Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9073 total)
85 online now:
nwr, Pollux, ringo, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (5 members, 80 visitors)
Newest Member: MidwestPaul
Post Volume: Total: 893,345 Year: 4,457/6,534 Month: 671/900 Week: 195/182 Day: 28/47 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Security Update Released


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is "the fabric" of space-time?
IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 256 of 327 (473300)
06-28-2008 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 254 by john6zx
06-28-2008 2:08 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Spacetime is a quotient, namely an equation which represents the interaction of space and time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 254 by john6zx, posted 06-28-2008 2:08 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 260 by AdminNosy, posted 06-28-2008 9:48 AM IamJoseph has taken no action
 Message 262 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 2:31 AM IamJoseph has taken no action
 Message 263 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 2:33 AM IamJoseph has taken no action

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 2883 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 257 of 327 (473307)
06-28-2008 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by john6zx
06-28-2008 1:16 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
The term space is used to describe that area of nothing between objects. That area between you and what you are observing, that is space. Space is caused by looking out from a point. The concept of space comes about from the idea that one perceives through something when looking out from our point of view. There are objects that exist other than where we are viewing from, and by looking out to these items we create the idea of space...

...Space as far as I am Concerned has no shape because it is not a thing? Space is the area between objects, we as humans gave that area a name..... SPACE.

Yes, well done. You have grasped the concept of space that most had from 3000 years ago to about 100 years ago. You've only 100 years to go to catch up. It can't be that hard...

Given that your understanding is so out of date, it seems a liitle superfluous trying to sort out the rest of your post line by line. If you think of an ocean as space, and waves on that ocean as matter or stuff, then you're not too far off our current understanding.

What type of physical, observational data do you have that space is being bent? Einstein never showed physical proof, so that whole spacetime thing is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

:laugh: :laugh: I'm sorry, but GR is one of the two most successfully tested theories ever devised by mankind - admittedly not all of the evidence was gathered by Einstein himself, but does that matter???

If you are interested in this evidence, you may want to look into

Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury
Gravitational wave emission from binary neutron stars
Pound-Rebka experiment
Effect of GR on the GPS sattelite system
Gravitational lensing
Existence of black hole-like objects in galactic nuclei (including the centre of our own Galaxy)

That's a start - let me know if you find any problems with any of these.

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by john6zx, posted 06-28-2008 1:16 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 2:47 AM cavediver has replied
 Message 265 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 3:01 AM cavediver has taken no action

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 2883 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 258 of 327 (473311)
06-28-2008 8:21 AM
Reply to: Message 253 by john6zx
06-28-2008 2:05 AM


Re: Fabric of Space-Time
We have those things we all call physical, so what is it? nothing or something? These physical things are undeniable. They are real for us. So what do you mean nothing is physical? What are you saying about force? Force is not a thing, a physical thing. Force is an influence that tends to change the state of rest a body and its uniform motion. Force is an action that acts on physical things. So force is NOT found as the irreducible part of matter. Force is what moves matter.

Again, your understanding is a good 100 years out of date. What makes something physical? When you pick up an apple, what enable you to touch it? What stops your hand passing through the apple? What makes up the mass of the apple? The answer to all these questions is 'force'*, something unphysical according to you. How do you square this with your understanding? There is not as much difference between "physical" objects and "empty space" as you'd think...

* electromagnetic force in the case of the soliidty of the apple and the hand;, and mainly the chromodynamic (strong) force in terms of giving rise to the apple's huge mass (with respect to the total of the quarks and leptons rest masses that make up the apple.)

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by john6zx, posted 06-28-2008 2:05 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 266 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 3:17 AM cavediver has taken no action

  
Son Goku
Member
Posts: 1207
From: Ireland
Joined: 07-16-2005
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 259 of 327 (473327)
06-28-2008 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 252 by john6zx
06-28-2008 1:16 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Yes this is a science thread. So if something exists in the physical universe it is going to be made of some form of energy. Everything is made of energy. That energy will be condensed and form what we call matter or it will not be as condensed and be in the form as a wavelength. Either way it is a form of energy.

I just wanted to say that this is not true. Things are not made of energy. Energy is the ability to do work. It is a quantity an object can posses. Mass, the resistence to motion, is another quantity possessed by matter. Relativity states that these two quantities are the related. However nothing says that everything is made of energy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 252 by john6zx, posted 06-28-2008 1:16 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 3:34 AM Son Goku has replied
 Message 307 by john6zx, posted 07-13-2008 4:10 AM Son Goku has taken no action

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 260 of 327 (473328)
06-28-2008 9:48 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by IamJoseph
06-28-2008 5:40 AM


Caution for IamJoseph
IaJ, Please do not post in areas which you seem to actually have achieved a state of negative knowledge.

Take a moment to consider this: "You know nothing whatsoever about this topic. Your posts are gibberish."

Junk is not welcome in serious threads.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by IamJoseph, posted 06-28-2008 5:40 AM IamJoseph has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 261 of 327 (473410)
06-29-2008 2:23 AM
Reply to: Message 255 by IamJoseph
06-28-2008 5:35 AM


Re: Fabric of Space-Time
Posted by IamJoseph.
This concerns views of the unknown, and IMHO, based on the universe being finite, everything came from nothing. Physicality is a denser cluster, whereby matter is a clumping of atoms more densely, as in iron and wood - the densest is the later, accumulated, more compressed stage. At one primal stage, all matter would have been gaseous, and before that a force, preceded by a program or some form of directive or directional inclination - namely the program had to be at least precedent or even pre-ordained. Physicality [matter] is a result or effect.

Are you speaking in tongues? What are you saying exactly?

Is energy a physical thing or not? Yes/No?

Posted by IamJoseph

A sublimity would have occured,

What is a sublimity?

A sublimity would have occured namely when a state is bypassed, as with a solid leaping over the liquid state and going directly to gas, whereby the solid 'sublimed' [towards non-corporeal or spirituality] - only this occurs in the reverse mode. Here, any action of any kind, would require some form of a triggering device, as in an external impact. And since a finite realm had no other parts preceding it, it could not have emerged from other things - excepting only a program, which acts like a thought or will to an action. So all physicality, by the reverse mode, had to once been non-existent or nothingness. I see no other way in a finite realm.

What are you trying to say with all of this double talk? Can you be more scientific? What did this communicate? Anybody want to try and decipher this?

Just say what you think, is energy a physical thing or not?

Edited by john6zx, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 255 by IamJoseph, posted 06-28-2008 5:35 AM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 271 by IamJoseph, posted 06-29-2008 8:23 AM john6zx has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 262 of 327 (473411)
06-29-2008 2:31 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by IamJoseph
06-28-2008 5:40 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by IamJoseph
Spacetime is a quotient, namely an equation which represents the interaction of space and time.

Quotient and equation are man-made terms and concepts, is that what you are saying spacetime is, a man-made concept?

So is spacetime a physical thing? Yes/No?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by IamJoseph, posted 06-28-2008 5:40 AM IamJoseph has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 263 of 327 (473412)
06-29-2008 2:33 AM
Reply to: Message 256 by IamJoseph
06-28-2008 5:40 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by IamJoseph
Spacetime is a quotient, namely an equation which represents the interaction of space and time.

Quotient and equation are man-made terms and concepts, is that what you are saying spacetime is, a man-made concept?

So is spacetime a physical thing? Yes/No?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 256 by IamJoseph, posted 06-28-2008 5:40 AM IamJoseph has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 264 of 327 (473415)
06-29-2008 2:47 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by cavediver
06-28-2008 7:57 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by john6zx

The term space is used to describe that area of nothing between objects. That area between you and what you are observing, that is space. Space is caused by looking out from a point. The concept of space comes about from the idea that one perceives through something when looking out from our point of view. There are objects that exist other than where we are viewing from, and by looking out to these items we create the idea of space...
...Space as far as I am Concerned has no shape because it is not a thing? Space is the area between objects, we as humans gave that area a name..... SPACE.

Response by cavediver.

Yes, well done. You have grasped the concept of space that most had from 3000 years ago to about 100 years ago. You've only 100 years to go to catch up. It can't be that hard...

Given that your understanding is so out of date, it seems a liitle superfluous trying to sort out the rest of your post line by line. If you think of an ocean as space, and waves on that ocean as matter or stuff, then you're not too far off our current understanding.

I say that the term space does not describe a physical thing.

You say that my understanding is out of date. So what is space? Are you saying that it is a physical thing? Yes/No?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by cavediver, posted 06-28-2008 7:57 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 268 by cavediver, posted 06-29-2008 5:44 AM john6zx has replied

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 265 of 327 (473420)
06-29-2008 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 257 by cavediver
06-28-2008 7:57 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by john6zx

What type of physical, observational data do you have that space is being bent? Einstein never showed physical proof, so that whole spacetime thing is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

cavediver response.

I'm sorry, but GR is one of the two most successfully tested theories ever devised by mankind - admittedly not all of the evidence was gathered by Einstein himself, but does that matter???

If you are interested in this evidence, you may want to look into

Advance of the Perihelion of Mercury
Gravitational wave emission from binary neutron stars
Pound-Rebka experiment
Effect of GR on the GPS sattelite system
Gravitational lensing
Existence of black hole-like objects in galactic nuclei (including the centre of our own Galaxy)

That's a start - let me know if you find any problems with any of these.

WHAT TYPE OF SCIENTIFIC PHYSICAL, OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE DO YOU HAVE THAT SPACETIME IS A PHYSICAL THING? What reference emperically and precicsely describes spacetime as a physical thing?

If spacetime is a physical thing, then, in what does it exist? What is the form in which this object, thing exists as? All things are in some form of energy, so spacetime is in what form?

Just tell this whole form that you think that spacetime is a physical thing and show undeniable evidence of this. Give a scientific reference or definition that states that spacetime is a physical thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by cavediver, posted 06-28-2008 7:57 AM cavediver has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 266 of 327 (473421)
06-29-2008 3:17 AM
Reply to: Message 258 by cavediver
06-28-2008 8:21 AM


Re: Fabric of Space-Time
Posted by john6zx

We have those things we all call physical, so what is it? nothing or something? These physical things are undeniable. They are real for us. So what do you mean nothing is physical? What are you saying about force? Force is not a thing, a physical thing. Force is an influence that tends to change the state of rest a body and its uniform motion. Force is an action that acts on physical things. So force is NOT found as the irreducible part of matter. Force is what moves matter.

Response by cavediver.

Again, your understanding is a good 100 years out of date. What makes something physical? When you pick up an apple, what enable you to touch it? What stops your hand passing through the apple? What makes up the mass of the apple? The answer to all these questions is 'force'*, something unphysical according to you. How do you square this with your understanding? There is not as much difference between "physical" objects and "empty space" as you'd think...

* electromagnetic force in the case of the soliidty of the apple and the hand;, and mainly the chromodynamic (strong) force in terms of giving rise to the apple's huge mass (with respect to the total of the quarks and leptons rest masses that make up the apple.)

So you say that force is a physical thing. Show me a definition or reference that states force is a physical thing. There are those things that are considered physical objects, and then there is a thing that exists that moves or motivates these physical objects. There is the object and there is that which moves the object, two different things. Are you willing to say that force is a physical thing? If so, Just give some kind of evidence that supports your viewpoint.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 258 by cavediver, posted 06-28-2008 8:21 AM cavediver has taken no action

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 267 of 327 (473422)
06-29-2008 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 259 by Son Goku
06-28-2008 9:33 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by john6zx.

Yes this is a science thread. So if something exists in the physical universe it is going to be made of some form of energy. Everything is made of energy. That energy will be condensed and form what we call matter or it will not be as condensed and be in the form as a wavelength. Either way it is a form of energy.

I just wanted to say that this is not true. Things are not made of energy. Energy is the ability to do work. It is a quantity an object can posses. Mass, the resistence to motion, is another quantity possessed by matter. Relativity states that these two quantities are the related. However nothing says that everything is made of energy.

O.K. So what are physical things made of?

Matter is the condensation of energy. The more energy condenses, the less space it occupies and the more solid it becomes. Energy becomes matter if condensed. Matter becomes energy if dispersed.

Energy=mass times the speed of light squared.

Tell me what you think matter is made of. You can not consider matter without also considering energy. But go ahead, tell me what matter is.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 259 by Son Goku, posted 06-28-2008 9:33 AM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by Son Goku, posted 06-29-2008 10:25 AM john6zx has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 2883 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 268 of 327 (473424)
06-29-2008 5:44 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by john6zx
06-29-2008 2:47 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Are you saying that it is a physical thing? Yes/No?

As I pointed out, you have an outdated erroneous definition of "physical", so what are you going to gain by an answer to this question? You think that physical means "having substance", "tangible", etc, which are reasonable definitons for Newtonian mechanics and gravity. And space in a Newtonian sense is obviously not "physical". But we are talking about space-time, something far beyond Newtonian concepts, and it is not something that can be described as being, or not being, something (i.e. "physical") that only relates to Newtonian concepts.

So, yes, space-time is physical, but to understand this, you need to understand what physical means. In physics, we describe everything in terms of fields. Matter (electrons, quarks, etc) are one type of field, forces (photons, gluons, etc) are another type of field, and space-time (which gives rise to the sense of distance between objects in the Universe) is another type of field. These fields are so similar that we think that they are different manifestations of just one field. So matter, forces, and space-time are all physical.

If so, Just give some kind of evidence that supports your viewpoint.

In my last few posts I have given you more than enough experiments and key-words for you to Google and Wikipedia your way through this information to satisfy yourself. Or you can pick up any decent advanced graduate particle-physics/relativity text book and start learning properly, assuming you have a suitable grounding in the undergard maths and physics.

Feel free to ask any questions regarding this, but if you are going to simply repeat your erroneous assertions, such as

Space as far as I am Concerned has no shape because it is not a thing

then I am going to ignore you, or at least offer you my (not particularly competitive) rates for teaching annoying students advanced physics...

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 2:47 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 269 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 6:55 AM cavediver has replied

  
john6zx
Member (Idle past 4061 days)
Posts: 66
Joined: 01-27-2007


Message 269 of 327 (473432)
06-29-2008 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 268 by cavediver
06-29-2008 5:44 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Posted by john6zx
Are you saying that it (space, spacetime) is a physical thing? Yes/No?

Response by cavediver:

As I pointed out, you have an outdated erroneous definition of "physical", so what are you going to gain by an answer to this question? You think that physical means "having substance", "tangible", etc, which are reasonable definitions for Newtonian mechanics and gravity. And space in a Newtonian sense is obviously not "physical". But we are talking about space-time, something far beyond Newtonian concepts, and it is not something that can be described as being, or not being, something (i.e. "physical") that only relates to Newtonian concepts.

I have not given a definition of physical. You are putting words into my mouth by stating what I think the definition of physical is.

Did I give a definition of physical? Yes/No?

Here is what you said I think the definition of physical is:
"You think that physical means "having substance", "tangible", etc, which are reasonable definitions for Newtonian mechanics and gravity."

That definition IS a reasonable definition for the term physical. You say that this definition is erroneous and outdated. REALLY! Have you looked in a dictionary lately? Here I will help you.

DEFINITIONS OF PHYSICAL FROM DICTIONARY.COM

Phys·i·cal /ˈfɪzɪkəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fiz-i-kuhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. of or pertaining to the body: physical exercise.
2. of or pertaining to that which is material: the physical universe; the physical sciences.
3. noting or pertaining to the properties of matter and energy other than those peculiar to living matter.
4. pertaining to the physical sciences, esp. physics.
5. carnal; sexual: a physical attraction.
6. tending to touch, hug, pat, etc.; physically demonstrative: a physical person.
7. requiring, characterized by, or liking rough physical contact or strenuous physical activity: Football is a physical sport.

Physical

adjective
1. involving the body as distinguished from the mind or spirit; "physical exercise"; "physical suffering"; "was sloppy about everything but her physical appearance" [ant: mental]
2. relating to the sciences dealing with matter and energy; especially physics; "physical sciences"; "physical laws"
3. having substance or material existence; perceptible to the senses; "a physical manifestation"; "surrounded by tangible objects"
4. according with material things or natural laws (other than those peculiar to living matter); "a reflex response to physical stimuli"
5. characterized by energetic bodily activity; "a very physical dance performance"
6. impelled by physical force especially against resistance; "forcible entry"; "a real cop would get physical"; "strong-arm tactics" [syn: forcible]
7. concerned with material things; "physical properties"; "the physical characteristics of the earth"; "the physical size of a computer

Are you saying that these definitions of physical are erroneous and outdated? These are some correct and current definitions of physical, and these are the definitions of physical that I am referring to when I ask you if you think that space, spacetime are physical things. What definition of physical are you referring to?

You now have a few examples of the correct definition of physical, so tell me, DO YOU THINK THAT SPACE,SPACETIME IS A REAL PHYSICAL THING?

I mean every word that I say in that question. You can look up every word in my question to you in any dictionary and then you will know what exactly I am saying.

You seem to think that spacetime is a thing that exist in the physical universe. So all you need to do is show some evidence of this. In what way does this thing exist? What makes it a thing?

If spacetime is a thing, in what way is it a thing? I think I have stated my question in a way as to avoid any further confusion.

You say it exists. I say, exists in what way. What makes it what it is? Break it down if you have to. Example: Spacetime is made of space and time, and then go on to show how space is a thing that exist as some sort of energy. Then go on and show how time exists as some sort of energy. Or something like that. I am sure that you get the idea.

Thank You

john6zx

Edited by john6zx, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by cavediver, posted 06-29-2008 5:44 AM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 270 by cavediver, posted 06-29-2008 7:08 AM john6zx has replied
 Message 279 by onifre, posted 06-30-2008 11:59 AM john6zx has replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 2883 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 270 of 327 (473434)
06-29-2008 7:08 AM
Reply to: Message 269 by john6zx
06-29-2008 6:55 AM


Re: the gravity of general relativity
Unfortunately, you show no interest in learning anything and so I have nothing more to say to you. Enjoy wallowing in your own ignorance :)

If anyone else is so stupid as to think that they can debate advanced science topics using everyday dictionary defintions, please think twice before posting...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by john6zx, posted 06-29-2008 6:55 AM john6zx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 308 by john6zx, posted 07-13-2008 4:42 AM cavediver has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022