I challenge the world , bring it on!

[Woberts]

It worries me that this thread has been given so much attention. I say just let it die.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It worries me that this thread has been given so much attention. I say just let it die.

I am looking for recruits for the Directly Downwind Faster Than the Wind thread.

 

[atanu]

Spatial slices of spacetime are determined by being locally at rest. We assume space is isotropic and homogeneous. That is sufficient to anchor the coordinates to the extent required.

Will you say that the space-time slices constitute provisional frame or absolute frame?

 

[Polymath257]

Will you say that the space-time slices constitute provisional frame or absolute frame?

They are the frame in which the background radiation has no dipole moment.That picks out one frame at each point. In that sense, and only that sense, it is absolute. But, objects moving with respect to that frame have a different notion of which points in spacetime are 'now'.

 

[james blunt]

In this analogy, space is the surface of the balloon and time is the *radius* of the balloon.

So, in the analogy, there is a two-dimensional 'space' that is curved (in fact, spherical). Later times are represented by larger radii.

One nice aspect of this analogy: it shows that the most reasonable answer to the question 'what is the universe expanding into?' is very simple: 'it expands into the future'.

This is quite literally true in the typical formulation.

Hello Polly, I must point out a error in your post, you say the Universe is expanding into the future, that would be incorrect, there is no future. If you are let's say 10 light years away from me, you are occupying the same now I am occupying , you are in the present.

 

[Polymath257]

Hello Polly, I must point out a error in your post, you say the Universe is expanding into the future, that would be incorrect, there is no future. If you are let's say 10 light years away from me, you are occupying the same now I am occupying , you are in the present.

Except we know that may not be the case. If we are moving with respect to each other, for example, there might be points I consider to be 'now', but that you consider to be 'past' or 'future'.

This is *why* only spacetime makes sense and not just space or time individually. The concept of 'now' depends on motion (and gravitational field, by the way).

 

[james blunt]

In this analogy, space is the surface of the balloon and time is the *radius* of the balloon.

So, in the analogy, there is a two-dimensional 'space' that is curved (in fact, spherical). Later times are represented by larger radii.

One nice aspect of this analogy: it shows that the most reasonable answer to the question 'what is the universe expanding into?' is very simple: 'it expands into the future'.

This is quite literally true in the typical formulation.

Also sir , space is not the surface of the balloon, the ''particles'' are the ''surface'' are the balloon, the balloons surface is representation of EMR sir. The EMR boundary that is relative to size of a body.

 

[james blunt]

Except we know that may not be the case. If we are moving with respect to each other, for example, there might be points I consider to be 'now', but that you consider to be 'past' or 'future'.

This is *why* only spacetime makes sense and not just space or time individually. The concept of 'now' depends on motion (and gravitational field, by the way).

You are misunderstanding it sir, there is no past or future time, there is past and future geometrical positions.

 

[Polymath257]

Also sir , space is not the surface of the balloon, the ''particles'' are the ''surface'' are the balloon, the balloons surface is representation of EMR sir. The EMR boundary that is relative to size of a body.

Nope. Not in this analogy. E&M has nothing to do with it at this point.

Oh, by the way, there are other ways to detect things than via light. For example, sound, gravitational waves, etc. Light isn't required.

 

[Polymath257]

You are misunderstanding it sir, there is no past or future time, there is past and future geometrical positions.

Nope. There is spacetime and both past and future light cones. Spacetime is the basic concept.

 

[james blunt]

It worries me that this thread has been given so much attention. I say just let it die.

Interesting how people try to stop the truth.

 

[james blunt]

Nope. There is spacetime and both past and future light cones. Spacetime is the basic concept.

Sir, you are doing it again and relying on your memory of education. This is the wrong semantics sir, I have just give you the correct semantics.

 

[james blunt]

Nope. Not in this analogy. E&M has nothing to do with it at this point.

Oh, by the way, there are other ways to detect things than via light. For example, sound, gravitational waves, etc. Light isn't required.

Sir, there is no edge of our universe, you are not understanding the semantics correctly.

 

[james blunt]

Sir, I will point out Einstein was a one-way worker and thinker, it takes approx 8 minutes for a photon to travel from the sun to earth. Yes we see the sun in its past geometrical position .

However , that is one-way thinking, what about

Simultaneous a photon travels from the sun to earth and from the earth to the sun, do the time maths sir for that , when do we see each other?

start time A: 00:00:00

start time B: 00:00:00

 

[james blunt]

Yes sir, we see each other at the exact same time because c is constant.

 

[Polymath257]

Sir, you are doing it again and relying on your memory of education. This is the wrong semantics sir, I have just give you the correct semantics.

Nope. I rely on my understanding. Your semantics is misleading and incorrect.

 

[Polymath257]

Sir, there is no edge of our universe, you are not understanding the semantics correctly.

I didn't say there is. The surface of a sphere has no edge. That's why we can't fall off the earth.

But, even though it has no edge, the surface of the earth is finite in extent.

 

[james blunt]

Nearly all that you have learnt about science sir is incorrect. That is why they ban me because through Gods ''eyes'', I can s how it. God is real, I never believed it until I was guided to God .

God taught me science so I could see God, God work sin strange ways indeed. 10 years or more to understand God.

 

[james blunt]

Nope. I rely on my understanding. Your semantics is misleading and incorrect.

NO sir do the time math.

 

[Polymath257]

Sir, I will point out Einstein was a one-way worker and thinker, it takes approx 8 minutes for a photon to travel from the sun to earth. Yes we see the sun in its past geometrical position .

However , that is one-way thinking, what about

Simultaneous a photon travels from the sun to earth and from the earth to the sun, do the time maths sir for that , when do we see each other?

start time A: 00:00:00

start time B: 00:00:00

Am I on the earth and you on the sun?