Some questions for better understanding of Main Stream Cosmology

[RajeshTrivedi]

Correct....So?

So, answer the question.

How do we get resultant spacetime distortion of a multi object system like Galaxy ??

You are deliberately avoiding the question.

There is no problem with concept of "resultant force" but what is "Resultant Space Time Distortion" by billions of stars/objects of Galaxy. How do you add it up ? Vector addition ? Scalar addition ? Some vague integration ?

 

[paddoboy]

So, answer the question.

How do we get resultant spacetime distortion of a multi object system like Galaxy ??

You are deliberately avoiding the question.

There is no problem with concept of "resultant force" but what is "Resultant Space Time Distortion" by billions of stars/objects of Galaxy. How do you add it up ? Vector addition ? Scalar addition ? Some vague integration ?

No ones avoiding anything.
You are suffering from some delusional aspect as to why a galaxy would not cause spacetime distortion.
The same reason a asteroid causes some spacetime distortion....the same reason why a planet like Earth causes spacetime distortion, as has been verified by GP-B...the same reason a star will cause spacetime distortion.
I don't know how to add it up, as I'm no mathematician, but it makes no bloody difference.
The galaxy as a whole causes spacetime distortion.
You are seeing some non existent problem where there isn't one.

Now if that answer, amongst the many others you have been given, does not satisfy you, then do as I suggested before...You know, E-Mail some reputable cosmologist.

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

No ones avoiding anything.
You are suffering from some delusional aspect as to why a galaxy would not cause spacetime distortion.
The same reason a asteroid causes some spacetime distortion....the same reason why a planet like Earth causes spacetime distortion, as has been verified by GP-B...the same reason a star will cause spacetime distortion.
I don't know how to add it up, as I'm no mathematician, but it makes no bloody difference.
The galaxy as a whole causes spacetime distortion.

You are right... The asteroid being a single entity may cause, Earth May Cause, Star will cause....But how the Galaxy would cause ??

Let me tell you in detail ? The gravitational influence of Earth on Moon is of much higher value than the gravitational influence of Sun (even though Sun is 99% of Solar System Mass)on Moon. This statement can be re written as follows..

Spacetime distortion by Earth in the vicinity of moon, is of much higher magnitude than the spacetime distortion by Sun.

Now extend the analogy to Galaxy, the spacetime distortion by the peripheral star (Closer to the path of light which is getting lensed) is of much higher magnitude in the vicinity of that light path as compared to the Galaxy (assume Galaxy mass is near to its center). So where is the question of lensing by Galaxy.. Why can't we treat the same as that of lensing by a peripheral object. That too when we do not know the resultant aspect of spacetime distortion.

 

[origin]

Gravity is a distortion of spacetime.....

Correct

You are suggesting that effect brought the cause...

Nope.

Since it was your guess only, so not much harm done.

Nope not a guess.

The Galaxy Gravity does not cause distortion of space, it is the distortion of space which causes Gravity.

Nope. Galaxies have mass. Mass distorts space. We call that distortion gravity.

Hope now you have understood, when I asked about significance and meaning of spacetime distortion by multiple objects of a Galaxy.

Nope I don't see any particular significance you think is there. Whether we are talking about an atom, a planet, a galaxy or a galactic cluster the mass of each of these objects distort space to different degrees. The have different masses so they have different gravities.

The question is meaningless if we are simply talking about Newtonian Concept of Gravity as a force but Einstein didn't think gravity was a force, he proposed gravity as a distortion of space-time.

We are talking about the path of a photon so we are talking about GR.

 

[origin]

You are right... The asteroid being a single entity may cause, Earth May Cause, Star will cause....But how the Galaxy would cause ??

Let me tell you in detail ? The gravitational influence of Earth on Moon is of much higher value than the gravitational influence of Sun (even though Sun is 99% of Solar System Mass)on Moon. This statement can be re written as follows..

Spacetime distortion by Earth in the vicinity of moon, is of much higher magnitude than the spacetime distortion by Sun.

Now extend the analogy to Galaxy, the spacetime distortion by the peripheral star (Closer to the path of light which is getting lensed) is of much higher magnitude in the vicinity of that light path as compared to the Galaxy (assume Galaxy mass is near to its center). So where is the question of lensing by Galaxy.. Why can't we treat the same as that of lensing by a peripheral object. That too when we do not know the resultant aspect of spacetime distortion.

You are simply showing that you do not understand Newtonian gravity or GR. You need to take some classes to understand the basics. Your assumption that physicist don't understand these things simply because YOU don't understand them is absurd and you should be embarrased.

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

You are simply showing that you do not understand Newtonian gravity or GR. You need to take some classes to understand the basics. Your assumption that physicist don't understand these things simply because YOU don't understand them is absurd and you should be embarrased.

You have some fascination for nope and yep and Huh......

Your post #232 and Post # 244 are self contradictory, still you have the guts to tell me. You should be embarrassed for what you write, you do not have an iota of idea about these complex concepts and still you are acting as an expert. I am asking questions, I do not have to be embarrassed, you are acting as an expert and exposing your complete lack of understanding beyond certain superficial readings from here and there.

 

[origin]

You have some fascination for nope and yep and Huh......

Yep.

Your post #232 and Post # 244 are self contradictory, still you have the guts to tell me. You should be embarrassed for what you write,

I do not see where those posts are contradictory.

you do not have an iota of idea about these complex concepts and still you are acting as an expert.

I am not an expert (professional) I only have some knowledge from the physics classes I have taken and the research I have done on my own.

I am asking questions, I do not have to be embarrassed,

You are being dishonest now. If you were "just asking questions" then of course there is nothing at all to be embarassed about. But you are asking questions and not accepting the answers.
You are also making statements that indicate you do not agree with what real cosmolgist teach at universities. Such as this:

No, 3rd obvious conclusion is this lensing as explained as on date calls for a re-look.
The Galaxy Gravity does not cause distortion of space, it is the distortion of space which causes Gravity.
I once again put on record my appreciation for your blind acceptance of mainstream cosmology and GR/SR. I am sure you must be blindly supporting the time travel in either direction as well.

It is so odd that you are dead set against 'mainstream' concepts, but you don't even understand what those concepts actually are!

you are acting as an expert and exposing your complete lack of understanding beyond certain superficial readings from here and there.

You have no idea if my understanding is superficial since you have apparently no understanding. And yet you rail against these ideas you do not understand.

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

Origin,

You state : Gravity causes space time distortion.... and when confronted you say "Nope", and go into denial mode.

Well, I am not interested in your knowledge or lack of it but it is fairly clear that you are just bluffing around with absolutely no proper understanding beyond ABC.

It is no surprising that your last resort is, that scientists could not have missed this or that point.. What an answer !!

This Gravitational Lensing due to Spacetime distortion calls for further reasearch, so please keep your eyes open, who knows may be you can come up with some good idea which astro-physicists can pursue... You (and paddoboy) have almost surrendered your creativity, what happened to your thinking prowess, you have become blind followers, this is some kind of scientific bigotry. This is not done...

I also know that these theories have proved many observations and many predictions came true, so what ?? That's no license that questions cannot be asked or theory is 100% foolproof. I again state, you should not act as an advocate for mainstream cosmology, make it interactive type and restrict yourself to the question/answer only, if you know fine, if you do not know, still fine. Sky will not fall.

I tried to under play the response by pointing out that you may have made the guess, but you are hell bent on committing harakiri. Then so be it.

 

[origin]

You state : Gravity causes space time distortion.... and when confronted you say "Nope", and go into denial mode.

False. (I didn't say nope - happy now?)

Well, I am not interested in your knowledge or lack of it but it is fairly clear that you are just bluffing around with absolutely no proper understanding beyond ABC.

How would you know? You have proven that you do not know any physics or cosmology.

It is no surprising that your last resort is, that scientists could not have missed this or that point.. What an answer !!

That is not a last resort. I was trying to get you to understand that your misconceptions are on such a basic level that it is just not something that could be missed. It is like a doctor not realizing that your brain is in your head.

This Gravitational Lensing due to Spacetime distortion calls for further reasearch, so please keep your eyes open, who knows may be you can come up with some good idea which astro-physicists can pursue...

There is plenty of research in this area. The basics, which for some reason you cannot grasp, are well documented however.

You (and paddoboy) have almost surrendered your creativity, what happened to your thinking prowess, you have become blind followers, this is some kind of scientific bigotry. This is not done...

I have investigated the mainstream concepts in physics and I have done experimentation to confirm these concepts, I have not blindly accepted them. You think creativity is making up silly crap concieved in complete ignorance. That is not creativity that is buffoonery and it is a waste of your time.

I also know that these theories have proved many observations and many predictions came true, so what ?? That's no license that questions cannot be asked or theory is 100% foolproof. I again state, you should not act as an advocate for mainstream cosmology, make it interactive type and restrict yourself to the question/answer only, if you know fine, if you do not know, still fine. Sky will not fall.

Theories are never 100% correct. There is always more to learn. The issue is that if you actually know a little bit about physics and someone presents a stupid idea based on ignorance (instead of asking a question) the stupidity of that idea needs to be pointed out. If the person persists in reiterating the stupid idea it becomes a bit frustrating.

I tried to under play the response by pointing out that you may have made the guess, but you are hell bent on committing harakiri. Then so be it.

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

 

[OnlyMe]

Origin,

You state : Gravity causes space time distortion.... and when confronted you say "Nope", and go into denial mode.

I said nope!

Spacetime distortion or curvature is a description of gravity, rather than the cause of gravity.

And I qualified that by adding that some modern interpretations of GR do conceptualize spacetime as causing gravity.

And I will add now, this is also one of the stumbling blocks that divides QM and GR on the issue of gravity.

 

[paddoboy]

Now extend the analogy to Galaxy, the spacetime distortion by the peripheral star (Closer to the path of light which is getting lensed) is of much higher magnitude in the vicinity of that light path as compared to the Galaxy (assume Galaxy mass is near to its center). So where is the question of lensing by Galaxy.. Why can't we treat the same as that of lensing by a peripheral object. That too when we do not know the resultant aspect of spacetime distortion.

What can I say?
I must highly commend all that origin has said in regards to your refusal to accept answers, your methodology and your anti mainstream claims.
You most certainly, without any shadow of doubt have an agenda.
If it walks, talks quacks, like a duck..........

Now once again, if you do happen to be genuine, then do as I suggested. E-Mail some authority and see what happens.
Your refusal to comment or actually do as I suggested, condemns you 100% along the lines of my accusations.

 

[paddoboy]

I said nope!

Spacetime distortion or curvature is a description of gravity, rather than the cause of gravity.

And I qualified that by adding that some modern interpretations of GR do conceptualize spacetime as causing gravity.

And I will add now, this is also one of the stumbling blocks that divides QM and GR on the issue of gravity.

I don't agree. Spacetime distortion has been evidenced many times most recently with GP-B.
Gravity is exhibited when spacetime is distorted in the presence of mass/energy.
At best, you are being rather pedantic.

 

[paddoboy]

Origin,
Well, I am not interested in your knowledge or lack of it but it is fairly clear that you are just bluffing around with absolutely no proper understanding beyond ABC.

No, that is a lie. The only bluffing being carried out in this thread is from you.
And that sticks out like dogs balls.

It is no surprising that your last resort is, that scientists could not have missed this or that point.. What an answer !!

This Gravitational Lensing due to Spacetime distortion calls for further reasearch, so please keep your eyes open, who knows may be you can come up with some good idea which astro-physicists can pursue... You (and paddoboy) have almost surrendered your creativity, what happened to your thinking prowess, you have become blind followers, this is some kind of scientific bigotry. This is not done...

The usual cry and lament from our God botherer friends, anti mainstream alternative hypothesis pushers and conspiracy nutters.
You have been give correct answers. You refuse to accept those answers.
If the answers were wrong, or if they were not answered, or if it was obvious you were genuine in asking them, others would be replying and correcting those answers.
You indeed are embarrasing yourself.

That's no license that questions cannot be asked or theory is 100% foolproof. I again state, you should not act as an advocate for mainstream cosmology, make it interactive type and restrict yourself to the question/answer only, if you know fine, if you do not know, still fine. Sky will not fall.

No scientific theory is 100% foolproof. But scientific theories do gain in certainty over time, and as they continually support observations correctly. In fact a handful of scientific theories are so damn well near certain, that they are referred to sometimes as fact.
Let me present them for you, in order of certainty....Abiogenisis, Evolution, SR, GR and the BB.
With regards to the sky falling, it has already fallen on you, for obvious reasons that I have presented.

I tried to under play the response by pointing out that you may have made the guess, but you are hell bent on committing harakiri. Then so be it.

Stop being so dramatically silly. You are fooling no one.

 

[OnlyMe]

I don't agree. Spacetime distortion has been evidenced many times most recently with GP-B.
Gravity is exhibited when spacetime is distorted in the presence of mass/energy.
At best, you are being rather pedantic.

How does the GP-B experiment prove that the curvature of spacetime causes gravity?

What it proves is a GR prediction, that spacetime is dynamically associated with any gravitational mass within it.., which is the point of GR.., that a gravitationally significant mass results in a curvature of spacetime........ without explaining exactly why!

It does not prove why or even really how that interaction occurs.., just that it does.

In my post I was just making note that it was myself, rather than Origin, who made that statement.., mostly because I had!... But the underlying reasoning is not really the subject of this thread, so I did not elaborate.

 

[paddoboy]

How does the GP-B experiment prove that the curvature of spacetime causes gravity?

Point taken. GP-B only proves that spacetime is indeed warped/curved/twisted in the presence of mass.
But we certainly know for certain that this curvature/warping, exhibits the phenomenon we call gravity.....why or how, we as yet do not know.
I have not inferred anything different, and I don't believe origin did either.

You did say....
" Spacetime distortion or curvature is a description of gravity, rather than the cause of gravity."
I'm more comfortable with my description.....
"Spacetime distortion in the presence of mass/energy exhibits the phenomenon we call gravity"
It doesn't really describe gravity.

 

[OnlyMe]

Point taken. GP-B only proves that spacetime is indeed warped/curved/twisted in the presence of mass.
But we certainly know for certain that this curvature/warping, exhibits the phenomenon we call gravity.....why or how, we as yet do not know.
I have not inferred anything different, and I don't believe origin did either.

You did say....
" Spacetime distortion or curvature is a description of gravity, rather than the cause of gravity."
I'm more comfortable with my description.....
"Spacetime distortion in the presence of mass/energy exhibits the phenomenon we call gravity"
It doesn't really describe gravity.

Actually paddoboy, I did mean it—meaning spacetime is an exquisitely accurate description of gravitation, but not a description of the why or fundamental how. And I still qualify that by adding that there is a commonly accepted modern interpretation of GR, that the curvature of spacetime causes gravitation.

So, I am acknowledging that how you are interpreting spacetime curvature, is consistent with a modern interpretation of GR.., and that I don't agree with that interpretation and that I believe, that it is one of the conceptual issues that stands in the way of a unified understanding of gravitation consistent with both, what we know is true within the context of GR and at the same time QM.

Much of where these discussions tend to lead is into areas of theoretical physics that reside in that no man's land between GR and QM, and it is almost always the case that depending on the scale of the discussion, the conceptual approach favors one or the other, never reaching a unifying consensus. One of the things that stands in the pathway which leads to a unified understanding of gravitation, is that when we approach the how and why of inertia and gravity, which should be unified by the equivalence principle, we reach a point where all explanations beginning within the context of QM, are unable to duplicate that modern spacetime interpretation of the how and why.

How space and time are defined within the context of QM and GR are not in full agreement, and it is that fundamental difference that embodies one of the stumbling blocks that lies between the two.

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

I was not referring to Nope by OnlyMe, I was referring to origin's fiat that Gravity Causes Spacetime distortion

Origin writes in his post # 232

"The meaning is that a galaxies gravity can distort space. The significance is also that the galaxies gravity distorts space, I guess. What do you thing the significance is?"

This statement is fundamentally incorrect.

When I drew his attention to this aspect by stating the factually correct statement that is:

"The Galaxy Gravity does not cause distortion of space, it is the distortion of space which causes Gravity."

He responds with 'Nope' in his post # 244.

This is called completely disowning the statement made, to escape exposure.

 

[paddoboy]

This is called completely disowning the statement made, to escape exposure.

Stop acting Rajesh. The only escaping exposure obvious in this thread, is you trying to hide behind your agenda, and pretending you don't have one.

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

I have investigated the mainstream concepts in physics and I have done experimentation to confirm these concepts, I have not blindly accepted them.

This is a very poor bluff even by amateur poker standard...

I am sorry Origin, at least Paddoboy has the humility and courage to correct himself. You are just bluffing around, completely devoid of grace, humility and courage..

 

[RajeshTrivedi]

Paddoboy,

I would love to have a friend like you. You are fairly intelligent, but more important, you are extremely loyal.