• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Disproof of General Relativity

questfortruth

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Axiom: any spacetime local place, if the curvature in this local place is finite, can exist.

Fact: there are geodesic trajectories, which are abrupt. Even photons do vanish. Hereby the curvature of spacetime at the place of abrupt end is finite: [email protected]

Thus, the GR is wrong.

Fact: there are many published papers about geodesics, but never the abrupt ones were reported: it is global conspiracy.
 

Attachments

  • BlackHHole.pdf
    159.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Altfish

Altfish

Veteran Member
questfortruth said:
Axiom: any spacetime local place, if the curvature in this local place is finite, can exist.

Fact: there are geodesic trajectories, which are abrupt. Even photons do vanish. Hereby the curvature of spacetime at the place of abrupt end is finite: [email protected]

Thus, the GR is wrong.

Fact: there are many published papers about geodesics, but never the abrupt ones were reported: it is global conspiracy.
Click to expand...
No, it is correct but has limits.
Like Newton's Laws - Einstein took them further.
 
C

Cloverfield

Member
questfortruth said:
I am just telling you the truth. Remember Matrix two pills! I took red one.
Click to expand...
FYI , I've rewrote physics and the understanding of physics. Sorry to say this to you , your notion is not presented well and is "antique" science these days. Additionally I took a bottle of pills and they were every colour of the rainbow.
Do you have any useful science to add ?
More modern !
 
W

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
GR is useful but it is not complete. For example, the center of our sun will have its space-time reference contracted relative to its surface. In the center of the black hole time essentially appears to stop.

But on the other hand, if we look at how matter is behaving, the fastest frequencies of matter; fusion, occur on the core of the sun, where time is supposed to run the slowest. Matter is speeding up in terms of active or dynamic time-frequency parameters.

There are two time vectors, one for reference and the other for the dynamics of tangible matter. These are going in the opposite direction, with GR only dealing with one time vector. Newtonian deals with the other time vector.

Gravity is connected to acceleration. Acceleration is two parts time and one part distance; d/t/t. (D,t) is space time, while the second time (t) of acceleration, is connected to newtonian principles, where matter speeds up.
 
Brickjectivity

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
General Relativity to me seems pretty good as a working theory, and it can be improved if it ever stops being useful.
 
C

Cloverfield

Member
wellwisher said:
GR is useful but it is not complete. For example, the center of our sun will have its space-time reference contracted relative to its surface. In the center of the black hole time essentially appears to stop.

But on the other hand, if we look at how matter is behaving, the fastest frequencies of matter; fusion, occur on the core of the sun, where time is supposed to run the slowest. Matter is speeding up in terms of active or dynamic time-frequency parameters.

There are two time vectors, one for reference and the other for the dynamics of tangible matter. These are going in the opposite direction, with GR only dealing with one time vector. Newtonian deals with the other time vector.

Gravity is connected to acceleration. Acceleration is two parts time and one part distance; d/t/t. (D,t) is space time, while the second time (t) of acceleration, is connected to newtonian principles, where matter speeds up.
Click to expand...
Quite clearly your first mistake is the concept of time. Time is neither a dimension or an entity . Time is a human construct that's purpose is to synchronise our everyday lives and record the aging process. There is no future time or a past time , now is constant and things age relative to now but only in a sense of measurement and recorded history . The geometrical position of matter changes in the universe but there is no real time . There is future positions and past positions but there is no future time or past time , just recorded memories of events.
 
`mud

`mud

Just old
Premium Member
All this convoluted circular discussion evades me !

If the Cosmos is expanding outwardly, at what speed is it going ?
And....more interesting, where is, `the Cosmos`, going,
into what nothingness ? In `infinite` directions ?
One can't count the vectors, can one ?
 
`mud

`mud

Just old
Premium Member
As to time.....there is no `now`,
there is no future, yet to happen.
There is no past, only memories.
Kiss the `now` goodbye.
 
C

Cloverfield

Member
'mud said:
All this convoluted circular discussion evades me !

If the Cosmos is expanding outwardly, at what speed is it going ?
And....more interesting, where is, `the Cosmos`, going,
into what nothingness ? In `infinite` directions ?
One can't count the vectors, can one ?
Click to expand...

Basic physics logic , for something to expand it needs sufficient surrounding space to expand into . We can assume with simple logic there has to be a space beyond our visual universe but infinity would be a supposition .
As for speed , that is a diverse question as speed is defined d/t but in essence it is no different than v/d, where v is velocity. I think if we consider light travelling a Plank Length , from a spatial point to an adjoining spatial point , it would be an almost instantaneous speed . However the apparent thought is your can't travel above the speed of light but I'm sure that's just a perception and ones own interpretation.
 
`mud

`mud

Just old
Premium Member
I just get caught in the spider-web of `expanding` into `nothingness`.
Getting `sucked` into a `void` that doesn't really exist !
That would try to explain `infinity` doesn't it ?
What would provide the inertia for the added velocity ?
Ahhh...infinity, the `cliff` over which the Cosmos `falls`,
in infinite directions, Planck you say, in infinite accelerations ?
I'm still confused !
 
questfortruth

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Altfish said:
No. I'm not a physicist, I wouldn't think about trying to disprove such a thing.
I also accepted that the Theory of GR is limited, that's when quantum physics kicks in - and as the quote goes, "If you think you understand quantum physics ... you don't"
Click to expand...
No need to go Quantum: curvature is finite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top