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

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #376193

Re: rotation

Cross-posted to 2 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

Am 13.02.2016 06:25, schrieb Thomas Heger:

>>> Everything you wrote is a complete fabrication and has NOTHING WHATEVER
>>> to do with rotation or light cones (ostensibly what you are attempting
>>> to write about).
>>>
>>> Why do you bother to just make stuff up and pretend it is true? What's
>>> the point?
>>
>> I did not write about light-cones, but about black holes.
>>
>> I assume a physical reality of spacetime, where the axis of time could
>> turn in some regions into directions, which other observers regard as
>> spatial.
>>
>> See from the back a timeline points into the future and drags the
>> observer and (everything else) with it.
>>
>> This is a picture and similar to what the term 'black hole' means.
>>
>> Seen from the other side (or: time-reverted) a black hole is similar to
>> what we call 'big bang'.
>>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_cone
>
> It is this picture:
>
> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/World_line.svg/300px-World_line.svg.png
>
>
> What we see (as observers) is what is happening along our own past light
> cone.
>
> The cone itself is a reduction by one dimension, which we had to keep in
> mind.
>
> The cone has 2+1 dimension, meaning actually 3+1.
>
> So we need to multiply it with three, since there are there combinations
> of 2 out of 3 axis (xy, yz, xz).
>
> Actually meant are nested spheres, which are nested in time (older the
> further away).
>
> This is actually what we call 'universe'.
>
> The point 'here and now' is actually the observer.
>
> So to any observer belongs his own universe, since that is actually his
> view about a certain reality, we cannot see directly.
>
> His view and his now and his here are in fact comoving (with him/her).
>
> This view is - of course - not really real, but an impression someone
> has. But everybody has one, but about a different universe.
>
> Also the axis of time is unique to any observer, since it is actually
> his own path through space and time, which is different for everybody.
>
> Now we view upon regions, where time does not flow into the same
> direction as our own timeline points, than we would also see the
> corresponding space distorted.
>
> In case of a black hole this space would shrink and the bent axis of
> time would drag us with it, hence would let us see a different universe,
> which belongs to that now different axis of time.
>
> In the opposite case the axis of time points towards us, hence there
> seem to pop things out of nowhere. There had been there before, but in
> this invisible space, which is not along our own past light cone.
>
> And that is the same as a black hole, but only with the axis of time
> pointing towards us (a 'white hole').
>

Since I have made extensive use of this interpretation of relativity, I 
would like to add a link to my 'book' about this subject.

I regard it as important, since my interpretation would also allow a 
different understanding of matter and fields.

My 'book' is (still) not really a book, but a google.doc.presentation. 
You find it here:

https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6

I have stopped working on it in 2009, since nobody took any notice and I 
had failed to convince someone, even if I still believe, my ideas are 
actually correct.


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