A better way to imagine the time space continuum.

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter the_truth
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuum Space Time
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around conceptualizing the time-space continuum and its relationship with the behavior of light in varying densities of materials and gravitational fields. Participants explore theoretical models and interpretations related to general relativity, light propagation, and alternative theories of optics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Theoretical development

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that warping of the time-space continuum can be understood as an increase in density, drawing parallels with how light behaves when passing through different media.
  • Another participant points out that while spacetime is a continuum, matter is not, and clarifies that light slows down in transparent materials due to absorption and re-emission by atoms, rather than due to the medium being a dense continuum.
  • A reference is made to J.J. Thompson's work on light slowing in a medium, which involves classical principles and the interaction of light with atomic structures, suggesting a different perspective on the phenomenon.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the original theory being discussed, labeling it as a "pet theory" rather than a robust scientific concept.
  • One participant mentions the work of Professor J. Almeida on "4-dimensional optics," relating it to geometric optics and the behavior of particles in a four-dimensional framework.
  • A participant reflects on the complexities of light interaction with electron fields and expresses a desire to learn more about the theories discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit a mix of agreement and disagreement. Some challenge the original claims and suggest alternative explanations, while others support the exploration of new theories. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views presented.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding the nature of spacetime and light behavior, as well as the definitions of terms used in the discussion. The mathematical relationships and theoretical frameworks referenced are not fully explored or settled within the thread.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in theoretical physics, general relativity, optics, and the development of new scientific theories may find this discussion relevant.

the_truth
Messages
148
Reaction score
0
The laws determinning the passage of light through varying densities of transparent material and through varying "acceleration" caused by a common field of gravity have similarities.

I prefer to think of warping of the time space continuum as an increase in density. Light bends as it passes from one medium into a denser or into glass, or in the case of the time space continuum, a field of varying density. In the case of light orbitting a black hole, you would simply have to imagine a very huge change in "density", enough to prevent light from leaving. The very center of a black hole is an infinitely small point and the light would still end up orbitting the black hole in some extremely tight orbit. It would also take a long time to travel through the dense field due to time dilation, which is similar to how light slows down in dense transparent objects. Bearing in mind light cannot gain momentum and if it did have some theoretical momentum (in relation to the displacement it cause when it interacts with a mass) it would take something like 10^50 years to come orbit the center of the black hole and leave out the other end (it's called an event horizon for a reason!).

What do you think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The obvious thing to be pointed out is that spacetime (in GR) is a continuum, but we know that matter is not. Light doesn't slow down when it passes through transparent matter because it is a dense continuum, it slows down because it is absorbed and reemitted by the atoms.
 
Interesting article: http://livescience.com/technology/050819_fastlight.html.

Also, there are some very good alternative theories on why light is slowed in a medium - JJ Thompson derived a complete set of mathematical relationships based upon classical principles that conform with experimental results. In summary, Thompson showed that the interaction of the electric field of the light wave with the corpuscles that comprise the atoms of the medium (electrons and nucleus) would produce a separation polarizaion - increasing the inductive capacity of the medium and therefore the refractive index.
 
the_truth said:
The laws determinning the passage of light through varying densities of transparent material and through varying "acceleration" caused by a common field of gravity have similarities.

I prefer to think of warping of the time space continuum as an increase in density.

This looks like a great candidate for the "theory development" forum to me. It doesn't seem to be about relativity, but about someone's pet theory.
 
See the work of prof. J. Almeida on "4-dimensional optics" here.
For those who are not inclined to reading scientific literature I will say that the whole theory is very reminiscent of geometric optics in 4-dimensionsional form, hence the designation of 4-dimensional optics. The worldlines of particles and bodies are seen to be the geodesics of 4-dimensional space with signature (++++). The variational principle for geodesics is seen to be the perfect extension of Fermat's principle when 4-dimensions are considered
 
Thank for all the insights, I never thought that light could be absorbed and re-emitted at exactly the same frequency and in the general direction it originally came from, it seems a little far fetched. I thought that most light passed through the electron fields interacting between atoms and the spectrum of light absorbed and let through depended on the frequency of the electron field. I can imagine perhaps light being affected by the electrons. I had better read up on some of the theories and facts put forward on this matter.

"It doesn't seem to be about relativity, but about someone's pet theory."

definitely a bit better than the rubber sheet model..
 
pervect said:
This looks like a great candidate for the "theory development" forum to me. It doesn't seem to be about relativity, but about someone's pet theory.

Agree.

the_truth - - Trying posting your ideas to our Independent Research forum if you would like to pursue this idea further. (But be sure to read the guidelines first!) Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
969
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 171 ·
6
Replies
171
Views
9K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K