General Relativity Proves HV Lifters' Create Significant Space-Time Curvature

Discussion in 'Alien Hub' started by Dejan Corovic, Mar 11, 2020.

  1. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    strange that it generates the image fine. I just cant get the image to post. My question is how to I get the image it generates to post?
     
  2. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    Euler's formula
    named after Leonhard Euler, is a mathematical formula in complex analysis that establishes the fundamental relationship between the trigonometric functions and the complex exponential function.
    [​IMG]
     
  3. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    oh simple, At the top of the editor by the smiley face you will see the image field click that and drop the link of the image in there. image uploading most usually depends on having an image server to link to, in the case of Latex when you generate the image, right-click that image and just copy image address, This will work fine to post an image in that field.
     
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  4. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    Ah You're just copy and pasting the image huh.
    [​IMG]
    Aha yea.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  5. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    forgive :p it works so well :)
     
  6. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    Ok so now that I know how to post it, here's the description in Latex generated images,
    That last statement is saying that v behaves the same as the Newtonian electrostatics electric potential. To be clear it is directly proportional to the electric potential. Meaning that this is the solution to Einstein's field equations for a static electric field configuration. As discussed his log is base e, not 10 and composing the two and using my mentioned preferences for conventions results in the composition of these as
    [​IMG]
    The first order expansion of the [​IMG] yields
    [​IMG]
    In a Newtonian limit this has to relate to the gravitational potential [​IMG] by
    [​IMG]
    So if we write
    [​IMG]
    where it is understood that [​IMG] is proportional to the electric potential, then this is the exact solution with it in units of gravitational potential and yields a Newtonian limit gravitational acceleration field that is proportional to the electric potential.
    Now consider for a moment the solution for a nonrotating but charged black hole the Reissner-Nordström solution,
    [​IMG]
    I think it doesn't let me copy more images than that to a post so to be continued...
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  7. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    So consider the case of extreme charge
    [​IMG]
    Then
    [​IMG]
    Now do a r transformation
    [​IMG]

    Now

    [​IMG]
    Now this takes that form

    [​IMG]
    where
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Apr 16, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  8. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    BTW
    [​IMG]
    is Einstein's field equations with the cosmological constant [​IMG] included. If one moves the term to the right hand side via addition, then it can be thought of as a contribution to a stress-energy in space that if positive is gravitationally repulsive (antigravity) has a positive energy density, but negative pressure state. Observations of galactic separations are consistent with this model for a positive cosmological constant of about
    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  9. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    Just a side note, I don't want to get into a whole thing about the Cosmological constant, I just was wondering how you deal with the observational discrepancies of the cc over the traditional theoretical value assigned to it?

    There is a little bit of wiggle room with the Cosmological constant that really should be accounted for.
     
  10. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    Simple, those coming up with theoretical values for it are absolutely wrong about what is contributing to it. It is the quantum guys that are getting the predicted value wrong. As far as general relativity goes, the value I just gave yields very good predictive models. The next time someone predicts from something he proposes to be its source question him hard as to what the sign of the pressure of his source is. If he says positive, then that's not it. Its something with a negative pressure state.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  11. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    Bold Answer, I like it :Thumbsup:
     
  12. Thomas R. Morrison

    Thomas R. Morrison Administrator

    Messages:
    1,120
    It seems to me like spacetime behaves akin to an incompressible fluid. Because the BOSS Collaboration survey found that the universe is flat to within 1%, the limit of their observational accuracy. That means that for every positive spacetime curvature attributable to mass-energy, at the cosmological scale there's an equal and opposite negative spacetime curvature (which is currently attributed to dark energy). So perhaps there is no dark energy, and instead we're just seeing a cosmological-scale topological principle of an even more general theory of gravitation (that reduces to GR at non-cosmological scales), which simply wasn't discernible until we had sufficient astronomical proficiency to detect the cosmic-scale acceleration that such curvature induces.

    Because I find it very difficult to believe that there just so happens to be an otherwise undetectable field of "dark energy" particles throughout the universe which just so happens to have exactly the right density to produce exactly the right negative pressure in order to balance out the curvature of spacetime induced by mass-energy at this moment in cosmic history. It seems more plausible that we're seeing a physical principle at work; something along the lines of "the law of conservation of spacetime curvature."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    884
    Just in case I contract coronavirus tomorrow, I want to understand what you guys are talking about.

    Positive pressure is attractive, like gravity and negative pressure is repulsive like CC. Is that right?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    The negative pressure is what they are calling "pressure" because it aligns with the Relativity "Vacuum" Which is fine, It's not disproven or anything, So the Negative pressure is what they are assigning to "Dark Energy" That surrounds the universe pulling upon it to accelerate its expanse. The pressure, I can only assume is the ideological effect of space-time "Gravity" The reason, I say Ideological and "Pressure" Is because in Quantum theory The whole Vacuum Idea was thrown out the window. Kind of along with the cosmological constant.

    It's fine to support the relativity model, It's urged rather. I'm just not going to be ready any time to soon to chuck quantum physics completely out the window is all. I still feel relativity does nothing to explain why the dual slit experiment yields results. there is a lot of observational data out there that relativity in its current iteration simply does not explain. While Quantum Physics does at least make an attempt to explain these phenomena rather than pretending those phenomena simply don't exist. I like the Quantum model personally.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2020
    • Thanks Thanks x 1
  15. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    I mean to be fair, Quantum entanglement has been observed, 'Spooky' Quantum Entanglement Finally Captured in Stunning Photo | Live Science Still, Einstein did predict that He just called it something else. So, Point for Einstien I guess.

    Although there is a lot fo discussion to be had about the Quantum Vacuum effect, Which is a thing. Though in a relativity atmosphere one would be hard-pressed to find that conversation lol
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2020
  16. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    But no I do get it though, It's hard to have a QM V.S GR discussion without it derailing into a theories argument thread, And This is a GR thread to boot. So.. I Open the floor to the GR guys.


    I wonder sometimes, I've never been in a room full of legitimate scientists all arguing their theories back and fourth. I wonder, Do debates between esteemed physicists ever get heated?

    #PhysicsLove
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2020
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Dejan Corovic

    Dejan Corovic Noble

    Messages:
    884
    Without expanding this thread into QM it's really strange how QM, which is hugely based on experimental measurements, got vacuum energy so wrong, while getting everything else right.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  18. Shadowprophet

    Shadowprophet Truthiness

    Messages:
    3,694
    Well, the truth is, I love Quantum physics, But If I had to be fair, It makes a lot of Bold assumptions and some of their things labeled theory are simply hypothesis. The truth is, If I absolutely had to and generally wanted to, I could find a lot of things wrong with QM. In the end, I think GR and QM both miss the mark, I am open to other models Like M theory.
    Which to my limited study tries to merge GR and QM into something nicer.

    But no, If had to tell the absolute truth, I only support QM as a means to "poke at the bear" That's an old American saying, It means, I use QM to Urk Thomas And David. But only in a playful way to keep them on their toes. Truthfully, QM is wall to wall bold assumptions and It, in general, has weaker peer support than GR.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    What is meant by "spacetime curvature" is actually something quite different from what is meant by "the universe's curvature". An expanding universe that is flat does have nonzero spacetime curvature. Spacetime curvature refers to whether or not all components of the Reimann tensor is zero. For an expanding universe even if flat, that is not the case. It does have spacetime curvature which means the metric can not be globally transformed to the Lorentzian expression for the metric of special relativity. It can only everywhere locally be transformed to it. As such no globally rectilinear coordinates exist because the spacetime itself is curved. The flatness of the universe refers to a parameter in the Robertson-Walker metric model for an expanding universe. When it is flat, that parameter becomes zero and the metric becomes expressible in isotropic coordinates for which there is only one time only dependent scale factor on the space-space elements of the metric. Essentially at any time one can choose scale so that the metric at that time looks like the metric of special relativity, but then changes, but only in an overall isotropically scaled way over time.
     
    • Awesome Awesome x 1
  20. waitedavid137

    waitedavid137 Honorable

    Messages:
    101
    Its not that the pressure itself is, but its impact on the spacetime geometry does result in gravitation acting that way, yes.
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page