Remember when he turned back time?
Posted on 04/25/2019 7:37:31 AM PDT by Red Badger
I’m only claiming the veracity of GR as to its primary purpose: to explain how gravitation works; via the curvature of Spacetime. Evidence can be seen in Mercury’s precession (this month is the centennial of Eddington’s experiment), gravitational lensing etc. If GPS did not take GR into account it would be about 7 miles off.
Spacetime is a nonsense concept with no existence in physical reality. This sleight-of-hand trick trying to treat time as a spatial dimension is just a small part of the reasons why GR should be rejected.
You can’t prove curved spacetime of course, it’s inherently unfalsifiable.
GR is just a math trick that seemed to work and got way out of hand. Spacetime isn’t a thing, and even if it were the idea of curving it would be semantically barren. What does it even mean for spacetime to be curved?
You > I’m only claiming the veracity of GR as to its primary purpose: to explain how gravitation works
But it doesn’t exactly explain how gravitation works, does it? It doesn’t even claim to - it only claims to be a good explanation of its effects.
Regardless, the big picture problem with GR is the only-tool-is-a-hammer problem. There seems to be this dying need to explain everything in the universe using gravity and gravity alone, when gravity is the weakest force that we know by a mind-boggling number of orders of magnitude.
IMO the evidence seems pretty solid that the primary driver of action in the universe is electromagnetism, not gravity. We exist in a living, electric universe, not a dead gravitic one.
Surely you’re aware of clock experiments in space? Time slows down. The reason we can’t exceed the speed of light is because of the curvature of space time.
> Time slows down.
Again, religious nonsense. Time cannot speed up or slow down, it’s not a material thing in an of itself. It’s an abstract concept used to describe the order in which events happen.
What is happening in that experiment is that the clock itself, not time, is what slowed down.
> The reason we can’t exceed the speed of light is because of the curvature of space time.
Screw it, pass the Kool-Aid. Spike it please, I’m gonna need it.
So you reject the concept of the speed of light being constant for all observers? That’s the primary assertion of modern physics. There were demonstrative experiments in time dilation and contraction before Einstein.
You could prove that the speed of light is not constant with a glass tank full of water. (It can also be proven that the acceleration of gravity is not constant either - and that’s something with many practical applications already in use.)
If you’re referring to the relativity assertion, it cannot possibly be true. Two photons headed in opposite directions, put an observer on each. Each observer will be moving away relative to the other at twice the speed of light. Same goes if they started far apart and moved at light speed to a common point. The only way one can pretend otherwise is to ignore the rest of the universe.
You should stop taking faith-based approaches to alleged proofs and seek out alternative, less exotic explanations as a skeptic does... and as a scientist does.
It’s not a question of whether speeds faster than the speed light exist...they simply cannot be measured. Or at least they have not yet been measured.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.