Relativity

I like to think, and I want to avoid fallacies. i was, during a few years in my life, obsessed with the question: "how do we observe time and space". I was looking for answers via logic reasoning. And I discovered Einstein last year, even if I did not want that. But I necessarily must confront myself his ideas about time and space, to answer the question: "how do we observe time and space?" So, I walked through the spaceships of Einstein's thoughtexperiments and stood in heavy fields of gravity to observe the nightsky. I did a lot of thoughtexperiments. And I came to the conclusion that 'the observer' will always, wherever he/she/it goes have the same idea of time …

If you passed through a BH's event horizon and survived the tidal forces, would the interior seem much like the rest of the universe outside of a BH? - Inside the EH, your future light cone points toward the singularity. This means that in every direction that light can travel, is the singularity. Therefore it appears to be all around you. The singularity looks "as big as" all of space. - Every future light cone very close to the singularity is also pointed toward the singularity, so you can't see it. It looks like blackness at the edge of space, receding from you. Light cones of objects around you also tilt toward the singularity. They all look like they'r…

Intergalactic space travel is possible and will not take a huge amount of time to get there because of special relativity. If we go at speeds very close to the speed of light, then the time it takes relative to us and the length of the trip relative to us would be shorter because of special relativity. Time is relative, and in special relativity, then if an observer sees something with a relative velocity v, then the time that passes for that object relative to the observer t'=t(1-v2/c2)1/2. Same with length. The length would be l'=l(1-v2/c2)1/2. But this is relative. Relative to us, then we are staying still, and everything else is moving, so then everything else contrac…

Is it possible to use gravity to accelerate something to the speed of light? past the swartzchild radius then could something accelerate to c?

Isn't it true that if something does not have mass it does not have energy? I always thought so, so let me explain... If the 'thing' doesn't have mass, it will not be able to react, as mass is in effect stored energy. or what?

This question covers a few categories, but I'll put it here first. If you are approaching the edge of a black hole and time is slowing down, what happens to your thoughts? Would the speed of your thoughts slow down too or would you continue to experience existence the same way for eternity?

I was just wondering in general relativity how you would be able to calculate how strong gravity is? I know that you can calculate spacetime curvature, but how do you calculate the force of gravity in general relativity?

I'm confused about time dilation. I thought it meant the speed a clock ticks as a function of the speed the clock is moving. Lets say a clock is on an object A that is approaching object B. Lets say someone on Object B shines a light on object A. There will be time dilation due to the speed of object A that will make the speed of light appear to be constant no matter how fast B approaches A. We can describe that as deltaTA/deltaTB. That describes the speed at which the clock is ticking. Lets say someone on object fires an object at 10 miles an hour toward object A. Why doesn't a person on object A measure the speed of the approaching object as 10 * deltaTB/deltaTA…

Is it possible to model refraction using General Relativity ? If you assume local speed of light inside a low refractive index material to be c, and find the length contraction and time dilation for an "outside observer",could you work out the local curvature?

Note: I am familiar with (special) relativity and its implications. This is just a question about experimental results. I remembered hearing many years ago that data was showing that the speed of light in vacuum is getting slower. So, recently I decided to google it and I see a bunch of articles about the same thing. But I know from experience that articles on the internet can have very outdated information or just plain incorrect information sometimes. and the articles make it sound like it's not confirmed yet too, which doesn't make sense to me because isn't measuring the speed of light a relatively easy thing to do? I find it hard to believe that this c…

Can my 3d video game program be used as Cartesian Coordinates for Space Time And Relativity?? Yes I am lazy I am having problems with visualizing QM wave functions. What I want to do is use my 3d modeling program of game creation, and just use this to build things such as: Minkowski Space, Lorentz Transformations and etc. But I want it to work as the equations themselves and see the visual results and take photos of my ideas, not sure if this is possible??? Minkowski Space https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space I would take say a 3d mesh sphere = a particle, and place it at position x , y directions and animate this. But not sure…

Hey,I have question bugging me for a couple of days now. I wanted to ask that according to Einstein's mass energy equivalence,if scientists create a warp drive allowing them to travel FTL(suppose at a speed 'c2' mentioned in formula E=mc2),which energy will they convert in while travelling at double the light speed or will they have safety measures to prevent the ship from turning into energy?Will they be stationary in the ship according to relativity?Will slowing down again turn them into matter i.e. mass?

How do reference frames affect experiments, and how do they come into play in general and special relativity? I'm doing A-level physics, so I have a general understanding of certain aspects of physics, but this is an area (all be it small) that makes my head hurt. And thank you in advance for any relevant explanations or answers given.

That atomic clock on board of a deep space probe launched decades ago, if turns around back and safely lands on earth, will show the same or different time than that other atomic clock that never traveled ? After decades, an atomic clock that has always been at the equator will show equal or different time than one that has always been at 10 metres from the north pole ?

Hi, I've read on several forums and websites there there is no such thing as absolute speed or movement, it's always relative because there is no fixed frame of reference. But, if the speed of light is constant and thus independent of the speed/movement of it's source, than this must mean that the direction or vector of a light beam is also constant once it is generated. If the vector (x,y,x) of a light beam is not influenced by the movement/speed of its source (lets say a laser diode) than a light beam in it self is a fixed frame of reference. So this would mean that if I can somehow capture a light beam and measure the (apparent) change in its direction, I…

I found the following on the web, comments welcome!!! http://squishtheory.wordpress.com/about/ The triplets paradox text removed

It is now approaching 100 years since the inception of general relativity from Elbert Einstein. Despite the enormous labour of scientists world wide backed by heavy resource investments from government agencies and private institutions along with highly developed and accurate experimental instruments, the application of general relativity is still a mysterious scientific topic. No any scientific topic ever achieved such a highly enormous scientific research labour, research resources, research instruments, research time and political favour in the history of scientific research for implementation like general relativity. Apart from astronomy where most of their scienti…

Hi guys, I was recently analyzing the famous train and tunnel paradox which is based on length contraction. If somebody isn't familiar to it, here's the link: . So in the example there are two guillotines and the most important thing is that all observers agree that none of them hits the train. The first observer is at rest with respect to the tunnel and in his reference frame the guillotines went off simultaneously, but the train got contracted so nothing happened to the train. The second observer is moving towards the first guillotine and away from the second so in his reference frame the first guillotine went off and the second followed, so nothing happened …

I've always heard this well known phenomenon but I have never really understood in detail why it is so, can anyone help me out?

I have heard that when astronauts travel to outer space they travel forward in time into the future and are a few seconds younger when they return to earth. Is this true or are they just ageing slower due to the difference in their velocity to ours. What is actually physically happening to the atoms in their bodies?

Gravitational Potential Energy (GPE) ~ GM2/R equivalent rest-mass energy = mc2 GM2/R = mc2 m/M ~ RS/R (actually, 1/5 x RS/R) So, order-of-magnitude, the rest-mass equivalent, of some self-gravitating body, is a similar fraction of the total actual mass, as that body's Schwarzschild radius is, to its actual physical radius.

I am lead to believe this is the case, if it's not then well I guess I am wasting my time!! So.....if they are how is this possible, we are told this is impossible. It seems to be the case that people will say yes some are moving faster than the speed of light but that is because space if expanding. That leads to new questions such as, how fast are they really moving. It seems to me that nothing is moving very fast really indeed I think that basically everything is basically pretty static and that there is a standard time for the universe which I will call 'real-time'. So I think there is a common reference point for time and that any different time …

The speed of light is measured to 299 792 458 m / s and 1 meter defined to 1/299 792 458 of the speed of light. Let us assume that A live at the top of a skyscraper and B in the cellar the past 10 billion years. After 10 billion years B’s clock have “lost” (let's say) 10 second due to different gravitational influence, compared to A’s clock. 10 billion years ago 2 photons was leaving a star 10 billion light years away and hit A and B at (almost) the same moment (splitsecond) 10 billion year after. B would now say that he measured the time it took for the photon to reach earth to 10 second less than A measured. B would therefore claim that either the speed of light mu…

I'm trying to fully understand the effects of time when travelling near the speed of light... Now, if people on a ship were travelling at 99% (roughly) the speed of light, I hear it will take about 80 years to reach the edge of our galaxy. My question is; is it 80 years for us on earth, or 80 years for the people on-board the ship?

Warp Field Mechanics 101 http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20110015936 Warp Field Mechanics 102: Energy Optimization http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20130011213