Relating to absolute reality.

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Dinosaur, Nov 24, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Mazulu Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,090
    The space station is falling around the earth.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    @ mazulu/all
    Obviously people expecting gravity to prove their points, subscribe to the "I think therefore I am" antiquated philosophy of reality. Maybe it is an absolute reality, and they are correct.

    However in my post I demonstrated that there are 2 camps interpreting the Many Worlds Interpretation. Some view it as an imagined state that eliminates the dreaded need for collapse within the interpretation and is purely to make the math seem fair. There are others who really believe that Many Worlds do exist where our every action is being lived out by some alternates of us.

    For the record I do not believe in this Interpretation but many do.

    Does this mean gravity is failing to detect those created Universes in their alternate dimensions? I guess if they are other dimensions then they would not recognize our gravity.

    Proposed Interpretations may sound like woo to many people if they even understand it. I doubt you could walk into many crowds and attempt to explain the MWI and not get a few chuckles.

    If the MWI is correct then really we should be saying "gravities" not "gravity", as there would be many in all the dimensions.

    To simply notice that reality is real spits in the face of all those who accept various interpretations of quantum mechanics. (again MWI is not my view, but is still popular among many serious physicists )

    Quick note: @ Sideshow. Mass attracting Mass experiments would measure the same on the space station as on earth, it is not relative. Speed can be relative depending on viewpoints, but Gravity cannot fit that category.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    Issue identified.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,853
    My point was that the perception of gravity is relative. Whether or not there "is" an absolutely real thing called "gravity" is irrelevant. Any effects that we can test - and all of our tests depend on our perception - will be relative ot our point of view.
     
  8. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    One part of gravity that is always left out, is gravity induced pressure. Pressure is force/area such as PSI of pressure. This aspect of the gravitational force is absolute in terms of its inpact on matter.

    For example, the atom iron, at the surface of the earth, but at the temperatures of the earth's core, will be a vapor. But in the earth's core it is a solid. These phases are not relative to observational reference, but is an absolute function of gravity induced pressure and temperature.

    If you orbit the earth, these phases will remain the same to you, since they are not based on your ego-centric reference but based on an absolute amount of mass in a given geometry. If look at the iron in your own reference its state, will tell your reference. It will also tell me the limits of your references.

    The core of Saturn may contain solid hydrogen or solid water. The observation of these phases do not depend on whether I am on the earth or in space. This will still be the same even looked at from another galaxy.

    Much of the relative reference stuff is based on only assuming space-time and not doing an energy balance like I did with pressure and temperature.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page