STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES of the THEORY OF RELATIVITY

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Asexperia, Aug 3, 2012.

  1. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    Some advice to you - learn a little bit about physics before drawing conclusions. Your errors and misunderstandings have been pointed out to you by many people on this site that actually understand physics. Ignoring them will only keep you ignorant.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    My reality point of view is philosophical. Physicists have a different view. Besides, I don't like to make personal discussions, It doesn't get anything.

    Try to bring something interesting. Over and out.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    As has been pointed out to you, physicists don't have a 'different point of view', the physicist are describing reality, just because you don't particularly like reality does not mean you can substitude your own.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    Now you have become the lawyer of the physicist.

    OVER AND OUT.

    Let's discuss about science.

    What do you think about gravity?
    What's its nature? Teach me.
     
  8. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    Here is a simple explanation for someone with no physics background:
    Learn
     
  9. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    That's curious. And people forgot Newton. Light curve was the result of gravity, and not by the space-time. Space-time is a mathematical model to place objects and events in the reality. For GR gravity doesn't exist.
    Space and time are related, but not mixed.

    Au revoir.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 15, 2012
  10. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    Seems that you forgot or never understood Newton. It is impossible for light to be affected by the Newtonian view of gravity.
     
  11. przyk squishy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,190
    Actually Newtonian gravity doesn't say anything either way: you can allow light to be affected by Newtonian gravity if you want. Newtonian gravity neither prohibits nor requires it. The concept of a "black hole" as an object so massive that light doesn't escape was thought up before general relativity, and you even (superficially) get the same formula for the radius of the event horizon. But if you allow light to bend under the influence of Newtonian gravity, then the bending is half as much as predicted by GR. This is what was tested in the 1919 solar eclipse experiment.
     
  12. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    If a photon has no rest mass how could it be affected by Newtonian gravity? Isn't a zero mass going to kinda blow up the equations?
     
  13. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    If you think of mass as a substance, as was the case within Newtonian mechanics, then that is an inportent distinction.

    However, if you think about mass as it is described today, a small part emerges from fundamental particle interactions with the Higgs mechanism and the rest may emerge from the motion of complex charged particles and atoms through the ZPF. In both of these cases mass is not a defined substance. Instead it is an emergent phenomena... And photons while they have no rest mass contribute to and are affected by, the overall gravitational mass of a system.

    Part of the problem that comes up in this type of discussion is that the definitions of mass and inertial are intertwined and too often, though we generally make the transition to a post Einstein relativistic view, we very often hold on to the everyday and old Newtonian concepts and definitions of mass and inertia.

    The truth is that we really have no clear and definite definition of what mass is. Is it a fundamental component of objects, or perhaps a phenomena, which emerges from the interaction between objects? Or perhaps as some would suggest, even the interaction between objects and the ZPF, which itself might be thought of as, the "substance" of space/space-time itself?

    If the Higgs boson and the the Higgs mechanism are in fact confirmed, it may lend more credibility to the second explanation and a definition of mass as an emergent phenomena, rather than fundamental "substance".

    The case for a quantum source of gravity seems a harder nut to crack. Still there are those who continue work in that direction.
     
  14. przyk squishy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,190
    Not necessarily: the acceleration due to a Newtonian gravitational field is independent of the mass of the object being pulled.
     
  15. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    The other side of the coin...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Photons of light interacting with the alleged particles (gravitons) of gravity.
     
  16. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    WEAKNESSES (edited)

    1 - All reference frames are equally valid. (if it's possible the observation and measurement).

    2 - The curvature of space-time.

    3 - It's possible the time travel.

    4 - The gravity force doesn't exist.

    5 - The unification of all forces (EM, G, SF, WF) in a single equation.

    Un saludo cordial.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 17, 2012
  17. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,931
    But for there to be a force on the particle according to Newton, the particle must have mass, isn't that right?
     
  18. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    You know when przyk first posted that comment it was like a slap in the forehead. He is of course completely correct.

    The trick is to try an set aside the limitations in how Newton conceptualized gravity in the late 1600s and evaluate the implications of what we have learned since.

    Newton's field equation is still useful and in use, it winds up being a close approximation of GR in a weak field. If we accept that within the context of GR a photon is affected by gravity or the curvature of space/space-time, then we must also accept that this remains true in a weak field, even if the affect is not currently detectable, in a weak field.

    Newton's field equation that describes the force of gravity between two masses, uses the two masses only to determine the total mass and the center of mass of the system. With one mass there is still a gravitational field and photons are influenced by any gravitational field they travel through.
     
  19. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372

    Relativity requires treating time as a part of the space to develop its equations.
     
  20. Gregg Schaffter Registered Member

    Messages:
    85
    I agree with this. Someone who thinks the theory of relativity has weaknesses to it means you have a misunderstanding of the whole concept. Research a bit more of the theory before pointing out anything about the theory.
     
  21. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    I research a lot, but I have much to learn. Einstein is not infallible.
    I have nothing against Physics.
     
  22. Gregg Schaffter Registered Member

    Messages:
    85
    I am not saying that Einstein was perfect, but his theory doesn't have any proven flaws. For example, they already just proved on of Einstein's theories on gravitational effects on light.
     
  23. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,372
    Of course, Relativity is a theory of the behavior of light, fits well with the Optics.
     

Share This Page