Relativity

I don't understand the concept of when we move in light speed we age less than in earth. Why? Is it coz of the gravity. Internet says that when gravity increase, the time becomes slows. So in the space one must age faster than the earth. But it isn't like that. One more thing when we move with light speed, gravity will be generated inside the space shuttle, but it won't be more than the earth. Again they say when gravity increase, time slows..so moving with light year we should age more 🤔 If going through my theory, earth may had less gravity in past time and eventually increased with the time, due to that reason life span of human decreased with time and a…

According to this video 1:24:00). < hperlink . If someone is a very long distance away and they reverse their direction of travel from away from me toward me, their experience of time is supposed to switch from my past to my future. I have been trying to understand why their direction of travel makes this difference. How this is possible?

Well GR 's equations show(I have to take this on trust as I have not learned them personally) that sources of mass and energy curve neighbouring spacetime with the result that bodies move along the geodesics and that we see as them "falling" towards that source ,when account is taken of their existing momentum. Why do these bodies move "down" rather than "up"? Is there something in the equations that only allows them to ,as it were be attracted rather than repelled by the sources of mass-energy?

X_B is = 0. Why do the gamma get crossed out?

I have some problems/questions regarding the existence of black holes. First, here is the current state-of-affairs in the physics community AFAIK: Black holes "exist" in the sense that they are physical objects in the Universe Black holes contain an event horizon, located at the Schwarzschild radius, beyond which "nothing can escape" Black holes are likely located at the center of many galaxies, including our own; "micro black holes" are also likely formed and quickly evaporate in our atmosphere due to relativistic cosmic rays Quantum mechanics is anticipated to resolve any mathematical singularity issues at the center of black holes There …

Time is both absolute and relative To prove my concept that time is both relative and absolute, I will use a classic Albert Einstein envisioned thought experiment. When an observer is situated in the middle of a moving boxcar and lightning hits both the front end and rear at the same time. He will observe the timing of the lightning hit the front before the rear. To a still observer outside of the boxcar, he will observe it hitting both ends simultaneously. This is how I explain it. The observer in the boxcar is in motion therefore his observation of the timing of the lightning strikes is relative. But the observer outside of the boxcar is still so his observat…

Suppose we have two observers ,A and B (who are in inertial motion wrt one another) that are observing a series of events at a third location(O). I understand that both observers will agree on the timing and nature of events playing out at O. Does that mean that both A and B apply Lorentz transformations in spacetime in order to change their own frame of reference to that of the events they are observing at O ? Do they ,as it were "get into and walk in the shoes" of the third observer at O?

Lets say a spaceship travels at very very very close to lightspeed from point A. to point B.. And they need 10 seconds for that journey Now because they were so fast, time moved differently, and for the rest of us 1 month went by. Here my question: For themselves, they moved about 10lightseconds in 10 seconds, but for everyone else, wouldnt they have moved incredibly slow, needing 10 months for that journey?

Let's say we have two massive bodies such as two identical black holes ,each with a radius of 1 light second and separated by a distance of 100 light seconds These bodies are not spinning and approach each other directly with a speed of c/1000 Is it possible with that information to say how the curvature of spacetime at a point midway between the two bodies would be characterized or quantified? Would the frame of reference used to calculate this spacetime curvature be that of the point itself,so that it would lie at the origin of the calculation and the two black holes and their motions would be referred to that point?

Two massive bodies approach each other and their fields ,I imagine combine in some way so that a third object's worldline is affected (is different from what it would otherwise have been ) What methods are used to calculate the resultant gravity field from the 2 contributory fields? Also ,separately (but the two questions may be connected) have there been ,or are there any underway that try to show any quantum effects when two bodies gravity fields interact? Is it possible to look at the behaviour of 2 very small objects and search for quantum effects in the way they move wrt each other?

Lets ignore the warp bubble for the second question. How could I have 2 regions of space that bend space and in between the two warped space regions be flat? If you are having trouble understanding the second question let me make a diagram. "u=u" The diagram isn't perfect. The u represents the bending of space and the = represents the flat space. I don't have an understanding of general relativity so this might make it harder to get a comprehensive answer

I start by saying i'm not good at science. i'm tying to do a solar system simulation, i alredy did the gravity simulator, the first problem now comes with the planets' orbit. Let's presume that we're looking at the solar system from above and that there is a cartesian plane where a the center of it there is our Sun: And now let's add Mercury's orbit: So, thanks to the first law of Keplero we know that the sun is actually on one of the two Mercury orbits's foci, but the orbit could even like this: So my question is, is there a value, a data or something else that indicates the orentation (or direction) of an orbit?…

I was prompted to start this subject by an article I came across, as follows..... https://www.sciencealert.com/scient...-drives-seriously-especially-this-one-concept Scientists Are Starting to Take Warp Drives Seriously, Especially This One Concept: MATT WILLIAMS, UNIVERSE TODAY 1 MAR 2020 It's hard living in a relativistic Universe, where even the nearest stars are so far away and the speed of light is absolute. It is little wonder then why science fiction franchises routinely employ FTL (Faster-than-Light) as a plot device. However, in recent years, the scientific community has become understandably excited and skeptical about claims that a parti…

how relativity which explicitly says that nothing with mass can travel faster than the speed of light predicts something with the mass of an entire galaxy moving faster than the speed of light is predicted by relativity which forbids this?

I am familiar with the relationship between spatial and temporal measurements in Special Relativity. s^2 =r^2 -(ct)^2 Does this relationship also apply in General Relativity or is there perhaps another relationship that applies when gravity applies rather than relative motion?

Is there a relationship between the length contraction and a squeezed coherent state?

As I understand all the heavenly bodies rest on the space time fabric and the gravitational force is only the effect of the curvature. I would like to understand two things. What is it that curves.. Is it space or time ? And since time is continuously moving, is the space time fabric also moving ? if yes then why is it moving in one direction only ?. And what exactly is the relationship between space and time I would appreciate information Regards

I suppose you could call it first degree Quantum weirdness when most people are aware that 1/ the photons/wavelengths that are emitted from all the rotating sources in the universe 2/ travel in straight lines from their emission point to the relatively stationary observer 3/ although they are not generally aware that the source and observer are connected by a discrete spiral photon/wavelength path at the time and point of observation, if the source is still rotating and emitting and the path has not been blocked or distorted along the way. Spoiler https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?173552-Modelling-the-locations-of-in-transit-photons-emitted-fr…

I find it hard to understand General Relativity when it is casually referred to as curvature in spacetime or as the sagging in a trampoline mat. Would a better explanation for the novice be to say things fall because they are seeking out the place where time runs the slowest? For instance, when explaining how light is deflected as it passes close to a star imagine it surrounded by voxels (3D blocks of space). Time runs slowest in the voxels close to the star. Because the speed of light is constant in all frames of reference and as speed = distance /time the voxels close to the star would appear to be smaller to the photons of light. Consequently the quickest…

Is this explanation ok that avoids using forces? Thanks Rather than twin flying it is best to consider synchronised clocks. This avoids talking about acceleration at certain times is the flight. Special relativity doesn’t require an understanding of acceleration – this is dealt with in general relativity. It is not necessary for an actual twin to follow the out and back path or to experience an acceleration at the turning point. Outgoing and incoming spaceships could simply exchange clock readings or videos when they pass each other. Clock A stays on earth and is synchronised to clock B on a spaceship flying past (3/5c). After 5 earth years the spaceship …

Is there a layman's guide to the mathematics of calculating the spacetime curvature of a body of mass M inhabiting a flat space? Suppose we take the mathematics of calculating the curvature at any point as given (it's not ,of course ;I don't understand that yet except that it seems to be a tensor) how does one ,in broad terms proceed from there to describe the curvature of the body on its surface ,in its interior and extending beyond? Does one integrate all the individual points of curvature?

I have heard that ,in relativity (and QM?) the (sentient) observer and the mechanical mechanism are equivalent. This comes up from time to time but not as often as I might expect. Is that because it is a mundane observation (ironically ) or is there more to be mined from it (perhaps my lack of intellectual curiosity has not kept me abreast with current thinking around this) ? For example is it related to questions such as why we cannot "get outside" of the universe and look at it as a whole (in the mind's eye) but are forever condemned to be looking at ourselves (through a special part of the anatomy possibly) ,which seems like a logical contrad…

When a rocket is standing on earth the time in the top is going faster that the time at ground/rocket-engine level due to gravitational time-dilation. Using the equivalence principle with the same rocket accelerating in deep space, again an observer in the top will see the time passing by faster in the top then a traveler at rocket-engine level. To me this looks like a contradiction because they both will experience the same acceleration and duration of acceleration! I am confused: how is this possible? What am i missing?

...THEN - would there be "no need whatsoever for general or spacial relativities" ?. i.e. we could all have got on with our lives after newton - or is that not right ? (- i can't do math). thanks.

Hello all. The principle of Maximum ageing says a stone (with wristwatch) in free fall takes the path which accumulates the greatest proper time on the stone's wristwatch. Time runs slower at at sea level than at the summit of Mt Everest. When an apple falls from a tree, its path is down to the ground. Yet, this free fall path would slow the accumulation of the apple's proper time. What am I misunderstanding?