Measuring the curvature of spacetime

This is an easy one. There is no local curvature in a curved space. Locally the curvature is the same as the tangent space and therefore flat. So no "missing points" are required for curved spaces.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Let's see the two Wolverines fight across the Arena of Earth!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well I did read that paper you mentioned where the 10K times c for entanglement is claimed, but nowhere in the paper was there any mention of faster than light communication.

I did quite a bit of searching for this elusive information and every reference I found said that quantum entanglement has no ability to transmit information let alone communicate FTL. So your lack of ability or desire to back up your statements seems to point to you being a ... uh, never mind.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And yet the scientific world keeps on keeping on despite your religiously driven anti science rants.
Let's give a realistic picture as to what GP-B achieved other than the childish fairy tails a couple of would be's if they could be's are trying to present.
https://einstein.stanford.edu/MISSION/mission6.html#successful_mission
Extraordinary Accomplishments
Following is a list of some of the extraordinary accomplishments achieved by GP-B during the 17 months of its flight mission.

• Over the course of the 17.3-month mission, we communicated with the spacecraft over 4,000 times, and the Mission Planning team successfully transmitted over 106,000 commands to the spacecraft.
• GP-B is the first spacecraft ever to achieve nine degrees of freedom in control. The spacecraft itself maintained three degrees of freedom in attitude control (pitch, yaw, and roll), plus three degrees of freedom in translational drag-free control (front-to-back, side-to-side, and up-down). In addition, the Gyro Suspension System (GSS) for each gyro maintained three degrees of freedom in controlling the location of its spherical rotor within the gyro housing.
• The GP-B gyros, which performed extraordinarily well in orbit, have been listed in the Guinness Database of World Records as being the roundest objects ever manufactured.
• The spin-down rates of all four gyros were considerably better than expected. GP-B’s conservative requirement was a characteristic spin-down period (time required to slow down to ~37% of its initial speed) of 2,300 years. Measurements during IOC showed that the average characteristic spin-down period of the GP-B gyros was approximately 15,000 years—well beyond the requirement.
• The magnetic field surrounding the gyros and SQUIDs (Super-conducting QUantum Interference Device) was reduced to 10-7 gauss, less than one millionth of the Earth’s magnetic field—the lowest ever achieved in space.
• The gyro readout measurements from the SQUID magnetometers had unprecedented precision, detecting fields to 10-13 gauss, less than one trillionth of the strength of Earth’s magnetic field.
• The gyro suspension system operated magnificently. It had to be able to operate both on the ground for testing purposes prior to launch, as well as in space. This meant that the suspension system had to operate over 11 orders of magnitude—an enormous dynamic control range—and its performance throughout the mission was outstanding.
• The science telescope on board the spacecraft tracked the guide star, IM Pegasi (HR 8703), to superb accuracy, and it also collected a year’s worth of brightness data on that star. The brightness data we collected on IM Pegasi represents the most continuous data ever collected on any star in the universe.

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/may/HQ_11-134_Gravity_Probe_B.html

GP-B was designed to measure two key predictions of Einstein's general theory of relativity by monitoring the orientations of ultra-sensitive gyroscopes relative to a distant guide star.
http://einstein.stanford.edu/

GP-B of course achieved its goal in confirming Einstein's predictions to even greater precisions.
The warping/curving of spacetime in the presence of mass had been confirmed before by other Satellites, but the frame dragging [Lense Thirring effect] had not.
Both predictions were as expected confirmed with flying colours, further enhancing GR and how we interpret gravity...at least to the majority of level headed agenda freed scientists.
Here's another rundown with a video by Kip Thorne....
http://einstein.stanford.edu/MISSION/mission1.html
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""


So much noise from a few isolated nuts on this forum, are in reality having about as much effect on what mainstream professionals and science in general think, as the proverbial snowflake in hell.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I really do not know, but what is obvious is that you have certainly not denied you accept some deity or other [: Brahma, Saraswati, Lakshmi, Vishnu, Shiva, Durga, Harihara and Ardhanarishvara or the Christian god] and have become quite emotional at times on the issue.
Of course that is your belief and you are entitled to it, but when it clouds your scientific judgement, and sees you spouting anti science propaganda in the science sections of forums such as this, then you will most certainly continue to be shown as the fraud you so obviously are: The fact that science has pushed into oblivion any need or excuse for any deity, will continue to drive your need to post the usual meaningless anti science posts periodically.
But like the snow flake in hell, your effects on science/cosmology is zero, zilch, nada. Surely even in your delusional state you can see this? Perhaps not. :shrug:

 

Well as this one believes science and religion may be opposed but there is still a place where they meet. And these are not the only one place where mutually exclusive things meet. There are other places that KNOW such a place. There are plenty of programs about such things on the television and also the radio. Please enjoy such things.

 

Okay. When the physics of a gyroscope in a gravitational field was taught to me, no curvature of space was mentioned. GPS was not implemented yet either, but I understand, it wouldn't have happenened without General Relativity's time corrections to keep all of the clocks in sync. Why exactly did that change? Most of the magnitude of the correction vectors are from relative satellite motion, not gravity. So why is the gyroscope now considered to be measuring space curvature instead of time dilation?

Also, when the physics of entanglement was taught to me, no speed was mentioned. I was very interested. If you are also, I encourage that. A number of times faster than light was mentioned, and it is very interesting. I wonder about how that might be the case. If true, for one thing, relativity is incomplete. Folks like whizbang here want it to stay that way, and for it to be forever incompatible with the even more incomplete and convoluted math he paid good money to learn. And I'm Okay with that too.

 

Seems as though ignoring fact is a strong point for making crank status.

GR predicts the local spacetime curvature is an infinitesimal. For most local proper frame experiments the effects of the infinitesimal local spacetime curvature can be ignored since it will have no measurable effect on the results of experiments. Essentially flat as you said. But they're experiments conducted in local proper frame where the infinitesimal effects of gravity, spacetime curvature, must be accounted for. Most notably the GPS. For doing physics in the local proper frame we generally get to use the math of SR. The local proper frame is an infinitesimal away from boundary. The local bookkeeper frame flat spacetime, far away. So what you said is generally correct while being an infinitesimal away from being absolutely correct. Happy new year. Thanks for posting. For the local tangent space in our solar system it's approximately 1 AU. The local tangent space is much smaller in the strong field but it exists everywhere in the universe.

 

By this reasoning, anyone who learns Newtonian physics first should never believe in General Relativity at all!

Here is some of the work done for you: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jbourj/gr/homework 7.pdf

The short answer is because it is an effect of spatial location that cannot merely be decomposed into one of time or timing.

It is a very interesting topic and there is clearly a need to do investigation into where relativity theory and quantum theory can be expended. However, this is no reason to merely invent elements of relativity theory or quantum theory while ignoring the actual elements of the theories.

 

Well said bruce and cheezle.
Not sure if this is relevant [I think it could be] but isn't it true that any straight line, can be seen as part of the arc of a much larger circle?

 

It's fundamentalist dogma that clouds the ability to make sense. Dogma such as some ridiculous requirement that the earth be 6,000 years old. Or other such obvious bullshit. There's nothing in modern physics which rule out the possibility of a supernatural origin for this universe. What's ruled out is the fundamentalist dogma. The dogma that is in direct conflict with reality. An example for modern physics would be eternal inflation. There's no physics which could rule out the origin of eternal inflation being supernatural.

 

Definitely. The local path is essentially straight while the global path sums the local spacetime curvature over the entire path.

 

In my career as a satellite telecom engineer, I was once tasked by a senior engineer, as part of an assignment to construct an appropriate size Doppler buffer, and to calculate the amount of movement (apogee minus perigee) for an inclined geostationary orbit of an Intelsat telecommunications satellite. It was about 80 miles over a 12 hour period, more or less. Time shifts due to relative motion is important to satellite technology. The asynchronous Doppler buffers were needed to avoid temporal discontinuities in data packets streamed via satellite uplinks and downlinks.

I'm not kidding when I say that most of the relativistic time corrections needed for GPS is due to relative motion, with a significantly smaller correction applied for the equivalent acceleration due to gravity for a GPS satellite that is in low Earth orbit. That acceleration is close to the value near the surface of the Earth for LEO satellites.

Most people don't think of corrections of time to be the result of spacetime curvature when projectiles are moving in straight lines as opposed to an orbit. Curvature doesn't even enter into the necessary calculations. The curvature of a satellite trajectory is just an artifact of the shape of the gravitating mass and the desired orbit, not of any permanent curvature or inertia imparted to an inertialess region of space surrounding a gravitating body.

 

Since you spent the time confirming there's nothing to find [there never was] I'll link Gunter Nimtz claim to have transferred Mozarts 40th at 4.7 c via a quantum tunneling experiment. Very few agree with his analysis. Fodder for the scientific illiterate cranks. lOL.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Günter_Nimtz

 

By choosing the right coordinate system and after the technological aspects of the GPS system are well understood then making operational corrections associated with this accumulated knowledge become possible. The fact that these operational corrections are required is further confirmation of the GR prediction. Try getting the system up working without them. When you choose Schwarzschild coordinates to model the GPS near earth spacetime then the correction is synching the earth based clock with the satellite based clock. Choose the student project for the GPS.
http://www.eftaylor.com/download.html#general_relativity

 

Wrong, absolutely wrong.

GR does not predict any local spacetime curvature as nil or infinitesimal. It is just that when you feed the values the curvature comes out to be small for weak Gravity objects. Export yourself to the surface of a Neutron Star the local curvature is significant or take yourself closer to BH singularity, the curvature value is very very large. So it is patently incorrect to say that GR predicts no or infinitesimal small local curvature of spacetime.

This is also incorrect to say that local spacetime curvature gets summed up. The solution of GR equations is non linear so the solutions from multiple effect cannot be summed up.

Brucep : Be careful, do not spread falsehood or misinformation around. You have few followers here, teach them proper Physics, let your lack of formal education not come in the way of science.

 

Yes, you are not. There is well established maths for what you say here.

 

Wrong, rather naive.

In present era, religious or fundamental dogma does not come in the way of progress of science. It is quite likely that a top most scientist bows in front of God and his belief, but never lets this come in the way of his professional research work.

What does not make sense is the ignorance of people, the pretention of people lacking formal education, people who do not know what is curvature of spacetime and still argue in favor of curvature. People who do not know what the volume of a sphere is and still talk of density. This blows bigger damage to science than any dogma or God.

Someone has rightly said, the damage to GR is not from its opponents but from ignorant proponents...Both Paddoboy and Brucep lack formal education, how can they defend GR ? by abuses and copy paste and funny arguments. This bloke Physbang is stuck in the grammer of a priori and a posteriori, not able to come out of that despite chronological evidence; he has used the word crank more than any other alphabet used by him. And then we have "Origin', he just trolls without any meaningful content. When confronted he gets bored and runs away, he has been nudged by Mods also for meaningless trolling.....with such supporters of mainstream, opponents are not really required.

 

No as is obviously par for the course with your views, it is you who is drastically wrong. bruce and cheezle have summed it up as per GR.
But your continued refusal to accept what the many professional giants in the industry [as distinct from your own lack of knowledge, credentials and reasonable logic] is expected at this stage.
Of course that is your belief and you are entitled to it, but when it clouds your scientific judgement, and sees you spouting anti science propaganda in the science sections of forums such as this, then you will most certainly continue to be shown as the fraud you so obviously are: The fact that science has pushed into oblivion any need or excuse for any deity, will continue to drive your need to post the usual meaningless anti science posts periodically.
But like the snow flake in hell, your effects on science/cosmology is zero, zilch, nada. Surely even in your delusional state you can see this? Perhaps not. :shrug:

The rest of your unsupported diatribe remains as is: Unsupported diatribe.
Do better [if you can

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

]

That may be true for a legitimate professionally qualified scientist: It does not apply to a nobody and a never was such as yourself.Sorry about that.

Yet it is you who fits into what you describe to a "t"....pretentious, uncredentialed, no formal education, based on the standard of your posts, arrogance, a lack of humility that for someone not yet on the bottom rung of the ladder, is really sad and delusional.

Speaking for myself, I do not need to defend GR: It does that job itself, evidenced by being the reigning supreme model of gravity, at least the last time I looked.
All I do is help to show yourself for the fraud you are, and your religiously inspired anti science posts, for the nonsensical speudoscience that they represent.eg: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/cosmology-at-the-threshold-of-encountering-the-reality.153132/ [PSEUDOSCIENCE SECTION

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

]

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Yes, yes, we all know...the whole world is wrong, all of science is wrong, and you are its saviour. If that makes you happy, you go ahead and believe it.
[And science and the world keeps on turning, oblivious to your nonsense: hohum

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You don't understand Physics, thats why you make wild allegations. I never said 'the whole science' is wrong, none has done that.......few questions and the gang of GR starts trolling, you have become the master ring leader of such troll gang..

I said and I am still maitaining...

1. GL does not prove curved spacetime.
2. Deflection of light around a massive mass which is seen as GL, may include deflection due to refraction. It need not be 100% due to curvature of spacetime.
3. Black Holes cannot form, as the singulaity is only a mathematical artifact.
4. Worm Holes / White Holes are imaginations, bad ones too.
5. Travel to past is as ridiculous as anything can be. This is no science. Pure BS.
6. Curved Spacetime is not a reality. Its a mathematical artifact.
7. GP-B and experiment for detecting Gravitational Waves as a ripples in the curvature of spacetime, is all sham.
8. BH cannot evaporate as long as CMBR is present and as long as gravitational time dilation is understood the way it isbeing pushed as of now.
9. Assigning any thermodynamic Temperature to BH singularity, is violative of thermodynamic principle behind temperature. It has no link with reality.

These points are beyond your understanding, formal education of Physics is not something which can be acquired by reading some popular science articles. Formal Education of Physics covers vast arena of topics, you and Brucep are venturing into something about which you have no foundational idea. First act as students, acquire decent knowledge, then take side, till then learn and learn.......