But it was taking some data anomoly measurements during an eclipse.

I came across it while digging into Ning Li. Would make a great thread of its own, if someone cares to do it.

ETA: I was wrong. It was David Noevers, when he was trying to confirm the Allais effect:

www.allais.info...
edit on 3-6-2011 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)


i have decided to go ahead and start a seperate thread
on the topic with your blessing
i will give you credit for the info

xploder





top topics
 
4
<< 1   >>

log in

join