Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by cav755, Apr 1, 2014.
No, It's an opinionated Interpretation of yours, no more.....
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
You made this statement the other day, so I will reply to you in the same way.
...This is more than an interpretation, timelessnesss is a natural consequence of GR. I don't need the proof to show GR is timeless, because it does it itself when physicists understand there is no global time evolution in GR. All scientists recognize this fact.
No they certainly do not. I have shown that on a few occasions......
Time is as much a part of GR as is space, gravity, space/time, matter, and energy.
Most scientists recognise that fact.
Actually they do, to such an extent in fact it has been given an official name, it's called the problem of time. All scientists who are competent are aware of this global problem of time in GR.
I would say that all scientists who are competent are aware it isn't a problem in GR, it is a problem when trying to combine GR with QM (Quantum Gravity):
But even though you aren't a scientist, I'm not really inclined to let that slide.
And again: the fact that it is a problem is because time is part of both theories. Your continued insistence that there is no time in GR is pretty absurd at face value.
Aether has mass and is displaced by the particles of matter which exist in it and move through it.
Displaced aether pushing back and exerting inward pressure toward matter is gravity.
The state of displacement of the aether is gravity.
What ripples when galaxy clusters collide is what waves in a double slit experiment; the aether.
Einstein's gravitational wave is de Broglie's pilot-wave; both are aether displacement waves.
Aether displaced by matters relates general relativity and quantum mechanics.
Bored with your parrotting. If you want to continue discussing your ideas, pick it back up where you left off: you never responded to my last post to you.
Sounds waves do not travel through the "vacuum" of space.
It's analogous to the bow wave of a boat. The state of displacement of the water connected to and neighboring the boat remains the same as the boat moves through and displaces the water. Changes to the aether propagate through the aether at c.
There is evidence of the aether every time a double slit experiment is performed; it's what waves.
By definition, a bowling ball moving through a supersolid will roll forever through the supersolid. If the bowling ball slows down then what it is rolling through is not a supersolid.
Do you not know what relativistic means?
"The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo." - Robert B. Laughlin, Nobel Laureate in Physics, endowed chair in physics, Stanford University
The rest frame of the insterstellar medium relative to what? How do you know the interstellar medium doesn't flow? And if you could detect a flow then flows relative to what?
Looks like cav755 just doesn't know when to give it a rest. More from the Wikipedia talk page about the article cav755 tried to vandalize:
Added a short summary of de Broglie's wave mechanics with a link to where it is described in de Broglie's important theories. Mpc755 (talk) 07:30, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I have removed your wp:UNSOURCED content, pointing to the same freshly added wp:UNDUE and wp:SYNTH content in another article Louis de Broglie. - DVdm (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I have reduced the de Broglie's wave mechanics interpretation of what occurs physically in nature in a double slit experiment to its most basic description. Mpc755 (talk) 08:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Reverted. User Mpc755 is blocked again, now for 5 days. - DVdm (talk) 08:55, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
My prediction has been successfully confirmed, that's now one scientific prediction more than anything cav755 has managed to produce in this entire thread. It's like either I can read this guy's brain, or there just isn't that much brain to read. Can I have my Nobel Prize, now?
Are you able to understand the statistical nature of quantum mechanics does not fully explain the walking droplets?
From 2:10 in the video, "Whatever the case may be in quantum mechanics, the statistics are an incomplete description of our fluid system and emerge from an underlying pilot-wave dynamics"
'Interpretation of quantum mechanics by the double solution theory Louis de BROGLIE'
Such is, in its main lines, the present state of the Wave mechanics interpretation by the double-solution theory, and its thermodynamical extension. I think that when this interpretation is further elaborated, extended, and eventually modified in some of its aspects, it will lead to a better understanding of the true coexistence of waves and particles about which actual Quantum mechanics only gives statistical information, often correct, but in my opinion incomplete."
The Copenhagen interpretation is statistical and incomplete.
So too is the cav755 Interpretation.
Paddo he doesn't even have an interpretation. To have one, you need a working model for gods sake.
Agreed....Similar to your own conglomeration re time.
Or so you would like everyone to believe. The differences are large, I actually confront your comfortable view of time with real science... and you hate it.
Ok then, why don't you settle the issue right here and write down the geodesic equation for us without any reference to time.
Are you serious? That's so easy... the geodesics of general relativity are well known. But if you expand dilation for a photon, there is no local frame of reference. Do you deny this?
A yes or no would be productive.
Note to everyone else: The whole point here is to just to demonstrate that, like cav755 and all the other cranks posting garbage in the Physics section, BlackHoley has absolutely no clue what he's talking about and is, after so many years under various other usernames, continuing to post nonsense and crap in the hopes of impressing someone.
As for you, Reiku BlackHoley, if you knew anything about General Relativity, you would know that the geodesic equation is the fundamental equation which governs the motions of all free-falling inert bodies. If you weren't full of shit, one of the first things you'd be doing is writing that equation down in a way that removes any reference to time, since you claim that GR makes no reference to it.
Actually, all bodies, even photons moves through geodesics. A null geodesic just characterizes the path of the photon.
I asked you a question and you blatantly ignored me!
I asked you, does a photon experience any time due to time dilation, I asked you does it have a frame of reference. And I asked you... if it is a yes or a no.
So can you just clarify the points I have been making troll?
wtf are you talking about, you asked me to write down geodesics, I never actually wrote down a thing. I asked you a very simple question and if you don't want to answer it fine. I know why you aren't answering it because it means confirming what I have been saying to several posters for about three pages concerning if a photon even experiences time. That would be heresy to think you'd do that.Oh god, it's better to verbally downplay my ability to talk about science. Just so long as you don't answer the question, you should be ok cpt.
Separate names with a comma.