Is Relativity Reality?

Post Reply
User avatar
Twiglet
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:33 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Twiglet » Sun May 30, 2010 2:42 am

pcCoder wrote:I also dislike some of them because they seem to suggest that their is no objective reality and that it is dependent on the observer, where I tend to believe that there is an objective reality, even if we do not currently know what it is or ever will, regardless of any observer, that the best way to get the closest approximation of it is to try to be in the same frame of reference with an event as it happens, and if not, being able to know how to compensate for the differing frames of reference.
I totally understand this feeling, because it's exactly what our everyday experience of the world tells us....
But common sense is not always the reality of things.
Exactly so. We put things to the test experimentally to see if they are consistent with theories, however uncomfortable that is.
Because the effect is real, it seems that there must be some force that somehow causes this (and more stuff)
I tend to the belief that any other explanation would probably need to be substantially more complicated than the one which it replaces, and would probably end up being even more counterintuitive and hard to live with... like String theory. Relativity is conceptually uncomfortable because it doesn't gel with our everyday experiences, but at least it is quite simple.
I've wondered what it is that actually causes this. Why does speed differences, gravity, differences, etc, have this effect? Is there some force or drag effect that happens, perhaps affecting the very makeup of matter, quarks, strings, whatever, that cause changes at higher speed or higher gravity relative to lower speed or lower gravity?
This is a personal answer, rather than a science one. I tend to think of the universe as resonant interconnected energy which is rather like a huge galaxy, bright points of light where energy concentrates and thin tenuous threads where information is exchanged like ripples or threads. Its a mentally satisfying picture where I can fit a lot of physics in - like particles exchanging information, spacetime mutation and what have you. It's nice to try and find a mental picture to make sense of the really bizarre universe physics suggests we inhabit....

Energy is scientifically... what "is". Everything which happens and can happen is described by the patterns physical law makes available for energy to express itself, which are actually very varied.

Mathematical models fall out much more prettily when working with energy and time as dimensions instead of force, acceleration etc...because it moves from a coercive world of cause and effect, to an artistic one of expression and possibility...which is why I love the Hamiltonian formation of Quantum physics. There are satifying ways of learning to conceptualise the new physics. I wish they were more widely taught.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by mistermack » Sun May 30, 2010 8:58 am

Colubridae wrote:
mistermack wrote:
ChildInAZoo wrote: There are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1
Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one. An infinity of nonsense, as I'm sure you well know.
:funny: :funny: :funny: :funny:

Each number is identical to the preceeding one??? :coffeespray:
Colubridae, you've surprised me now. I thought you would understand something that simple, but apparently not. So I'll explain it :
If there are an INFINITE number of real numbers between 0 and 1, then the difference between one of them and the preceding one is INFINITELY SMALL, which is ZERO.
Now that wasn't hard, was it?
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
colubridae
Custom Rank: Rank
Posts: 2771
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
Location: Birmingham art gallery
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by colubridae » Sun May 30, 2010 9:32 am

What the flying fuck are you talking about! :think:

You said
mistermack wrote:There are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1…
Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one.
That is still fucking dumb. :coffeespray:


Is it your belief by replying to my ridicule of your statement with this blathers
mistermack wrote:Colubridae, you've surprised me now. I thought you would understand something that simple, but apparently not. So I'll explain it :
If there are an INFINITE number of real numbers between 0 and 1, then the difference between one of them and the preceding one is INFINITELY SMALL, which is ZERO.
Now that wasn't hard, was it?
.
That you are doing science? :banghead:

Do you think that winning a debating point verifies FS’s joke theory? :funny:
Do you think that losing a debating point ‘weakens’ his twaddle? :funny:

Is that how science is done? :eddy:




BTW
This is an interesting discussion on evolution.
I’m surprised you have not taken part. Human evolution is your main interest :eddy:
mistermack wrote:My real interest is human evolution.
:dono:

http://www.rationalia.com/forum/viewtop ... on#p473508

You could have at least given your fascinating scientific insight to the discussion.
What a shame they shall lose out. :cry:


:biggrin:
I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by mistermack » Sun May 30, 2010 11:02 am

colubridae wrote:What the flying fuck are you talking about! :think:

You said
mistermack wrote:There are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1…
Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one.
That is still fucking dumb. :coffeespray:
Did you even bother to read it? I wrote : ''Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one. An infinity of nonsense, as I'm sure you well know''.
I was making that exact point that the consequences were nonsense, or ''fucking dumb'', if you prefer it. Why did you cut that off?
colubridae wrote: This is an interesting discussion on evolution.
I’m surprised you have not taken part. Human evolution is your main interest :eddy:
I read it, I thought it was a very simple question, and the first few comments covered it perfectly well. As did the poster, apparently.
,
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
colubridae
Custom Rank: Rank
Posts: 2771
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
Location: Birmingham art gallery
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by colubridae » Sun May 30, 2010 11:38 am

mistermack wrote:
colubridae wrote:What the flying fuck are you talking about! :think:

You said
mistermack wrote:There are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1…
Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one.
That is still fucking dumb. :coffeespray:
Did you even bother to read it? I wrote : ''Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one. An infinity of nonsense, as I'm sure you well know''.
I was making that exact point that the consequences were nonsense, or ''fucking dumb'', if you prefer it. Why did you cut that off?
Dude leaving that bit on doesn’t make the post less stupid. It makes it worse. :hilarious:

You have said:-

Childinazoo wrote
“there are an infinite number of numbers between 0 and 1” :tup:

You replied:-

“they are all identical” :hilarious:

“[they are] an infinity of nonsense” :flowerboy:

And I definitely don’t see an infinity of numbers between 0 and 1 as nonsense.
Don’t associate me with your twaddle. It’s disingenuous.
:nono:


Dude this is dud.

This isn't science. And you are definitely not helping FS. :whisper:
I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders

Farsight
Posts: 437
Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2010 10:52 am
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Farsight » Sun May 30, 2010 12:55 pm

Twiglet wrote:Look at what the figures are telling you, what that equation is telling you..... that no matter how fast those particles are moving away from each other, they never reach c relative to one another, even though in classical terms, their speed should exceed it.
That's wrong, Twiglet. They're moving apart at 1.8c. If they started out midway between Earth and Alpha Centauri, in a little over two years one will reach Earth and the other will reach Alpha Centauri. They've covered the four-light-year gap in a little over two years. The measured speed of one particle, as measured by the other, is .99c.
Twiglet wrote:No matter how much energy is put into accelerating those particles they can never reach c. You can perform the calculation if the particles are moving at an angle to each other if you like, it won't affect the nature of the result, just complicate the calculation. You don't need to define the terms farsight, they are very well defined already. This is an established and tested theory.
Yes, I know it's an established and tested theory. I'm an advocate of relativity. But the expression or calculation isn't explaining why a massive particle can't travel at c.
Twiglet wrote:We're not doing anything complicated here, just plugging numbers into equations that are easily referenced to see what the results look like. Looking at those results provides an insight into what the theory predicts.
Yes, it's simple, and yes those results do provide insight. But there's more insight to be gained by examining the mathematical terms and understanding the underlying reality to appreciate why we use a particular equation.

edit:
Twiglet wrote:...Relativity is conceptually uncomfortable because it doesn't gel with our everyday experiences, but at least it is quite simple...
It isn't conceptually uncomfortable, not when you see why c is the limit. Then it's simpler than ever.
Twiglet wrote:...Energy is scientifically... what "is". Everything which happens and can happen is described by the patterns physical law makes available for energy to express itself, which are actually very varied.
Yep.
Twiglet wrote:...There are satisfying ways of learning to conceptualise the new physics. I wish they were more widely taught.
I'm trying. You can lead a horse to water.

User avatar
Twiglet
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:33 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Twiglet » Sun May 30, 2010 1:11 pm

Farsight wrote:
Twiglet wrote:Look at what the figures are telling you, what that equation is telling you..... that no matter how fast those particles are moving away from each other, they never reach c relative to one another, even though in classical terms, their speed should exceed it.
That's wrong, Twiglet. They're moving apart at 1.8c. If they started out midway between Earth and Alpha Centauri, in a little over two years one will reach Earth and the other will reach Alpha Centauri. They've covered the four-light-year gap in a little over two years. The measured speed of one particle, as measured by the other, is .99c.
Again farsight you are showing your complete ignorance of the subject matter. Particle A obersving particle B sees it moving at 0.99c. The difference between what particle A observes and what the "at rest" observer sees is accounted for by time dilation. You cannot project the obervers frame of reference onto either particle.

Don't you understand that is exactly what you just worked out by solving the problem?? Maybe you just found the equation, put the numbers in, and didn't stop for even a moment to consider what they mean. I didn't ask the question solely to see if you could look up an equation, put numbers in and tap out the result on a calculator farsight.

I chose a problem which would help anyone answering it to understand and get a feel for how time and speed are experienced differently depending on the frame of reference of the observer.

I'm an advocate of relativity. But the expression or calculation isn't explaining why a massive particle can't travel at c.
I don't give a shit about what you "advocate" farsight, this has been tested to oblivion with particle accelerators for longer than you have probably been alive, and hundreds if not thousands of experiments take place daily which rely on those findings and confirm them.

ChildInAZoo
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by ChildInAZoo » Sun May 30, 2010 2:19 pm

mistermack wrote:Colubridae, you've surprised me now. I thought you would understand something that simple, but apparently not. So I'll explain it :
If there are an INFINITE number of real numbers between 0 and 1, then the difference between one of them and the preceding one is INFINITELY SMALL, which is ZERO.
Look, that someone might hold this belief is enough of an insult. As one can find in Bishop and Bridges, Constructive Analysis, one can prove that there is an infinite amount of numbers between 0 and 1 even in a constructive context.

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by mistermack » Sun May 30, 2010 2:42 pm

If the difference between one of your numbers and the preceding one is D, then
infinity x D = 1. Therefor D = 1/infinity which equals 0.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Twiglet
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 1:33 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Twiglet » Sun May 30, 2010 2:45 pm

There are infinite numbers between any two numbers you can write down which are different from each other.

Can we move on?

ChildInAZoo
Posts: 257
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 4:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by ChildInAZoo » Sun May 30, 2010 4:13 pm

mistermack wrote:If the difference between one of your numbers and the preceding one is D, then
infinity x D = 1. Therefor D = 1/infinity which equals 0.
.
This may pass for mathematics for pre-schoolers, but it doesn't hold for young school children and it certainly doesn't bear on set theory.

But regardless, this doesn't bear on how incorrect your theory is. Even if we accept that there is only a great number of finitely available reference frames, your argument against relativity theory doesn't hold because it still doesn't match relativity theory.

User avatar
Xamonas Chegwé
Bouncer
Bouncer
Posts: 50939
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:23 pm
About me: I have prehensile eyebrows.
I speak 9 languages fluently, one of which other people can also speak.
When backed into a corner, I fit perfectly - having a right-angled arse.
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Xamonas Chegwé » Sun May 30, 2010 10:26 pm

mistermack wrote:If the difference between one of your numbers and the preceding one is D, then
infinity x D = 1. Therefor D = 1/infinity which equals 0.
.
There is no such thing as a preceding number - not when you are discussing real numbers.

There are an infinite number of real numbers between any two real numbers, no matter how close together they are.

The term 'preceding number' only makes sense when discussing a denumerable set of numbers, such as the set of natural numbers, where there is an agreed order to its elements.

Trust me on this, you are making a mathematical laughing stock of yourself by continuing on this course. :tea:
A book is a version of the world. If you do not like it, ignore it; or offer your own version in return.
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing :nono:
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur

User avatar
colubridae
Custom Rank: Rank
Posts: 2771
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:16 pm
About me: http://www.essentialart.com/acatalog/Ed ... Stars.html
Location: Birmingham art gallery
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by colubridae » Sun May 30, 2010 10:49 pm

mistermack wrote:If the difference between one of your numbers and the preceding one is D, then
infinity x D = 1. Therefor D = 1/infinity which equals 0.
.

:funny: :funny: :funny: :funny: :funny:
I have a well balanced personality. I've got chips on both shoulders

User avatar
mistermack
Posts: 15093
Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2010 10:57 am
About me: Never rong.
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by mistermack » Mon May 31, 2010 12:59 pm

Xamonas Chegwé wrote: The term 'preceding number' only makes sense when discussing a denumerable set of numbers, such as the set of natural numbers, where there is an agreed order to its elements.

Trust me on this, you are making a mathematical laughing stock of yourself by continuing on this course. :tea:
Of course it doesn't make sense, I've already said it's nonsense. Why don't you read the posts before you criticise? How can you possibly have a preceding number in the number one divided by infinity? If the difference is zero, you don't have a preceding number. It's circular nonsense. Put nonsense in and you get nonsense out. You can spray infinity around as much as you like in maths, but you don't find many in the real world.
.
While there is a market for shit, there will be assholes to supply it.

User avatar
Xamonas Chegwé
Bouncer
Bouncer
Posts: 50939
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:23 pm
About me: I have prehensile eyebrows.
I speak 9 languages fluently, one of which other people can also speak.
When backed into a corner, I fit perfectly - having a right-angled arse.
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Re: Is Relativity Reality?

Post by Xamonas Chegwé » Mon May 31, 2010 1:21 pm

mistermack wrote:
Xamonas Chegwé wrote: The term 'preceding number' only makes sense when discussing a denumerable set of numbers, such as the set of natural numbers, where there is an agreed order to its elements.

Trust me on this, you are making a mathematical laughing stock of yourself by continuing on this course. :tea:
Of course it doesn't make sense, I've already said it's nonsense. Why don't you read the posts before you criticise? How can you possibly have a preceding number in the number one divided by infinity? If the difference is zero, you don't have a preceding number. It's circular nonsense. Put nonsense in and you get nonsense out. You can spray infinity around as much as you like in maths, but you don't find many in the real world.
.
I did read the posts. Especially this one.
mistermack wrote:
ChildInAZoo wrote: There are an infinite number of real numbers between 0 and 1
Yes, and each one is identical to the preceding one.
It is not just wrong. It's pure, undiluted, 100% wrong. There is a non-denumerable, infinite number of unique real numbers between any 2 numbers.
A book is a version of the world. If you do not like it, ignore it; or offer your own version in return.
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing :nono:
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests