Ignoring an Idiot or two, if we are to ask the question is spacetime real, then first we need to define is space real?....is time real? At one time it was thought both were absolute...We now know that to be false. IMHO the mistake some seem to make is defining real as something that you can either see, touch, smell, or observe some real physical property of. Space separates everything.....If we had no space, everything would be packed together back in the primordial Singularity that the BB instigated from. Similarly for time......If we had no time, everything would happen together, and again we arrive back to the BB Singularity. Space and time and associated properties depend on one's frame of reference......There is no universal now. That's my simple Occam's razor deductions that I believe says it all, but here is Sean Carroll, putting it in a more extended explanation.... http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/10/18/is-time-real/ This brings us to the question of spacetime. The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality. — Hermann Minkowski: Also GP-B immediately comes to mind as the experiment that took decades to complete and a fair amount of money that showed that not only is spacetime warped in the presence of mass, but that it can also swirl in the presence of a rotating body like a planet or star. Light always travels in straight paths, but that path is often seen to be bent or curved because it is actually following geodesics in curved/warped spacetime. This gets us to the relevant question at hand...are gravity waves/gravitational waves/gravitational radiation real. Again, we also have strong evidence to suggest they are a real artifact of spacetime, plus also the simple Occam's razor argument, that if space and time [henceforth known as spacetime] can be warped, curved, twisted, all mathematically verified, than why not gravitational waves caused by asymmetric S/Nova explosions or similar catastrophic cosmological events? While spacetime warpage was evidenced before GP-B, the Lense Thirring effect was far harder to detect. Likewise the same problem exists for the direct detection of gravitational radiation. So far we simply have not had the technology to directly detect them, although the evidence remains convincing. All the above are facts and can be found in any search one would like to conduct. None of it is contrived bullshit, perpetrated to align with one's own alternative agenda governed by personal delusions of grandeur about one's self. All the above are observations in how our Universe operates.
What is this 'Time' being bound and Unbound ? And if we 'unbind' the time how fast would it flow ? Just thinking loud.
...But none can feel or see or visualise or (keep adding to suit yourslef) spacetime....You call it real?
Thats copy paste, does not prove that you understand that. Just tell us how the 'spacetime' is real which you are claiming. You may like to first copy paste the definition of 'real'...
Evidence in our exchanges has shown that I understand far more than you. I already have along with links....You as usual have nothing other than your alternative "would be if you could be" desire. http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/10/18/is-time-real/
Good for you if you understand, more or less does not matter.. Again Popo-science... (not even popscience) But 'Spacetime' not time ?
Paddoboy, the Minkowski quote was about SR and a flat spacetime corrodinate system, not GR. Spacetime as it is used in GR is not the same thing. And the GP-B experiment did not prove that spacetime has any physical reality... Meaning it did not prove that spacetime causes frame-dragging........, only that.., as predicted it does occur.
Your position of ignorance and stupidity, is not my fault. They are driven by your own excessive self gratutitous persona...Not much I can do, sorry. Popo science?? [you mean pop science?] Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The easy fraudulent excuse and way out for our cranks ratbags and nuts in general. The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality. — Hermann Minkowski: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Post 101 is accepted science and correct just as my two tutorials are and stand unchallenged. If you want to dispute accepted knowledge, go get a degree, than some observational evidence to support your stance, and than publish with a reputable publisher. I see anything at all though, as no better than the stupid defunct Black Neutron Star and that paper, and the supposed follow up, which mysteriously never eventuated after much "song and dance"by you. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
And SR is a subset of GR. I did not say that. In fact I made an effort to say that for something to be real, does not mean we need to be able to touch, see or smell it. So it certainly is not physical. I stand by my claims. https://www.quora.com/Is-spacetime-a-real-thing-or-just-a-mere-concept https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html What is a space time continuum? In 1906, soon after Albert Einstein announced his special theory of relativity, his former college teacher in mathematics, Hermann Minkowski, developed a new scheme for thinking about space and time that emphasized its geometric qualities. In his famous quotation delivered at a public lecture on relativity, he announced that, "The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality." This new reality was that space and time, as physical constructs, have to be combined into a new mathematical/physical entity called 'space-time', because the equations of relativity show that both the space and time coordinates of any event must get mixed together by the mathematics, in order to accurately describe what we see. Because space consists of 3 dimensions, and time is 1-dimensional, space-time must, therefore, be a 4-dimensional object. It is believed to be a 'continuum' because so far as we know, there are no missing points in space or instants in time, and both can be subdivided without any apparent limit in size or duration. So, physicists now routinely consider our world to be embedded in this 4-dimensional Space-Time continuum, and all events, places, moments in history, actions and so on are described in terms of their location in Space-Time. Space-time does not evolve, it simply exists. When we examine a particular object from the stand point of its space-time representation, every particle is located along its world-line. This is a spaghetti-like line that stretches from the past to the future showing the spatial location of the particle at every instant in time. This world-line exists as a complete object which may be sliced here and there so that you can see where the particle is located in space at a particular instant. Once you determine the complete world line of a particle from the forces acting upon it, you have 'solved' for its complete history. This world-line does not change with time, but simply exists as a timeless object. Similarly, in general relativity, when you solve equations for the shape of space-time, this shape does not change in time, but exists as a complete timeless object. You can slice it here and there to examine what the geometry of space looks like at a particular instant. Examining consecutive slices in time will let you see whether, for example, the universe is expanding or not.
The Ernest. C . Watson Lecture series: Caltech: Kip. S. Thorne: Richard Feynamn: WARPED SPACETIME: BLACK HOLES: GRAVITATIONAL WAVES: ACCELERATING UNIVERSE:
Well than keep up...It's not really that hard, all you need to do is stop your nonsensical one liners and trolling.
Past thinking .....is past thinking. Pad you dig and know your stuff as far Einstein goes. Good. But it is out-dated. The good thing though it does no doubt make things easier to understand thinking outside the box.
