Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #376049

Re: rotation

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Am 11.02.2016 14:51, schrieb Muddy Shoes:
> Thomas Heger wrote:
>
>> A black hole is (in my own lingo): 'seeing time from the back, if the
>> axis of time is turned away'.
>
> Absolutely NOT. That's the point, under the event horizon you cannot
> observe anything, much less time going reverse. Moreover, a singularity,
> the black hole must be described by, makes anything including time
> completely nonsensical. Learn your physics, before coming up with
> conflicting statements as the you did above.


a light-cone is a 2+1 simplification of a 3+1 spacetime-diagram. This is 
meant as reduced representation of 3 space dimensions and on time 
dimension.

Since spacetime is a combination of space and time, the light-cone is 
actually part of a  space, where this 2+1 space needs to be  'multiplied 
by three'.

The two dimensions of 2+1 can come in three combinations (xy, yz, xz). 
So we need to multiply this picture by three.

With this we would also multiply the axis of time.

This is a little tricky, but it is a hint, that our world of 3+1 
dimensions is our own view on something of higher dimensionality.

Our view is kind of 'cut' and depending on our won state of movement.

Now guess you would move into another direction (than me): you still 
would expect to see some sort of universe.

So to any timeline belongs a universe and this is actually a view an 
arbitrary observer has onto something called 'spacetime'.

This timeline is unique for this specific observer, hence we have many 
possible timeline, though in any particular case only one.

If now your timeline and mine have an angle in respect to each other, we 
would not agree about the term 'space': Your space could shrink to 
nothing, but I would not see anything interesting at all, because your 
space is not mine and mine does not shrink.

Now time-revert 'to shrink' and you have 'to expand'. Time-revert a 
black hole and you get a (the ?) big bang.

Now lets assume, that both ways are actually possible, thou only visible 
under certain circumstance.

Than we could compare a black hole to a white hole and this to the big-bang.


TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

rotation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-09 12:34 -0800
  rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 14:37 -0800
    rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 14:46 -0800
      rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-09 15:18 -0800
    Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-10 07:23 +0100
      Re: rotation Heiðr Einherjar <einherjar@notformail.org> - 2016-02-10 16:01 +0000
        Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-10 09:40 -0800
          Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-10 09:46 -0800
        Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-10 09:42 -0800
          Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-10 10:29 -0800
            Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-14 08:13 -0800
              Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-14 08:25 -0800
        Re: rotation David Fuller <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-02-10 09:53 -0800
  Re: rotation jamesl51165@gmail.com - 2016-02-09 14:50 -0800
  Re: rotation jamesl51165@gmail.com - 2016-02-10 17:17 -0800
    Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-11 06:22 +0100
      Re: rotation Muddy Shoes <shoes@muddyshoes.org> - 2016-02-11 13:51 +0000
        Re: rotation Muddy Shoes <shoes@muddyshoes.org> - 2016-02-11 14:37 +0000
        Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-11 22:05 +0100
          Re: rotation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-02-11 23:02 -0600
            Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-12 21:23 +0100
              Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-13 06:25 +0100
                Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-14 05:03 +0100
                Re: rotation benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 23:57 -0500
                Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-14 15:50 +0100
                Re: rotation Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-02-16 08:48 +0100
  Re: rotation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-02-10 19:30 -0600
    Re: rotation RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-12 22:34 -0800
      Re: rotation Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-02-13 21:25 -0600

csiph-web