Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

Science > Physics > Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

LINK TO THIS PAGE

rating : 0 | 0

Page 1 of 1

Topic:	Science > Physics
User:	"Perfectly Innocent"
Date:	18 Aug 2003 10:03:09 AM
Object:	Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity

The Special Theory of Relativity, we teach our students, did away with
Absolute Space and Absolute Time, leaving us with no absolute motion
or rest, and also no absolute time order. General Relativity is viewed
as extending the "relativity of motion" applicable to curved
spacetimes, and General Relativity's most probable models of our
actual spacetimes (the big-bang models) appear to re-introduce a
privileged "cosmic" time order, and a definite sense of absolute rest.
In particular, some of the same kinds of effects whose *absence* led
to rejection of Newtonian absolute space are present in these models
of GTR.
End of quote. Colloquium for 13-NOV-97 Abstract, UCR.
See http://physics.ucr.edu/Active/Abs/abstract-13-NOV-97.html
I'm delighted that common sense is finally being recognized in the
physics community. When do you think it will be realized that an
absolute time order precludes the possibility of anything falling
into a black hole?
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm
Eugene Shubert
.

User: "Perfectly Innocent"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 07:30:06 AM

(Patrick Reany) wrote in message news:<844a1b64.0308181807.6baac5a5@posting.google.com>...

Except that you have mangled the definitions of the terms
'commonsense,' 'absolute,' and 'preferred' as they are to be used in
the context of science and relativity in particular, as I have
complained to various posters on numerous occasions.

Patrick

True or false? A frame is an absolute frame of reference if it is
physically distinguished from all other frames and if it is totally
independent of the distribution of matter/energy in the universe.
http://cornell.mirror.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v8/i6/p1662_1
http://qcd.th.u-psud.fr/page_perso/Uzan/fileps/art_2002_ullp_ejp23.pdf
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm
Eugene Shubert
.

User: "Patrick Reany"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 12:53:56 PM

(Perfectly Innocent) wrote in message news:<c45b45b3.0308190546.30c00520@posting.google.com>...

The simplest and easiest to conceive universe that has an absolute
frame of reference is the cylinder SxR. The physics of the SxR
universe is dealt with at length in these links:

http://cornell.mirror.aps.org/abstract/PRD/v8/i6/p1662_1
http://qcd.th.u-psud.fr/page_perso/Uzan/fileps/art_2002_ullp_ejp23.pdf
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm

The reader is required to comprehend trivial model universes or
advanced mathematics. The space part of SxR is a circle S.

Let an observer in the circle universe be at rest in her own "inertial
frame of reference." Let her pick a positive and negative direction.
Suppose she has a nice watch on her wrist to note the time. Other than
just looking nice and being able to see how old she's getting, let her
do experiments. Let t1 be the time she measures for a photon to
circumnavigate the universe in the positive direction. Let t2 be the
time she measures for a photon to circumnavigate the universe in the
negative direction. Being only a one dimensional creature, she is
still smart enough to realize the impossibility of all frames agreeing
on a frame independent law of light propagation. Consequently, if t1
doesn't equal t2, then she is moving at some velocity v with respect
to an absolute frame of reference. Isn't it obvious, based on the
global theorem, that the velocity v is given by the equation:
t1/t2 = (c+v)/(c-v) ?

http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm

Eugene Shubert

What is "easiest" is subjective. You are free to choose what is
easiest to you. Just don't claim that what is easiest to you is
necessarily easiest to everyone. Don't make the same dogmatic error
that the Unstable Al's of the relativist camp make.
Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind.
Patrick
.

User: "Perfectly Innocent"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	20 Aug 2003 12:08:19 PM

(C. E. S.) wrote in message news:<tcooney-1908032337510001@ppp-spk-8.icehouse.net>...

Perfectly Innocent wrote in message

news:<c45b45b3.0308190546.30c00520@posting.google.com>...

What if your observer picks postive and negative directions that are
perpendicular to his/her direction of travel. Won't the signals come back
to the observer at the same instant, leading the observer to believe
he/she is not in a moving inertial frame? I suppose the observer could use
some form of accelerometer to be sure that he/she did not make a change of
course, take another series of measurements in different directions, and
conclude perhaps that the observer was in motion. I don't believe a person
could ever be sure about motion or stasis, as the person would never
really know if the pos. and neg. directions of the light beam was the same
or different than the previous one. Is there a good answer to the problem
posed?

Think about it. If the experiment is done in the spherical universe,
S^2 or S^3, the light signals, original sent together, must return at
the same time to a unique point. In general, these signal won't
return to our observer unless she happens to be at rest in the
absolute frame of reference.
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm
.

User: "xxein"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 10:06:23 PM

(Patrick Reany) wrote in message news:<844a1b64.0308190953.325fa120@posting.google.com>...

perfectlyInnocent@as-if.com (Perfectly Innocent) wrote in message news:<c45b45b3.0308190546.30c00520@posting.google.com>...

What is "easiest" is subjective. You are free to choose what is
easiest to you. Just don't claim that what is easiest to you is
necessarily easiest to everyone. Don't make the same dogmatic error
that the Unstable Al's of the relativist camp make.

Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind.

Patrick

Universe: Patrick, I yam what I yam and you are a part of me. You
cannot break or bend what I yam. I am the only product of ever. To
your concepts, I may appear to change at your whim, but I yam what I
yam and immutably so.
Entertain yourself with concepts of what you think I yam, but I am
what I yam and you are just a possible combination of a part of me
that is still obeying what I yam.
To me, you are just a grain of sand on a beach, obeying what I yam.
You are a composite structure, a part of me, just as that grain of
sand is composite. But you are just a local variant of a composite,
subject to local conditions that inveriably maintains the equilibrium
that is what I yam. I yam what I yam.
Maybe to you I seem to get older. Not so. I will always exist. I
yam what I yam. I will never disassociate with myself but is there
another I yam?
I know that parts of my dynamic I yam will cease in their present form
of local synergism only to reappear again as another temporary eddy in
part of I yam. But I diffuse and cannot re-create the past in its
present form and place, but I yam, nevertheless.
I know your local sensitivies to your surroundings. These are what
you consider your thoughts --- your concept of how things work. Other
parts of I yam have different sensitivities and compose different
thoughts of how they must react to their different surroundings. I
yam is not a pefect nothing. I yam live forever. Is there another I
yam?
I like the rapid energy exchanges. It exhilerates me and gives new
life to those parts of me. But as much as I like them, they are
predictable. I yam what I yam.
I would like to meet another I yam and experience what happens.
Really, Patrick, I may be living in my parents dowdy past. I would
like to meet another fairly young universe and clash. But I yam only
13 billion yrs. old.
While relative to scale, your actual experience and wishfulness for
magnitude can only guess of the richness and diversity that I may
experience in encounters of larger scale.
Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind? To what scale
and granularity are you familiar with? Are they only what your local
sensivity can detect and compare? How can you guess, with only your
local sensitivity, what I yam?
Physical concepts are local. Can you guess what I yam?
.

User: "\formerly"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	20 Aug 2003 06:28:05 PM

Dear Mark Palenik:
"Mark Palenik" <markpalenik@wideopenwest.com> wrote in message
news:u4ydndLuWsssLt6iXTWJhg@wideopenwest.com...

"Robert J. Kolker" <bobkolker@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:bhqr30$21d3g$4@ID-76471.news.uni-berlin.de...

....

If event A precedes event B (and A, B are time like separated) in one
inertial frame, A will preceed B in all inertial frame.

Couldn't we also have a frame where the two happen at the same time

(unless

by precedes you mean "precedes or at the same time as) ?

The only frame that would have two timelike events be simultaneous is one
that travels at c. And it is not a valid frame (and is also useless),
since *all* events are simultaneous.
David A. Smith
.

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 09:36:02 AM

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

The simplest and easiest to conceive universe that has an absolute
frame of reference

You are wrong. You are empirically wrong. There is no absolute frame
of reference by explicit counterdemonstrations:
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume4/2001-4will/index.html>
Experimental constraints on General relativity.
<http://rattler.cameron.edu/EMIS/journals/LRG/Articles/Volume6/2003-1ashby/index.html>
http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf
Relativity in the GPS system
You being a psychotic git, you know in your heart of hearts that all
physics since 1905
http://fourmilab.to/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf
has been a giant conspiracy to hide the truth. Now here you are, with
God snuggled up your *****, broaching the dark conspiracy and exposing
Relativity for the sham that it is. You sorry ignorant fool. Go
ahead, moron, tell us how the Global Positoning Satellite system is
also a fraud.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
(Do something naughty to physics)
.

User: "Perfectly Innocent"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	20 Aug 2003 12:33:32 AM

To do relativity on a circle, you'll need to learn how to use the
following transformation equations:
x'=Y(v)(x-vt)
t'=t/Y(v)
Y(v)=1/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)
With these equations and the following rules you'll see that my system
is free of contradictions.
LENGTH CONTRACTION
Let d be the distance around the universe in the absolute frame of
reference. Let d' be the distance around the universe according to a
stationary observer in a moving frame of reference. Then d'=Y(v)d
THE LAW OF LIGHT PROPAGATION
To track the motion of light rays in a moving frame of reference,
use the equation, distance =rate*time and take special note of the
positive and negative directions:
C(v) is the velocity of light in the positive direction.
->
C(v) is the velocity of light in the negative direction.
<-
C(v)= (gamma^2(v))(c-v)
->
C(v)= (gamma^2(v))(c+v)
<-
I hope this helps.
Eugene Shubert
http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/simultaneity.htm
.

User: "Starblade Darksquall"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	18 Aug 2003 06:58:15 PM

Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<3F40FE11.AD4C2CD@hate.spam.net>...

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

GR is SR plus the Equivalence Principle as postulate. Spacetime
curvature is derived not postulated. GR models continuous spacetime,
going beyond conformal symmetry (scale independence) to symmetry under
all smooth coordinate transformations - general covariance. A tensor
theory has no fixed background.

The universe can't be scale independant anyways. If constants c, h,
and G are fixxed, then so are all corresponding Length, Mass, and Time
units. Likewise, one can fix electric and magnetic units using other
constants.

Spacetime curvature is a straw man. Affine theories of gravitation
have the same predictions as metric theories but use spactime torsion
rather than curvature.

http://w0rli.home.att.net/youare.swf

[snip]

Oh really?
Try this on for size:
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/node12.html
What does affine theory have to say about that?
And what about the metarigid and rotating disk?
http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/mirrors/physicsfaq/Relativity/SR/rigid_disk.html
How do you explain that?
Any two different theories of gravitation will differ in predictions
in at least SOME way or another.
(...Starblade Riven Darksquall...)
.

User: "Bill Vajk"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	18 Aug 2003 07:36:14 PM

Starblade Darksquall wrote:
snip

Try this on for size:
http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/node12.html

snip
With these sorts of ideas to play with, who does
one suppose would ever think about putting the
Schwartz chiral mass measurements anywhere above
the bottom 1% of a priority list?
Given a sizable budget and any of the equipment he
wants to play with in a one shot single experiment
of his own choosing, not limited to the experiment
he's been spamming on the internet and not time
limited in scope, who would be so limited in view
as to select the chrial E�tv�s experiment with so
many others, much more interesting, available?
I don't think the Schwartz proposal will ever move
upwards in the priority list.
.

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 09:29:39 AM

Bill Vajk wrote:

Starblade Darksquall wrote:

snip

Try this on for size:

http://relativity.livingreviews.org/Articles/lrr-2001-4/node12.html

snip

With these sorts of ideas to play with, who does
one suppose would ever think about putting the
Schwartz chiral mass measurements anywhere above
the bottom 1% of a priority list?

Given a sizable budget and any of the equipment he
wants to play with in a one shot single experiment
of his own choosing, not limited to the experiment
he's been spamming on the internet and not time
limited in scope, who would be so limited in view
as to select the chrial E�tv�s experiment with so
many others, much more interesting, available?

I don't think the Schwartz proposal will ever move
upwards in the priority list.

Not chiral, stooopid critic troll Vajk, parity. Not chiral, stooopid
critic troll Vajk, parity. Not chiral, stooopid critic troll Vajk,
parity. You are no damned good even at wiping your butt in public.
The mathematics is explicit: Contrasted quantitative parity pair
masses. There are no natural resolved parity pairs of any consequence
and the effect as calculated, difference/average of weight vectors, is
at most about 3 parts-per-trillion. It is a fundmental lab
experiment. Why don't you rev up your palsied brain and tell us what
empirical macroscopic effects are predicted, Vajk?
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
The demonstrated point of the parity Eotvos experiment - brilliantly
clear to anybody with an IQ larger than their hat size who can read an
abstract or conclusion - is to test parity symmetric theories of
gravitation (metric theories, e.g., Newton, General Relativity)
against parity anti-symmetric theories of gravitation (affine and
teleparallel theories, e.g., Weitzenboeck). If the parity Eotvos
experiment using P3(1)21 vs. P3(2)21 alpha-quartz single crystal test
masses gives reproducible net output, Einstein was wrong in
postulating the Equivalence Principle. ("Principle" idiot Vajk, not
your repeatedly declaimed "principal.") General Relatvity would then
be reduced to a heuristic not a theory.
Somebody should look.
There are no Equivalence Principle tests scheduled that are not 400
years old, repeating the same tired and unsuccessful studies started
by Galileo and his pendulums, albeit to many more decimal places. The
parity Eotvos experiment is the first new exploration, and it is based
on the last remaining unexamined automorphism in geometric phsyics.
Geometric parity could not be quantitatively calculated until
Petitjean's theory and software in 1999,
Petitjean, Michel, J. Math. Phys. 43(8) 4147 (2002)
Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. (Paris), serie IIc, 4(5) 331 (2001)
J. Math. Phys. 40(9) 4587 (1999)
Critic troll Vajk brainfarts. No contribution, only complaint. No
references URL or literature, no input to the discussion, no
enlightenment, no hint of intelligence. Nothing but anile kneejerk
spasm befitting a particulary inferior undergrad assignment in spew
emulation. Having pissed upon a skyscraper wall, the critic troll
rears back and exhorts the crowd to admire both his spoor and the
manly implement that emplaced it.
Vajk is a eunuch in a brothel, a capon in a henhouse, a steer amidst
cows; a stot, a gelding, a gelt, a havier, a gib, a lapin, a seg, a
hog, a wether... a critic troll in a science newsgroup.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
(Do something naughty to physics)
.

User: "Bill Vajk"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 10:12:41 AM

Al Littlemanwearingbigboypants whines:
I wrote:

I don't think the Schwartz proposal will ever move
upwards in the priority list.

snip <tourettish bluster>
You made the music, Al, now dance to the tune.
.

User: "Uncle Al"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 11:27:28 AM

Bill Vajk wrote:

Al Littlemanwearingbigboypants whines:

I wrote:

I don't think the Schwartz proposal will ever move
upwards in the priority list.

snip <tourettish bluster>

You made the music, Al, now dance to the tune.

Visit the April 2004 APS national meeting in May. Uncle Al has
already contacted American Science & Surplus for two boxes of
super-cut rate overhead transparency blanks. Only goyim buy retail.
Critic troll Vajk brainfarts. No contribution, only complaint. No
references URL or literature, no mathematics, no input to the
discussion, no enlightenment, no hint of intelligence. Nothing but
anile kneejerk spasm befitting a particulary inferior undergrad
assignment in spew emulation. Having pissed upon a skyscraper wall,
the critic troll rears back and exhorts the crowd to admire both his
spoor and the manly implement that emplaced it.
Vajk is a eunuch in a brothel, a capon in a henhouse, a steer amidst
cows; a stot, a gelding, a gelt, a havier, a gib, a lapin, a seg, a
hog, a wether... a critic troll in a science newsgroup.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm
(Do something naughty to physics)
.

User: "Bill Vajk"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	19 Aug 2003 03:12:57 PM

Al Littlemanwearingbigboypants whines:

Bill Vajk wrote:

Al Littlemanwearingbigboypants whines:
I wrote:

I don't think the Schwartz proposal will ever move
upwards in the priority list.

snip <tourettish bluster>
You made the music, Al, now dance to the tune.

Visit the April 2004 APS national meeting in May.

The TV industry will be there in force to make new
laugh tracks for their sitcoms.

Uncle Al has
already contacted American Science & Surplus for two boxes of
super-cut rate overhead transparency blanks. .

Ah yes, the yellow background is yellow for the sake of cheapness.

Only goyim buy retail.

Tell that to your neighborhood Palastinian.
Tell me, are you going to buy your test specimens on the
surplus market as well? LOL
snip <tourettish bluster>
.

User: "Maleki"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	31 Aug 2003 05:48:39 PM

Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in
<3F423453.A89B702@hate.spam.net>:

Vajk is a eunuch in a brothel, a capon in a henhouse, a steer amidst
cows; a stot, a gelding, a gelt, a havier, a gib, a lapin, a seg, a
hog, a wether... a critic troll in a science newsgroup.

And you're an engineer in a science newsgroup.
--
khodAyA:
marA be ebtezAle ArAmesh va khoshbakhti makeshAn;
ezterAbhAye bozorg, ghamhAye arjmand, va
heyrathAye azim rA be ruham atA kon.
"Ali Shari'ati"
.

User: "Hayek"
Title: Re: Absolute Space and Time in Einstein's General Theory of Relativity	18 Aug 2003 07:39:46 PM

Uncle Al wrote:

Perfectly Innocent wrote:

Unless when you start filling in the masses, then
the background is established. The fact that we
have masses in our universe is ignored by Uncle Nil.
http://w0rli.home.att.net/youare.swf
Oh yes, that's Uncle Nil alright.
Hayek.
.

Page 1 of 1

Post reply

On the meaning of Einstein's General Theory of Relativity of Gravitation
Moving Dimensions Theory Explains Away Einstein's Block Universe, Accounts for EPR Effect/ Wave/Particle Duality, & Constant Velocity of Light, and Unifies String Theory and General Relativity
Debunked by Proof: Einstein's Relativity Theory Is Wrong! - PROOF #1
Einstein refutes the theory of relativity
Poking at Einstein's theory because it is central to 21st-centuryphysics
Re: A Viable Alternative to Einstein's Special Relativity Theory
HOW EINSTEIN STARTED THE ROT AND STRING THEORY AND MOTL
While Lisa Randall Quotes Eminem, She Forgets to Quote Einstein -- MOVING DIMENSIONS THEORY TO THE RESCUE!!!

Quantum Gravity: Newton Wins, Einstein Second, Quantum Theory Last
Quantum Gravity 124.0: Egyptian Generalization of Einstein's Unified EM-Gravity Theory
Philosophy behind my deterministic theory(I am no physics student)(Inspired by statements of Einstein and Laplace) - Comments,Insults,Suggestions welcome
Quantum Gravity Via Expansion-Contraction 67.0: Einstein-Aether Theory Gives More Details on Black Holes-Mass Relationships
Tachyons is that breakes Einstein's Theory
Re: A Viable Alternative to Einstein's Special Relativity Theory
Einstein-Cartan-Evans Field Theory degrees at University of Glamorgan

NEWER

pg.1612 pg.1232 pg.940 pg.716 pg.544 pg.412 pg.311 pg.234 pg.175 pg.130 pg.96 pg.70 pg.50 pg.35 pg.24 pg.16 pg.10 pg.6 pg.3 pg.1

OLDER