Hence the simplification.
A huge number of problems have had to have simplifications to be solved, at least with classical methodology… techniques that can deal with about 5% of real problems. Chaos/Complexity theory has opened a window onto a large 95%. The issue i see is if it is not homogenous, what doe sit really look like.
dave
Update:
The European Space Agency's Euclid space telescope is set to launch atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket this Saturday (July 1) then begin its six year mission to map the distribution of mass in the Universe.
Blast off, from Cape Canaveral, takes place at 11:11 am EDT (16:11 BST).
The European Space Agency's Euclid space telescope is set to launch atop a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket this Saturday (July 1) then begin its six year mission to map the distribution of mass in the Universe.
Blast off, from Cape Canaveral, takes place at 11:11 am EDT (16:11 BST).
I did well enuff in whatever class i was in that the (Grade 11) teacher did not interupt me ignoring her and reading that book.
dave
No one mentions bending time only different rates according to some circumstances. The term arrow of time is sometimes used - it's linear but rate of "flow" can vary.
😉 The only time space bends is when the effect is shown pictorially. It's a mice way of illustrating what is happening. Another is a disk of rubber with a heavier weight in the centre with items thrown in to simulate orbits as they rotate around the heavier weight. That can show several Einsteinian effects.
The time effects are pretty well verified eg
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/...y-critical-for-gps-seen-in-distant-stars.html
Notice the comment about gravitational red shift. Interesting one - the wiki page on that mentions the results of measurements so far.
in General Relativity, the Metric defines the curvature of Spacetime.
So what is the difference between Newtonian Gravity and Einstein's Gravity?
The Scwartzschild Solution provides a a couple of testable predictions:
First precession of orbits close to a mass. Second, Black Holes.
The more realistic rotating solution for the Kerr Black Hole or any other body, also will exhibit rotational Frame Dragging. Which is surprising, though I think Einstein anticipated that one. The Event Horizon is also flattened AFAIK.
The only significant properties of a Black Hole are its Mass, Angular Momentum and Charge. Charge is not considered to be likely to occur to any high degree.
Our own Sagittarius A Galactic Black Hole is currently in the process of swallowing up a gas cloud, and observatories like ESO are following with interest:
Quite a unique observation by some of the astonishing new ground based telescopes.
So what is the difference between Newtonian Gravity and Einstein's Gravity?
The Scwartzschild Solution provides a a couple of testable predictions:
First precession of orbits close to a mass. Second, Black Holes.
The more realistic rotating solution for the Kerr Black Hole or any other body, also will exhibit rotational Frame Dragging. Which is surprising, though I think Einstein anticipated that one. The Event Horizon is also flattened AFAIK.
The only significant properties of a Black Hole are its Mass, Angular Momentum and Charge. Charge is not considered to be likely to occur to any high degree.
Our own Sagittarius A Galactic Black Hole is currently in the process of swallowing up a gas cloud, and observatories like ESO are following with interest:
Quite a unique observation by some of the astonishing new ground based telescopes.
Yes, the mathematics of general relativity also happen to have a geometric interpretation which corresponds to the notion of spacetime being curved.
Those of us with no mathematical bent are best served by geometric illustrations!
Apparently, the motion and elongation of the gas cloud have been observed over the past two decades.
The cloud's closest approach to Sgr A* will be in 2036.
https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/watch-the-milky-ways-black-hole-spaghettify-a-cloud/
;-)
There is also no "inside" (of) "singularity". As there is also no "inside" (of) "universe".
"Singularity" shall be: indifferent. strictly speaking: non-existent. At most for a not sufficiently exact "interpreting observer" (a different: "existent") there is "singularity".
There is also no "inside" (of) "singularity". As there is also no "inside" (of) "universe".
"Singularity" shall be: indifferent. strictly speaking: non-existent. At most for a not sufficiently exact "interpreting observer" (a different: "existent") there is "singularity".
Aside:
"Spacetime" is "interwoven" with "matter": black holes "swallow" stars, "clocks" run faster or slower....
But
"Spacetime" is not "interwoven" with "matter": "universe" "thins" "matter", "universe" (matter) dissolves, "spacetime" expands (visibly?) faster than "matter"...
Questions, questions, questions;-)
"Spacetime" is "interwoven" with "matter": black holes "swallow" stars, "clocks" run faster or slower....
But
"Spacetime" is not "interwoven" with "matter": "universe" "thins" "matter", "universe" (matter) dissolves, "spacetime" expands (visibly?) faster than "matter"...
Questions, questions, questions;-)
Let's assume that the drawn lines correspond to the space-time curvature. Let's replace these lines with light ("rays"). Let's look into the sky: Would we see distortions? Red shifts?
;-)
Newton: He has developed calculations on the basis of observation. But he has NOT clarified or explained the basis, cause of the observation and interpretation gravity. He can also have translated "electrophysical phenomena" into mathematics.
Einstein: He has made an inadmissible, unscientific equation: observation and interpretation gravitation = acceleration, speed up. Equated an unexplained phenomenon with an explained phenomenon, which had to lead to a curvature of concepts, of ideas, of imaginations, in order to dissolve this UNACCEPTABLE; UNSCIENTIFIC equation;-)
And now the kiddies are calculating around with formulas that bend concepts. The mathematics does not tell it to them, and the observations are interpreted simply suitably;-) Kids pranks.
;-)