Relativity

Hi everyone, As I already mentioned in my first post about the gravitation hypothesis, I'm not a physicist. I work on logic problems. One such logical problem I saw in the "Ladder Paradox" which explains the relativity of simultaneity. - - - The relativity of simultaneity shows a not so small discrepancy when a third simultaneous even is introduced in the “Ladder Paradox” thought experiment. Link to the Wikipedia page, treating the ladder paradox – click HERE to read. I'm sure that all of you know the so-called paradox. For better understanding, I’ll use the same graphics, modified for the purpose of the problem. (The text below is copy/paste from …

When a beam of light approaches a Black Hole "head on" would a stationary* observer between it and the Black Hole notice any change in it as it approaches? If it cannot go any faster than c but is being pulled into the Black Hole , does the beam become more energetic ? *For the observer to be stationary near a Black Hole ,he must,I suppose be accelerating towards the beam of light and so would that explain the increased energy between him and the oncoming beam of light ?(if indeed there is an increase in energy)

I've heard it said that Einstein first mentioned "light clocks" or first mentioned the dynamic that would lead to "light clocks" in his 1910 paper. (Sorry, I forgot where I heard that. But I believe I've heard that multiple times. Anyway ...) I've wanted to see if for myself and so I've gone looking for this 1910 paper, assuming that a paper this famous and this old would surely be in PDF format (and in English) on the internet. But I can't find it. In Wikipedia's list of Einstein publications (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientific_publications_by_Albert_Einstein), there are 6 publications listed for 1910. One of them is listed as dealing with Sp…

When you are moving at a large velocity, v, the brightness of the stars changes. Does anyone know the ratio of the brightness of the stars in the primed frame to which in the unprimed frame?

I have read a good few people complain that the rubber sheet or trampoline analogy is a bad one. Or rather perhaps what they say is that it is taken too literally and that it is not well enough described as simply an analogy and so, like all analogies breaks down at certain points. I want to ask at what points this analogy is actually accurate. For example ,if we actually drew grid lines on the rubber sheet and placed a metal object in the centre how accurately would the distorted parallelograms depict the spacetime graph lines that are actually used to model spacetime in the vicinity of massive or energetic object? Is there anything in fact about…

Lorentz alters the dimensions of Michelson's experimental apparatus to reverse the negative result of Michelson's experiment to justify the existence of Fresnel's ether, composed of matter, (Michelson, p. 120). "§ 9. Hitherto all quantities of the order p2x /V2 have been neglected. As is well known, these must be taken into account in the discussion of Michelson's experiment, in which two rays of light interfered after having traversed rather long paths, the one parallel to the direction of the earth's motion, and the other perpendicular to it. In order to explain the negative result of this experiment Fitzgerald and myself have supposed that, in consequence of the…

Got me thinking about an antigravitational floater system based on alcubierre warp drive (or Warp Bubble if you prefer). But then I asked myself, since space warping is messing with dilation/compression it could shred or crush anything on the distortion's area, air molecules included. Although, these warpings deal with the very basis/ground of reality, the spacetime, wouldn't these distortions also change the way things are? the distance atoms need to be to keep relation, how far two particles have to be to form bonds , how far energy can travel or transit... In other words... Wouldn't that be okay and not harmful at all?... Or would it hurt, tear, press and possibly…

According to Michelson, a stationary ether, composed of matter, exists in all of stellar space. At the surface of the earth, the earth daily and yearly rotational motions interaction with Michelson's stationary celestial ether forms an ether wind which Michelson's experiment is testing. An arc lamp and a beam splitter are used to form two light rays. One light ray propagates in the direction parallel to the ether wind and the second light ray propagates perpendicular to the ether wind. Initially only the parallel light ray is affected by the ether wind since the parallel light ray is propagating in the direction of the ether wind which would increase the velocity of the p…

In Relativity when something is moving does it become actually physically shorter or does it only appear shorter in the rest frame?

Just an odd thought that occurred to me seconds ago. Time slows, for objects under acceleration. The tip of a tuning fork is constantly accelerating one way, then the other. The g forces must be very high. Could you set up an experiment to slow the ageing of a radioactive isotope right down, by putting it on the tip of a similar spring, and maintaining it's vibration?

I just wondered, as the Universe expands, is it gaining energy in some way? If the Milky Way moves one kilometer further away from the Andromeda Galaxy, (ignoring it's existing motion), doesn't that mean that a stupendous amount of potential energy has been added to the system? Because of the distance apart being part of the energy equation? Is there a known source for this, or have I got it wrong in the first place?

If photon has no rest mass how it could have relativistic mass which is actually apprent mass added to the mass in motion .

Hello, I have been wondering if according to the relativity theory if something could be truly flat.

Einstein once said "if you can't explain it to a 6 year old you don't understand it yourself". Can you try and explain Relativity as simple as possible?

I've been auditing a Relativity course on Coursera. (It's pretty good. This guy's a real clear thinker.) In one of his lectures he gives the formula for calculating the amount of non synchronization between two moving clocks. This is shown in the screen shot above. He says its the distance between the two moving clocks in the rest frame (in the screen shot above this is both "L" in his drawing and "D" in his formula) times the relative velocity divided by the speed of light squared. I have no reason to doubt him, but I just wanted to verify what he is saying by finding the same formula on another site (or sites). The strange thing is that when I type in "no…

I think I am right to say that the causative mechanism between the two phenomena has not yet been uncovered . Rather than ask what it might be ,can I ask what main theories have been discounted? Does all ongoing research into this area require some kind of input from quantum theory or are there any purely classical theories that are also being pursued ?(I hoped I have not mangled the terminology with my use of the term "theories")

Eniestein while publishing his theory haven't considered that any quantity having rest mass zero doesn't exist in reality. Photon necessarily should have such energy density within each quantum that its density variation in different points of space imparts it two natures particle where density is highest and energy (wave) where density is lower than threshold value .hence transition between the two natures is so frequent that it can't be determines by any special equipment,Hence imparting it dual nature . Rest mass and relativistic mass of photon falls under controversy while the postulates that I intended are pondered well . concept is based on the rest mass of light i…

I tend to be clueless, but it doesn't stop me from having questions? When I think black hole, and Schwarzschild radius I tend to think spherical, but if a black hole can have plumes of energy emitting on opposite sides I want to assume that at those two points there can be no Schwarzschild radius by definition if the plumes originate from within the black hole. If the plumes originate outside the black hole why the concentration at those points? Also, artist renditions seem to suggest that the Schwarzschild radius need not be spherical? Leading me to think that the black hole doesn't need to be spherical? Does spinning flatten the black hole? It doesn't seem that it …

I'm looking for an expression for the deflection of light in a static gravitational field. Referring to 'deflection of star light past the sun' in Sean Carroll's "Spacetime and Geometry" - equation 7.80 for the "transverse gradient": Deflection angle is As far as I understand it, the transverse gradient is only valid for weak fields/small deflection. And I'm not looking for a general integral solution - I'd like to plot photon paths in strong fields, so I'm looking for the instantaneous deflection, which I'll plot/integrate numerically, based on mass, radial distance from mass, and a…

I am curious about the formula for gravitational time dilation. I have scoured the internet and can't seem to find any explanation for the variables in the formula. I am aware of velocity time dilation and that formula, but gravitational time dilation stumps me. It should be noted I am only a sophomore in high school so i might not fully grasp all of the mathematics yet however, any help is much appreciated.

I've read various accounts of the GPS that invoke both SR and GR in making required adjustments, but this use of both SR and GR confuses me. SR applies only in inertial frames and GR in all frames. Inertial frames don't actually exist in nature b/c there's always some kind of gravitational field present, even in empty space, so strictly speaking SR should never apply in the real world. But we still use it as a useful tool even though we know it doesn't strictly apply. That said, I'm confused why both SR and GR are invoked when it comes to the GPS system b/c it seems that any adjustments that would have to be made would require GR only. Or is SR being used for some adjustm…

[Link removed by moderator]

(apologies in advance for probably having already asked this -I plead obtuseness and a tendency to uneducatabilty so perhaps I will get lenience) It seems to me that Relativity at its basis boils down to the observed fact that light is always observed to be traveling at the same speed regardless of the relative (to said observer) speed of the object which emitted it. I understand that the reason for this is bound up in Maxwell's equations (which I have been unable so far to incorporate into my understanding) Are there any other ways of contextualizing this irrefutable fact that would allow someone with strong mathematical and theo…

If we use a thought experiment and supposed an entity on a neutron star, could look out at the outside universe, would the enormous gravity field of such a massive neutron star skew time so that the outside universe would appear to move faster relative to it? We could take this further and suppose two entities on different neutron stars could look at each other, what effect would time dilation then have on each of the entities?