How Can real energy 'permeate space-time', when space-time is just maths construct?

Says the person who admitted to never reading past page 20 of Einstein's text on general relativity and who admitted to being unable to do any simple example of GR physics.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Hi PhysBang.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

He was alluding to that as an illustration FIRST that it was INCOMPLETE and hence NONSENSICAL as the mainstream constructed it. He then IMPROVED the illustrative analogy by incl\uding what the 'professionals left out because THEY DID NOT EVEN UNDERSTAND the things that they were analogizing that bowling ball on rubber sheet FOR.

Not a good look, was it, until Farsight came to the rescue of that 'mainstream uncomprehending nonsense analogy' as was constructed BY the mainstreamers?

And instead of THANKING him for doing that, you still want to 'frame' him like that? Churlishly ungrateful of you, to say the least, mate.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So obvious TYPOS is now what passes for your LAME basis for 'rebuttal' and excuse for baseless accusations and lies about others? Not a good look.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

More TYPOS distractions away from your not admitting that the things that Sean Carroll said were TRUE and aired on a BBC documentary as I posted the details to you about.

How does the avoiding the facts posted to you about Sean Carrool's 2012 appearance on the BBC doco help you DENY the facts already posted to you? Is that what passes for 'scientific debate' in the troll camp you and brucep go on whenever the trolls get together and evade and avoid like that?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please show you have ACTUALLY looked it up, by simply posting the FULL 2nd Postulate COMPLETE with Einstein's explicit GR 'rider' stating that the SR validity of 'constancy of light view' does NOT extend to GR contexts.

Go on, PhysBang, demonstrate to the forum that YOU ACTUALLY consulted the FULL 2nd Postulate complete with that GR 'rider'. Or is it that YOU and BRUCEP have been ABSTRACTLY 'bending the truth' like your abstract theory would purport to 'bend spacetime abstraction'?

We're all waiting for you to put up or shut up and admit you were wrong on this one, PhysBang.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So you can't point to that 'tangent space' in reality, only in the maths construct/modeling? Mate, doing physics is more than just math-turbation and fantasizing the existence of math spaces as if they existed in reality, it's also about REAL understanding of the physical phenomena. Get a reality check at least once in a while, will you?...else you'll be like Einstein feared/predicted:

Cheers.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Who gets to decide that is was a "valid logical question"? Sounds like gobbledygook to me.

Are you always so rude and whiny? Or only when you come here? You set an impossible price for admission. How can someone provide a "cogent answer" to a "valid logical question" when the question is gobbledygook to any reasonable logical person? Why not ask the other forum members if it should bear the adjective "valid logical"? When you describe it that way it sounds like the lady in the fairy tale who's always asking "Mirror Mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of them all?"

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The context, Declan. You keep missing it, so you are always MISinformed. Yet you still pretend to have anything cogent to offer. Do better.

Again, you miss the CONTEXT where the rudeness, whining and trolling, baiting and general low standards of behavior and personalizing posts are FIRSTLY BROUGHT BY the obvious and vociferous/incessant trolls whom you conveniently miss in your 'assessment' now.

Still unable and/or unwilling to do due diligence before opening your trap, mate? That makes you the uninformed trolling whiner and unscientific opiner from your own obvious and lazy ignorance of both the matter and/or the person you pretend you have anything cogent to say about. Like again just now above. Do better, Declan, you can't afford too many more 'hits' against your intelligence or your integrity/objectivity.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

So somehow I tricked you into lying about Farsight in order to frame him?

Regardless, Farsight has shown nothing about that rubber sheet analogy that only he offered here (as I said and as you have now admitted, despite your lying to the contrary) because he has never said anything about the operation of GR, i.e., the mathematics of the formalism.

Your adding of words to something that you cut and pasted is not a good look. It makes you look like a very bad liar.

Given that you cannot even represent Farsight's views correctly when they are right in front of you, I cannot believe that Sean Carroll denied everything he has written before or since in one single interview that only you found.

 

It wasn't his analogy, it was a mainstream analogy. Farsight improved its explanatory value by adding the missing aspects to explain WHY it was a wrong analogy. And instead of being grateful to him you want to frame him as pushing the analogy as mainstream had it originally? You're totally 'unreal' troll, mate. Totally.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And what do you think THE CLOCKS were there for, just for decoration? Unbelievable. You miss the import of th CLOCKS LINE and you come back and say "never said anything about GR"? It was IMPLICIT to the clocks BEING THERE and the KNOWN GR effects ON clocks.

It's amazing you even know what end is "up" in your room without using a Plumb Bob, mate. Lol.

And let's not forget that you don't believe 'waggling hands' are moving unless the waggling hand happens to hit you on the nose!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Haven't you bothered to check out the BBC doco I gave you the info about? And you claim to kniow that I was "lying"? And that Sean Carroll did not say those things? Hooo-ee, you're some 'scientist' alright. Don't check facts but accuse others of lying before you even check the facts!

Well done, troll. You've just 'accused yourself' of being a liar and a timewasting troll who doesn't care to check the facts, only to personally attack in ignorance of the facts.

Brilliant work, PhysBang. This is classic. It will go down in forum history along with the other trolls' worse than useless 'works'. Doh!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Since you confuse video interviews for scientific papers, it is not surprising that you, like Farsight, mistake pop science jingoism for science.

At least now you admit that Farsight did introduce the subject here rather than lie about it.

No.

Can you take anything that Farsight wrote and plot the course of an orbit or any object whatsoever? Can Farsight?

Why are you lying again? He said it wasn't completely wrong, i.e., that it was an "analogy".

Again you lie. I merely said that he was the only one pushing the analogy here. I would prefer to abandon analogy as much as possible, but since there are children like you and Farsight here that refuse to look at the science, that's not going to happen.

Again, you need to produce the explanation for the difference in clock times in GR before anyone here can believe that you are doing anything other than the insult-scientists-to-feel-better-anout-myself stuff that Farsight does.

But that's not the point of the "waggling hands" question. Can you tell us how we can tell that a pair of hands is moving or not? What about a pair of hands on a train? In an elevator?

As far as I could, yes.

You may not be lying. Your mind may be so addled that you are committed to believing these crazy claims about Sean Carroll, even to the extent that although he has scads of written work publicly available, you timidly avoid looking at them because you know unconsciously that you are wrong. Or you may be lying about this like you lied about Farsight.

 

I think the OP question must be related to the following: How can real forces act on objects with mass to accelerate them, when F = ma is just a mathematical formula?

Or: how do objects with mass gain momentum, if momentum is the first order integral of force, another mathematical formula?

Or generally, why do mathematical formulas explain anything at all?

 

Good morning, arfa.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please don't try to -re-frame' the OP to 'suit yourself' or whatever it is you are trying on. Thanks.

Oh, and if you still think that 'spacetime' isn't just a mathematical modeling abstraction, then take a gander at this excerpt from Einstein:

See where the whole of current Relativity (both SR and overall GR) is pure abstraction math/geo modeling? So please no more dishonest and/or misleading IN-DENIAL-OF-FACTS claims that it isn't, Ok? Thanks for your future co-operation in this matter to everyone who is reasonable and objective and not just trolling.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Hence why the present push to get back to the local reality to inform the abstractions and so be capable of actually completing the ToE AS a reality-contextual physical mechanism/entities explanatory set, rather than just more abstractions piled on prior abstractions.

And hence why I (a 'crank') have for decades tried (and finally succeeded in) practically 'forcing' the 'abstract SR relativists' to INCLUDE the ACCELERATIONS info/effects on clocks/biology processes in the TWINS scenario so as to make sense LOCALLY iIN-frame (and not 'reciprocal co-ordinate maths views) of what was actually happening to the TRAVELING twin when finally reunited. And why the two-clock GR exercise in these Farsight threads has LOCAL GR EFFECTS determining the reality and not some more abstract maths 'overlays' views/interpretations which are made MOOT by the local GE effects right under your nose.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Cheers.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

But if you look at Newtonian mechanics, that's just pure abstraction too.

In fact when you're awake and moving around, your motion in some direction and the amounts of time you spend moving in that direction are also pure abstractions if you write any of it down. But you don't have to write anything on paper, you just have to "remember" it, you know, abstractly.

Unless you define "local reality" more exactly, no-one will know what you're talking about. That is, you need to present this concept: "local reality", in some abstract form that says more than the two words you've been using.

Otherwise it will just be some vague idea; to me, it might represent things like my current position, the time, how many other things I can see are "moving" apart from my own motion in some direction, that kind of thing. All these "local" things might be said to represent my "reality" in some "slice" of space and time. All of them have a well-established mathematical abstraction, which I can ignore completely without changing my "local reality". But does that mean the abstractions aren't real, or can't tell me anything about my "local reality"?

 

Yes, mate, all that is already understood. That was not the point.

You missed the associated point I made in this bit:

That's what both Newton and the current Relativity are missing, especially where Gravity causes/entities/mechanisms to MANIFEST the observed (and GR 'abstractly' descibed/calculated/predicted) EFFECTS is concerned. Get the point being made?

Thanks for your interest and polite and courteous replies nonetheless, arfa. Much appreciated and noted, I assure you. Cheers.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Exactly. Sometimes people are forced to deny certain things to help prop up other certain beliefs they have.
Space/time exists...it is measured [or at least its curvature/warping and twisting is measured] GP-B,...energy can be extracted from it [Casimir effect] and other unknown forms we call DE appear associated with this space/time and its accelerated expansion rate.
To deny it, is to deny all of 20th/21st century cosmology, including SR/GR


All ideas begin as an abstraction or concept and as evidence is gathered, reality is revealed.
600 years ago, two great continents America and Australia were also only abstractions in people's minds.

 

No no, I 'admitted' nothing, mate. You're dreaming again. You tried to imply he was pushing the lame mainstream 'bowling ball on rubber sheet' analogy; when he was just introducing/alluding to it in order to made improvements to it by adding the line of clocks so that at least it made some sense. Better than the mainstream could do at all, yes?

What's the matter? The present 'shut up and calculate' from the theory works ok; it's the abstract 'explanations' that don't provide the actual physical REAL entities/mechanisms/causesn explanations that is the point of these discussions, not the current maths usefulness/practice. Keep up and stop trying to RE-frame' the OP and discussion thrust to suit your Troll-dreaming confusions, ok?

When the full reality causes/mechanisms/entities are finally understood via the upcoming reality-based ToE, then we will ALSO understand what we are currently only abstractly/mathematically 'treating/describing' in our equations/models. Yes?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

So in order to maintain your own illusions and your claims of 'lying' etc etc, you are prepared to DENY the locally real effects of GR on clocks, as predicted by GR and observed? Wow. That takes some industrial strength heavy duty level of cognitive dissonance to maintain for so long. Oh, that's right, that's the forte of TROLL mentality, isn't it. Good luck with that mindset and MO, 'scientist'.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Have you finally found and read the FULL 2nd Postulate c/w GR 'rider'? Abd have you finally bothered to check what Sean Carroll actually said in that BBC doco? The communications MEDIUM doesn't change what he did/said about his finding that the universal energy-space is flat to infinity beyond observational horizon. What could possibly be clearer or more succinct than those words? They would not 'morph' into the OPPOSITE MEANINGS if they are delivered via another communication medium which you 'approve' of due to your snobbery, mate!

Go on, PhysBang, read also what I just posted to arfa about what Einstein said about 'spacetime' being an ABSTRACTION, not 'real' as such. Then admit that all your baseless puffing, accusations other and other irrelevant trolling/baiting/evading distractions have been just that, mindless and UN-informed (by your own willful choice/MO) trolling. That's a good lad; be honest for a change, hey; you'll feel better for it. Cheers.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Paddo, did you miss posts #209 and #211? Seems like, else your post above is pure in-denial trolling again. Read and understand ALL the pertinent context/facts/replies before 'me too-ing' others, ok? And listen to what Einstein actually said, and not your own 'handle on things' that's obviously 'disastrously broken' in more than one point. Will you never learn?

 

More to the point, will you ever learn
Stop taking people out of context...
Stop claiming absolute certainty in your silly beliefs...
Stop claiming to have a ToE.....unless you can show us...
Stop claiming everyone that disagrees with you is a troll...the count so far...brucep, Only me, Grumpy, PhysBang, Declan Dunny, Russ Waters....and I have forgotten someone...Bingo, and ME!!!![apologies if I have left any one out]
Stop claiming...period!

 

Oh dear, not only clueless, denier and 'projecter', but also a blatantly dishonest false-accuser and hypocrite to boot. What a troll. It must make wifey 'proud' to know what her little man is getting up to on the net (apart from his 'adult entertainment searches). Or doesn't she know what her troll hubby is up to? Sad 'internet case' if ever there was. Good luck, paddo! You'll need it when it all catches up with you and bites you in the bum when you least expect it. Karma payback can be mercilessly brutal sometimes. You poor guy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Whatever....

I'll let our peers on this forum be the judge OK? As will you. Your post speaks for itself.

 

YOUR 'peers' are the other TROLLS whom you cheerlead and sycophantically 'me too' ride on their posts which you pretend to 'understand and agree with' like a child playing 'grown ups' and trying to wear the 'grown ups' shoes and clothes which DON'T FIT at all on you. Poor Troll.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Like when you lied to try to protect Farsight?

 

You lied about him 'pushing' the lame mainstream analogy, not me. I only pointed out he alluded to it as not making sense, and then he went on to IMPROVE that lame mainstream analogy with the line of GR affected clocks info/aspect which then made more sense of the previously lame and incorrect analogy from mainstream.

Your other evasions and lies and plain dishonest denial of even the 2nd Postulate GR 'rider', and also the Sean Carroll work/results communicated in that BBC doco, just says it all about you. You aren't fair dinkum. Never were. So your continuing patently false self-serving accusations are now no longer here nor there. Good luck, PhysBang. Do/learn better.