Einstein's Theory of Relativity- Perception of my world changed once I understood!!

Lunarverse states, "Now" isn't a time or a destination, it is the present."
I would like to add to that, "here" is not a discrete location, it is everywhere at once.

 

In referrance to the 10th dimension video:
The theory of that aspect is that if you move from point A to point B you've traveled through something, be it space, time, or some other universal constant. The idea they're trying to drive home there is that even if the 3rd dimension (4th dimension) isn't perceivable to you, it could be possible to bend that span in such a way as to go from point a to point b bypassing the normal space between.

As far as this time debate goes...
It's pretty apparent every one here would agree on the aspect that time is generally thought of as a measurement. You see the sun move in the sky and equate that with the passage of time. You watch the hands on a clock move, and you again recognize it as the passage of time. Etc and so on.
The problem comes up when you start to look at time as a dimension as opposed to a measurement. I've read all the posts about how time doesn't exist so far, and have yet to see anything other than "It's a measurement." being stated. While yes, this is certainly true, it is not considered (at least by any physicist I've read or know) to be just that. For instance using the previously mentioned planet revolving around the sun example:
If you were able to stand out in space indefinitely and watched this process occur, could you not say that a measurable event happened? And for such an event to occur, it must have traveled through/interacted with a series of dimensions. (That is to say the event was not stagnate, had no conceivable imprint, no measurable difference) Almost every one would label one of these dimensions as Time.

 

The clocks of satellites have to be recalibrated every so often because they in fact run differently than our clocks here on earth. (Due to the aforemention phenomenon)

And as far as perception goes, yes it's relative to the observer. EVERYTHING is relative to the observer. One of the reasons why it's the theory of relativity and all that. (IE Perspective. It's not just for your eyes.)

 

Why would the process of a planet revolving around the sun necessitate the dimension of Time?
Time is merely a way to track an objects movement through space. When I watch things move, I need not concern myself with time unless I wish to measure the rate of it's movement.

 

The reason I have a problem with this is because it assumes that clocks are perfect time-keeping devices, and that expectation is a bit absurd.
If the clocks must be re-calibrated, we have two possible explanations.
A) There is a tangible dimension that is purely composed of Time, and this dimension noticeably affects clocks with regards to subjective perspective and their spatial relation because they are time measurement devices. Therefor, one can assume that this dimension Time, affects all objects in the same manner.
or
B) Humanity has not created an completely flawless instrument of measurement, and as such, our machines and clocks must be re-calibrated occasionally.

Which seems more likely

But things are relative to the observer because of the observer, not because of some universal force is weighing down on our perception.

 

Dimensions are required in order to encompass matter. The point of the example (though shortly explained) is that the sun and earth exist in at least 3 perceivable dimensions. (width, height, and depth) when you consider what these masses moved through to get from points X,Y,Z to points AX,BY,CZ the only other dimension we can currently think of is time. (Think of being equate to or perceive)

 

You seem to be saying that Time is some sort of soupy ether that things physically move through.
I don't see the necessity of that sort of explanation. The planet in this instance is moving through space, not time.

 

1st off, I apologize as I think some of my meaning is not getting through to you guys. English is not my first language.
That being said, even taking into consideration your counter example of all clocks being flawed, it may interest you tho know the phenomenon would occur regardless of what clocks you put in space or keep on earth. It happens in such a fashion as to be measurable (with in reason) across the board. Analog clocks, digital clocks, what ever clocks you can think of) The reason for this is based on MASS. Not imperfections in the counting ability of clocks. The same effects could be seen on a human being if given long enough to show. (IE Age) I would love to say more on the subject but I dont think I can explain it well enough for you to get it.

If your interested in understanding what I'm talking about, look into Einstein's work more thoroughly, and be sure to check into Time dilation specifically. (There are several other notable scientists who've weighed in on the subject)

 

Not at all. Motion is not essential to passing though time. Draw a dot on a sheet of paper, walk away. Come back later and it's still there. Sit and watch the dot. It still hasn't moved right? Even though there's no discernible change in the dot or its location it has 'moved' through time.

Time is a perceptionally based thing, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist when you aren't personally there to measure it.

 

I understand your position regardless of any language barrier you may feel hindered by, but my contention is that time does not exist in that manner. It's akin to putting the cart before the horse.

 

In physics, time and entropy are synonyms.
[Mid-19th century. < Greek en- "in" + tropē "change," after energy ]

 

Whether or not the clock is digital or analog is beyond the point. The theory remains constant: "Moving clocks are measured to tick more slowly than an observer's "stationary" clock."

One tick is simply one unit of time. It is not the case that this theory has been tested with a bunch of false clocks...

 

Every person has his own unique perception of his expectations, in the most general way, on how they perceive life and what they expect in the near future. Those expectations essentially create a 'table' of probabilities in each individuals life. These 'probabilities' stemming from your expectations, is your WORLD. It is the RANGE of ALL possibilities that YOU created. Nothing exist to you outside this range.
The human brain is flexible and it can be manipulated. I believe that health - physical and mental- well being has a lot more to do then your mental state and how you literally FEEL about everything thats going on in your life than anything else.

Thats why some people die from diseases that come out of nowhere and strike quickly, and others successfully live with diseases that are known to kill people on large scales worldwide. Some people grow very old and remain in good overall condition, while others age as quick as 40-45...

 

High Probability vs. Lower Probability is compared by your conscious and unconscious expectations. Equilibrium is just that, a state of complete balance. There is no higher or lower state of equilibrium.

 

i felt the same way. i had no idea what e=mc2 meant til one night i was on 5.5g of mushies and "the thought of einstein" came through me after watching a pingpong ball bounce. i have no idea how but i had the full comprehention of quantum physics and was gven absolute thruths about laws of the universe and was later told these are the thoughts of einstein. ( guess everything really is connected haha) but yea i feel u man it deff changes the way u look at everything

 

What I've never understood is the curvature of space. When you watch videos explaining this, everything appears to be on a single field. The sun and all the planets on one flat plane, warping it.

So do the planets rotate around the sun at identical degrees? Does our moon rotate around it at the same degree? Or would earth have its own plane it's bending as well?

I don't see why the sun would bend space in one direction any more than all of its directions. If all of space has one flat surface, I would really like to know. Would it be possible for an object to orbit the sun at a perpendicular angle to earth?

 

or in multiple seperate realities there is an earth just like our rotating the sun in every other possiible angle for all 365 degrees

 

Man am telling u these documentary's are made with metaphors be it a story or a picture which are great for ppl like us with no real understanding of physics and all the the math behind it. They make it interesting but these metaphors do not capture the true phenomena like the gravity u talk about it would seem like there is a big object that is pulling everything down to the bottom of the screen in reality the earth is the gravity's source and it should be pulling everything in around it from all directions but its hard to represent this on a 2D screen or on a paper page so they opt for what u talk about.

 

So I guess planets would create more like globes of gravity than flat planes... And then they talk about searching for a needed "graviton." I do not get this stuff. I can understand a body moving at such a high velocity that it would maintain an orbit, maybe, in the sphere of warped space created by a planet. Why are gravitons necessary? Would that just be the difference between space that is bent and space that isn't bent?

 

Gravitons are suppose to be virtual particles by which I mean they pop in to existence for a very short time to signal the presents of a real particle to another real particle. These virtual particles are photons and have high energy levels, real particles or photons have low levels of energy. Basically the 4 fundamental forces of the universe work on the principal that states virtual particles cannot travel far because they have borrowed energy and this loan is taken back by the universe very fast there for say electromagnetic force diminishes with distance so do the other forces. Gravity however extends its grip indefinitely am not sure bout this one well anyways way to far compared with the other 3, I think that's the problem with gravity that's why they want to see this graviton because it seems to act on something other principal.


Ok my go at gravity.


Say empty space is like a sea of negatively charge electrons with potential energy do to uncertainty principal some positively charged electrons pop in to existence they collide and destroy each other giving back the borrowed energy. This is called zero point energy.


Now then an object in space is made out of matter, matter is made out of atoms, atoms have electrons that loosely put it orbit it. This orbiting requires energy other ways electron would simply spiral in to the nuclei, I remember reading that zero point energy is responsible for this renewable energy. So what does it mean?


Imagine the fabric of space as this sea of negatively charged electrons some of them are just there some of them are colliding with the positively charged electrons. Now lets put an object in this image something like a basketball, the atoms within the ball need energy so the sea of electrons around it rush in to help seens this zero point energy is evenly distributed it creates a low pressure area sorta speak around the ball which draws more of this sea/fabric of space towards the ball from all directions in turn creating curvature of space time.