generalrelativity Posted December 1, 2017 Author Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Strange said: 9 minutes ago, Strange said: Edited December 1, 2017 by generalrelativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 50 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Ahaa! At least we are making a bit of sense now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 1 hour ago, generalrelativity said: In Einstein's paper, "The Foundation of the Generalised Theory of Relativity" (1916), Einstein represents gravity with Maxwell's equations. This one: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Foundation_of_the_Generalised_Theory_of_Relativity ? (why do I need to keep providing your links for you?) The only reference to Maxwell there is where he shows how Maxwell’s equations work in the framework of GR This is not a description of gravity. That was in the first 40 or so pages that you seem to have ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 "We have now deduced the most general laws which the gravitation-field and matter satisfy when we use a co-ordinate system for which {\displaystyle {\sqrt {-g}}=1}. Thereby we achieve an important simplification in all our formulas and calculations, without renouncing the conditions of general covariance, as we have obtained the equations through a specialisation of the co-ordinate system from the general covariant-equations. Still the question is not without formal interest, whether, when the energy-components of the gravitation-field" (Einstein, section 20). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 On 11/19/2017 at 7:46 AM, generalrelativity said: Is the LIGO experiment a hoax or something because they are assuming that we are all completely stupid or something. What do you think? Are we all stupid? Or is stupid is what stupid does? Perhaps this is simply a delusion affecting yourself, as this experiment now has been confirmed by three detectors...Or will you now claim conspiracy? My suggestion is that you actually learn some stuff re SR/GR, gravitational waves and physics in general, because in reality, you seem to have put a conglomeration of general errors together [as others have informed you] and somehow reach a delusional conclusion based on those errors and erroneous interpretations as to what did happen and was detected at least 6 times now. 1 hour ago, Strange said: This one: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Foundation_of_the_Generalised_Theory_of_Relativity ? (why do I need to keep providing your links for you?) I'm sure he'll now profusely thank you from the bottom of his heart for helping him over that hurdle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 6 hours ago, generalrelativity said: "We have now deduced the most general laws which the gravitation-field and matter satisfy when we use a co-ordinate system for which {\displaystyle {\sqrt {-g}}=1}. Thereby we achieve an important simplification in all our formulas and calculations, without renouncing the conditions of general covariance, as we have obtained the equations through a specialisation of the co-ordinate system from the general covariant-equations. Still the question is not without formal interest, whether, when the energy-components of the gravitation-field" (Einstein, section 20). This is, again, from the section on how Maxwell's equation work in the context of GR. It is not about gravity. For that you need to refer to sections 1 to 9 and possibly 15 and 16. I assume you are familiar with tensors and their use in this context? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) And what is the field of "gravitation-field" referring to ? Edited December 2, 2017 by generalrelativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: And what is the field of "gravitation-field" referring to ? Space-time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Strange said: Space-time Space-time is a coordinate system not a field. Edited December 2, 2017 by generalrelativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 § 13. Equation of motion of a material point in a gravitation-field. Expression for the field-components of gravitation. (Einstein, section 20). § 14. The Field-equation of Gravitation in the absence of matter. § 16. General formulation of the field-equation of Gravitation. "The question may lie open whether the theories of the electro-magnetic field and the gravitational-field together, will form a sufficient basis for the theory of matter. The general relativity postulate can teach us no new principle. But by building up the theory it must be shown whether electro-magnetism and gravitation together can achieve what the former alone did not succeed in doing." (Einstein5, Part D) We have now deduced the most general laws which the gravitation-field and matter satisfy when we use a co-ordinate system for which (g)^1/2 = =1. Thereby we achieve an important simplification in all our formulas and calculations, without renouncing the conditions of general covariance, as we have obtained the equations through a specialisation of the co-ordinate system from the general covariant-equations. Still the question is not without formal interest, whether, when the energy-components of the gravitation-field and matter is defined in a generalised manner without any specialisation of co-ordinates, the laws of conservation have the form of the equation (56), and the field-equations of gravitation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 2, 2017 Author Share Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) https://www.google.com/search?q=cat+got+your+tongue&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CRo4naz7LYxwIjhsmbAKBQaBgCQGlyq7BY6yIJk6O8nRBjfb1uW9e_1GQBWu_1Zi62CEmoQOGdIYQK6P2wDj6nP-JvfioSCWyZsAoFBoGAEeRhgR4mP52gKhIJJAaXKrsFjrIR41ZN7tRPKJUqEgkgmTo7ydEGNxFHapYdmgGFiCoSCdvW5b178ZAFEd_1bVVSRKgWzKhIJa79mLrYISagRCEGWjzyeA10qEglA4Z0hhAro_1RHcepIkwDy6NCoSCbAOPqc_14m9-EXM2yLZHR0yX&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjrx8H6sOzXAhUJ6WMKHZYlBxQQ9C8IHw&biw=1600&bih=769&dpr=1#imgrc=SGMWJwXJptD8XM: https://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+sticking+tongue+out&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS773US773&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixgNfEsezXAhVD4WMKHcJdBzQQ_AUICigB&biw=1600&bih=769#imgrc=UPc9rpwqQYux-M: https://www.google.com/search?q=Eduard+einstein&sa=X&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&ved=0ahUKEwjwxbvNs-zXAhUD1WMKHa7uD40QiR4IrwE&biw=1600&bih=769#imgrc=VXTyhhRhY-bRdM: diz is ma ass creem. Edited December 2, 2017 by generalrelativity -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, generalrelativity said: diz is ma ass creem Blimey. I didn't realise you were only 11. That explains a lot. 4 hours ago, generalrelativity said: Space-time is a coordinate system not a field. He says, immediately before posting several quotes saying that it is a field. BTW the Einstein paper you referenced earlier (see my link) doesn't say anything about gravitational waves. You want this one: http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol7-trans/25 (Strangely, he seems to have forgotten to say they are electromagnetic!) Edited December 3, 2017 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beecee Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 8 hours ago, generalrelativity said: And what is the field of "gravitation-field" referring to ? The gravitational field is geometry of spacetime, as dictated by mass/energy. Spacetime is the multi-dimensional framework/field within which we locate events and describe the relationships between them in terms of spatial coordinates and time. The concept of spacetime follows from the observation that the speed of light is constant and invariant, i.e. it does not vary with the motion of the emitter or the observer. Spacetime allows a description of reality that is common for all observers in our universe regardless of their motion. Gravitational waves are just one of the predictions of GR that has now been validated six times, with three instruments around the world. GR stands without any real challenge as the overwhelmingly supported model of gravity by the power of its predictions and its compatibility with the BB, and the evolution of this spacetime from t+10-43 seconds. Obviously going on your remarks in the first post, you seem to have some beef with GR, and/or gravitational waves. So what is this beef? Why? What you need to do is invalidate the current findings or show a means by which our observations are explained better then the current incumbent model. Obviously like many others with an agenda [although I havn't quite worked out yours as yet...religious??] you are unable to do so and simply find relief for your frustrations on forums such as this, open to any Tom, Dick and Harry. Edited December 3, 2017 by beecee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 3, 2017 Author Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 16 hours ago, beecee said: The gravitational field is geometry of spacetime, as dictated by mass/energy. What is mass/energy? Do you mean kinetic energy E = 1/2 mv2? The rest (mass) is to hard for me to understand. 20 hours ago, Strange said: Blimey. I didn't realise you were only 11. That explains a lot. He says, immediately before posting several quotes saying that it is a field. BTW the Einstein paper you referenced earlier (see my link) doesn't say anything about gravitational waves. You want this one: http://einsteinpapers.press.princeton.edu/vol7-trans/25 (Strangely, he seems to have forgotten to say they are electromagnetic!) The ether of Michelson's experiment is not a field? Edited December 3, 2017 by generalrelativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: What is mass/energy? Do you mean kinetic energy E = 1/2 mv2? Mass and energy are equivalent (related by e=mc2). So in the stress-energy tensor that defines the gravitational effect of a system the mass is represented as the equivalent energy. There are other terms (e.g. pressure, momentum, sheer stress, etc) that also contribute. 5 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Za ether is not a field? There is no ether. Although, before you bring it up (as many anti-relativity cranks do) he did once use the word "ether" to refer to space-time. Edited December 3, 2017 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 3, 2017 Author Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Strange said: Mass and energy are equivalent (related by e=mc2). So in the stress-energy tensor that defines the gravitational effect of a system the mass is represented as the equivalent energy. There are other terms (e.g. pressure, momentum, sheer stress, etc) that also contribute. There is no ether. Although, before you bring it up (as many anti-relativity cranks do) he did once use the word "ether" to refer to space-time. Where do you get the equation e=mc2? Can you cite your source? If there is not ether then what happening to Fresnel's diffraction mechanism. In Russia, Fresnel is a hero. Like the great Putin which I love berry much. Edited December 3, 2017 by generalrelativity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 5 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Where do you get the equation e=mc2? Can you cite your source? Really? The original paper: http://www.astro.puc.cl/~rparra/tools/PAPERS/e_mc2.pdf And for a bit of history: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/was-einstein-the-first-to-invent-e-mc2/ Some more discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence 8 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: If there is not ether then what happening to Fresnel's diffraction mechanism. Why does that require an ether? It just requires that light is a wave phenomenon. There is no evidence for ether. (And never has been, it was just an assumption.) There is no need for ether. An ether would have impossible physical properties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 3, 2017 Author Share Posted December 3, 2017 1 minute ago, Strange said: Really? The original paper: http://www.astro.puc.cl/~rparra/tools/PAPERS/e_mc2.pdf And for a bit of history: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/was-einstein-the-first-to-invent-e-mc2/ Some more discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass–energy_equivalence Could you explain in your own words what the variable e represents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 2 minutes ago, generalrelativity said: Could you explain in your own words what the variable e represents? Energy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
generalrelativity Posted December 3, 2017 Author Share Posted December 3, 2017 (edited) 32 minutes ago, Strange said: Energy What kind of energy. Potential energy, kinetic energy, Russian energy, Judo energy or kitten energy. What? My cat https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ee/Russian_blue_head_sm.jpg&imgrefurl=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Blue&h=225&w=270&tbnid=4Obo1wPQmy-RzM:&tbnh=166&tbnw=200&usg=__vwb2Jll-UKj5RGyhZV9qV5t548k%3D&vet=10ahUKEwiYu_-05e7XAhVQ8GMKHU5VBVoQ_B0IqAEwEw..i&docid=Pllmyu1FsaEFdM&itg=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYu_-05e7XAhVQ8GMKHU5VBVoQ_B0IqAEwEw Nastastia she have lots of energy too. She like to jump on the chair and tear the covering to pieces when she gets mad or she pee on the carpet and I cry and cry and she do more bad. She very Russian. https://www.google.com/search?q=cat+got+your+tongue&tbm=isch&tbs=rimg:CRo4naz7LYxwIjhsmbAKBQaBgCQGlyq7BY6yIJk6O8nRBjfb1uW9e_1GQBWu_1Zi62CEmoQOGdIYQK6P2wDj6nP-JvfioSCWyZsAoFBoGAEeRhgR4mP52gKhIJJAaXKrsFjrIR41ZN7tRPKJUqEgkgmTo7ydEGNxFHapYdmgGFiCoSCdvW5b178ZAFEd_1bVVSRKgWzKhIJa79mLrYISagRCEGWjzyeA10qEglA4Z0hhAro_1RHcepIkwDy6NCoSCbAOPqc_14m9-EXM2yLZHR0yX&tbo=u&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjrx8H6sOzXAhUJ6WMKHZYlBxQQ9C8IHw&biw=1600&bih=769&dpr=1#imgrc=SGMWJwXJptD8XM https://www.google.com/search?q=einstein+sticking+tongue+out&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS773US773&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwixgNfEsezXAhVD4WMKHcJdBzQQ_AUICigB&biw=1600&bih=769#imgrc=UPc9rpwqQYux-M: Thank you for all you help. All of my people will love you so for me to help you, thank you berry many and my kitty love you. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ LIGO stellar gravitational waves that are formed by a black hole are detected using Michelson's laser interferometer based on Einstein's general relativity. "The prediction of gravitational waves (GWs), oscillations in the space–time metric that propagate at the speed of light, is one of the most profound differences between Einstein's general theory of relativity and the Newtonian theory of gravity that it replaced." (LIGO Collaboration, § 2). "As illustrated in figure 1, the oscillating quadrupolar strain pattern of a GW is well matched by a Michelson interferometer, which makes a very sensitive comparison of the lengths of its two orthogonal arms. LIGO utilizes three specialized Michelson interferometers, located at two sites (see figure 2): an observatory on the Hanford site in Washington houses two interferometers, the 4 km-long H1 and 2 km-long H2 detectors; and an observatory in Livingston Parish, Louisiana, houses the 4 km-long L1 detector." (LIGO Collaboration, § 3). "Figure 1 illustrates the basic concept of how a Michelson interferometer is used to measure a GW strain. The challenge is to make the instrument sufficiently sensitive: at the targeted strain sensitivity of 10−21, the resulting arm length change is only ~10−18 m, a thousand times smaller than the diameter of a proton." (LIGO Collaboration, § 4). "On September 14, 2015 at 09:50:45 UTC the two detectors of the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory simultaneously observed a transient gravitational-wave signal. The signal sweeps upwards in frequency from 35 to 250 Hz with a peak gravitational-wave strain of 1.0 × 10-21." (Abbott, Abstract). "It matches the waveform predicted by general relativity for the inspiral and merger of a pair of black holes and the ringdown of the resulting single black hole." (Abbott, Abstract). The Caltech-MIT LIGO detected celestial gravitational waves that originate from a 1.3 billion light year black hole. The LIGO interferometer's armature contraction is represented with Einstein's general relativity but Michelson's experiment is based on an interference effect that is formed by the motion of Fresnel's ether, composed of matter, that does not physically exist (vacuum). Also, the LIGO gravitational wave mechanism describes the interferometer's armature length contraction of 10-18 m but the diameter of the atoms that compose the surface of the interferometer reflection mirror is 10-10 m, and the LIGO does not present photographs of the interferometer's interference effect. Einstein's relativity is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity that is used to contract the length of the interferometer's armature. Using the armature length of L = 4,000 m and Lβ = L' where β = (1 - v2/c2)1/2 the variable L' represents the contracted interferometer armature length which would require a translational velocity v of less than 1 m/s to form a armature contraction of 10-18 m yet the minimum value of the translational velocity v formed by the earth's daily motion is 462 m/s. In addition, the LIGO experiment is based on a constant magnitude of the translational velocity but Einstein's translationtal velocity formed by the earth's daily and yearly motions is not constant. At the surface of the earth, for the time of 6:00 pm, the magnitude of the earth's tangential velocity vector v that forms Einstein's translation velocity is 462 m/s (fig 7) and increases to 5,077 m/s at 7:00 pm. At midnight, the translational velocity is 30,462 m/s. The magnitude of Einstein's translational velocity increases from 462 m/s to 30,462 m/s (6:00 pm - 12:00 am) yet the LIGO experiment is based on the constant magnitude of Einstein's translational velocity to form the .10-18 m contraction of the interferometer armature. Time velocity ___________________________ 6:00 pm 462 m/s 7:00 pm 5,077 m/s 8:00 pm 10,154 m/s 9:00 pm 15,231 m/s 10:00 pm 20,308 m/s 11:00 pm 25,385 m/s 12:00 am 30,462 m/s _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Edited December 3, 2017 by generalrelativity -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 3, 2017 Share Posted December 3, 2017 ! Moderator Note Since generalrelativity is a sockpuppet of a previously banned account, I'm closing this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts