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

Groups > sci.physics > #727882 > unrolled thread

Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity sam.wormley@gmail.com - 2019-02-18 09:23 -0800
    Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 13:21 -0500
      Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 19:03 +0000
      Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity pnalsing@gmail.com - 2019-02-18 18:11 -0800
        Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-18 22:51 -0600
          Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 10:03 -0500
            Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-19 10:16 -0600
              Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 16:10 -0500
                Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Serg Io <invvalid@invalid.com> - 2019-02-19 16:33 -0600
            Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2019-02-19 14:21 -0800
    Truthiness isn't that important. Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-02-18 13:11 -0800
      Re: Truthiness isn't that important. "Sir Gregory Hall,  Esq." <greghall@yacht_maester.fake> - 2019-02-18 16:15 -0500
        Re: Truthiness isn't that important. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 14:16 -0700
          Re: Truthiness isn't that important. onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2019-02-18 22:28 +0000
            Re: Truthiness isn't that important. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 15:42 -0700
              Re: Truthiness isn't that important. onion@anon.invalid (Mr On!on) - 2019-02-18 23:00 +0000
                Re: Truthiness isn't that important. % <persent@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 16:46 -0700
            Re: Truthiness isn't that important. Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2019-02-18 20:23 -0800
      Re: Truthiness isn't that important. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 21:32 +0000
        Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ? Jeff-Relf.Me  @. - 2019-02-18 17:23 -0800
          Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ? benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2019-02-18 22:32 -0500
          Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ? moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2019-02-19 03:50 +0000
          Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ? Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 14:54 +0000
      Re: Truthiness isn't that important. Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2019-02-19 09:56 -0800
    Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Enes Richard <pies_na_teorie@vp.pl> - 2019-02-19 00:25 -0800
    Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Enes Richard <pies_na_teorie@vp.pl> - 2019-02-22 06:03 -0800
      Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity sam.wormley@gmail.com - 2019-02-22 06:06 -0800
      Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity sam.wormley@gmail.com - 2019-02-22 06:15 -0800
        Re: Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity Enes Richard <pies_na_teorie@vp.pl> - 2019-02-23 04:40 -0800

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#728007 — Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?

On 2/18/2019 8:23 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me@. wrote:
> Mr. Odd to me:
>>> QM and GR contradict each other.
>>
>> Not really, no.
> 
> Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?
> Quantum Mechanics or General relativity ?
> 
> Answer that, and Stockholm has a million dollars for you.
> 
No big bang! No million bucks!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728011 — Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?

Jeff-Relf.Me  @. writes:

>Mr. Odd to me:
>> > QM and GR contradict each other.
>> 
>> Not really, no. 

>Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?
>Quantum Mechanics or General relativity ?

Some process which matches GR at one scale and matches QM at a different
scale, but is unknown under those conditions.

>Answer that, and Stockholm has a million dollars for you.

True dat.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728067 — Re: Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?

<Jeff-Relf.Me  @.> wrote:
> Mr. Odd to me:
>>> QM and GR contradict each other.
>> 
>> Not really, no. 
> 
> Which prevailed at the start of the Big Bang ?
> Quantum Mechanics or General relativity ?

Neither one! 

The search for the third option is what’s going on now. 

> 
> Answer that, and Stockholm has a million dollars for you.
> 



-- 
Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728098 — Re: Truthiness isn't that important.

On Monday, February 18, 2019 at 4:11:21 PM UTC-5, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
> > There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of
> > Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. 
> > The theories remain fruitful tools of physics.
> > 
> > Oh, and guess what -- the same can be said of the quantum mechanics. 
> 
> Yet they contradict each other.

In what manner?
At quantum scales, gravitational effects are infinitesimal.
On cosmic scales, quantum mechanical effects are infinitesimal.

The do meet at black holes. That border will lead to a new,
better theory, but right now nothing is contradictory.
> 
> The best you can do is:
> 
>   - Find it useful ( in its domain ).
>   - Try to Falsify it ( in its domain ).

Exactly right. so how does that prove contradictions exist?
> 
> For example, the notion of "mass" ( rest mass ) is useful.
> The notion doesn't have to be entirely accurate ( nothing is at rest ),
> it just has to be _ useful.   Truthiness isn't that important.
> 
> Most people only love, comic book, sci-fi "physics";
> they've no use for the genuine article, real physics.

And which group are you in?
Ed

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728047

W dniu poniedziałek, 18 lutego 2019 18:23:30 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
> 
> There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. The theories remain fruitful tools of physics.
> 
> Oh, and guess what -- the same can be said of the quantum mechanics. 
> 
> <smiling>
> 
> Regards to all.

There is a precedent that makes us doubt the correctness of GTR.

These are the rights of view (perspective), not to overthrow,  
because only in this way (relatively) an observer can view the  
surroundings. Reality is different (not relative), the farther  
the more ... With GTR it may be similar.

Caricature ;)
http://fotoforum.gazeta.pl/zdjecie/2886623,2,2,General-Theory-of-Relativity--Ogolna-Teoria-Wzglednosci.html

QM does not meet the basic scientific condition, there are no  
3D geometric models ...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728691

W dniu poniedziałek, 18 lutego 2019 18:23:30 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
> 
> There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. 
(...)
Could it be?

"This situation is changed by the announced (... in 2106) first  
direct detection of gravitational waves. Two detectors 3002 km  
distant measured the signal with a relative delay of about 7  
milliseconds. If the direction of the wave propagation was  
parallel to the line connecting these detectors, we would get  
the speed (3002km) / (7ms) ≃1.4c. Taking into account the  
possibility of lack of parallelism, we find that 1.4c is  
currently the upper experimental limit on the speed of  
propagation of the observed signal."

https://zapytajfizyka.fuw.edu.pl/pytania/predkosc-rozszerzania-sie-wszechswiata-oraz-propagacji-grawitacji/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728692

On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:03:31 AM UTC-6, Enes Richard wrote:
> W dniu poniedziałek, 18 lutego 2019 18:23:30 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> > Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
> > 
> > There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. 
> (...)
> Could it be?
> 
> "This situation is changed by the announced (... in 2106) first  
> direct detection of gravitational waves. Two detectors 3002 km  
> distant measured the signal with a relative delay of about 7  
> milliseconds. If the direction of the wave propagation was  
> parallel to the line connecting these detectors, we would get  
> the speed (3002km) / (7ms) ≃1.4c. Taking into account the  
> possibility of lack of parallelism, we find that 1.4c is  
> currently the upper experimental limit on the speed of  
> propagation of the observed signal."
> 
> https://zapytajfizyka.fuw.edu.pl/pytania/predkosc-rozszerzania-sie-wszechswiata-oraz-propagacji-grawitacji/



              ##                                      # 
              ##                                      # 
              ######################################### 
              ######################################### 
              ##                                 ###### 
              ##                             ########## 
                                           ############ 
                                        ##############
                                      #############
                                   ############# 
                               ##############
                             #############
                          ##############
                        #############
                     ##############
                 #############                        # 
               #############                          # 
              ######################################### 
              ######################################### 
                                                      # 
                                                        
                      ######## 
                   ###############
                 ################## 
                #####################
               ####               ####
               ##                   ## 
              ##                     ##
              ##                     ##
              ##                    ###
               ##                   ## 
               ####               ####
                #####################
                 ################## 
                   ###############
                      ######## 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728694

On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:03:31 AM UTC-6, Enes Richard wrote:
> W dniu poniedziałek, 18 lutego 2019 18:23:30 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> > Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
> > 
> > There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. 
> (...)
> Could it be?
> 
> "This situation is changed by the announced (... in 2106) first  
> direct detection of gravitational waves. Two detectors 3002 km  
> distant measured the signal with a relative delay of about 7  
> milliseconds. If the direction of the wave propagation was  
> parallel to the line connecting these detectors, we would get  
> the speed (3002km) / (7ms) ≃1.4c. Taking into account the  
> possibility of lack of parallelism, we find that 1.4c is  
> currently the upper experimental limit on the speed of  
> propagation of the observed signal."
> 



On August 17th, 2017, the Advanced Laser Interferometer
Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) registered tiny ripples
in spacetime, produced by a pair of frantically orbiting
neutron stars right before they collided (GW170817). A Gamma
Ray Burst was observed at the same time from the same region
of the sky.

The excitement is fully justified--observing both
gravitational waves and electromagnetic radiation from the
catastrophic coalescence of two hyper-dense neutron stars
provides astronomers with a wealth of new, detailed
information.

The event also provides a limit on the difference between the
speed of light and that of gravity. Assuming the first photons
were emitted between zero and ten seconds after peak
gravitational wave emission, the difference between the speeds
of gravitational and electromagnetic waves, vGW - vEM, is
constrained to between -3x10-15 and +7x10-16 times the speed
of light, which improves on the previous estimate by about 14
orders of magnitude.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#728807

W dniu piątek, 22 lutego 2019 15:15:54 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> On Friday, February 22, 2019 at 8:03:31 AM UTC-6, Enes Richard wrote:
> > W dniu poniedziałek, 18 lutego 2019 18:23:30 UTC+1 użytkownik sam.w...@gmail.com napisał:
> > > Comment of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
> > > 
> > > There has NEVER been an observation that contradicts a prediction of Einstein's Special and General Theories of Relativity. 
> > (...)
> > Could it be?
> > 
> > "This situation is changed by the announced (... in 2106) first  
> > direct detection of gravitational waves. Two detectors 3002 km  
> > distant measured the signal with a relative delay of about 7  
> > milliseconds. If the direction of the wave propagation was  
> > parallel to the line connecting these detectors, we would get  
> > the speed (3002km) / (7ms) ≃1.4c. Taking into account the  
> > possibility of lack of parallelism, we find that 1.4c is  
> > currently the upper experimental limit on the speed of  
> > propagation of the observed signal."
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> On August 17th, 2017, the Advanced Laser Interferometer
> Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO) registered tiny ripples
> in spacetime, produced by a pair of frantically orbiting
> neutron stars right before they collided (GW170817). A Gamma
> Ray Burst was observed at the same time from the same region
> of the sky.
> 
> The excitement is fully justified--observing both
> gravitational waves and electromagnetic radiation from the
> catastrophic coalescence of two hyper-dense neutron stars
> provides astronomers with a wealth of new, detailed
> information.
> 
> The event also provides a limit on the difference between the
> speed of light and that of gravity. Assuming the first photons
> were emitted between zero and ten seconds after peak
> gravitational wave emission, the difference between the speeds
> of gravitational and electromagnetic waves, vGW - vEM, is
> constrained to between -3x10-15 and +7x10-16 times the speed
> of light, which improves on the previous estimate by about 14
> orders of magnitude.

Perhaps the direction of the signal was near  
symmetrical between R_L ...?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web