I can see how it would work with waves, since although a wave would get longer it would also come in for a longer time so the total amount would stay the same. I have no idea how this would work with photon's since you'd need to get more of them somehow.
I think it's currently impossible to tell if this is true or not, it could be the future and past actually do exist but are just "invisible" to us since we live at the "now". But it could also be that "now" is all there is, how would you go about proving such a thing?
I took this one a while back
http://www.flickr.com/photos/doggettx/5264801104/
I tried it as a single shot at first but couldn't get detail on both the moon and Jupiter at the same time, so did 2 shots and combined them.
So it's a black hole in a black hole in a black hole in a black hole? we need to go deeper! ;)
More seriously though, how can those calculations be correct? if the average density is high enough to be a black hole then shouldn't anything denser than average (meaning everything not empty space)...
The shell theorem only works for hollow shells, our galaxy isn't hollow. The reason there are no visible tidal forces is because the gravity from our galaxy is very weak compared to the gravity from the moon and/or sun.
This is already apparent when you compare the sun with the moon, the sun is...
I don't see why the moon can't cause Earth quakes, the moon pulls on the Earth so why wouldn't it be possible for this pull to cause an earthquake? Of course any earthquake caused would've gone anyhow, and would've been even stronger then if it took longer before triggered.
Or am I totally off?
I've been reading up a bit on black holes but I don't quite grasp why there should be a singularity at the center.
As far as I understand a singularity forms when all the mass of an object collapses to withing the schwarzschild radius, according to wikipedia...
Wouldn't a wormhole be able to violate conservation of energy anyhow? If you'd put one facing up from the ground and the other end facing down towards the first entrance then if you'd throw something in it would be accelerated by gravity forever.
Even worse if you bring time travel into it...
It's not so much the ability to travel as it is that distance is a measurement of spacetime, and well as the name implies the time is kinda stuck to the space part. So how would you just measure space without a time part?
Even the distance between LA and Sydney is dependent on time, the only...
I think the point is that when time slows down for you (and thus relatively speaking speeds up for everyone else) distances get shorter, to the point when times stops moving everything is at the same place.
If everything is at the same place, then the distance is also zero, so no time no distance.
I've seen this on tv, they make it sound complicated on some sites but basically all they're doing is the normal green screen routine with the difference being an extra camera added. If you're standing next to the guy it's still just a guy wearing a green coat.
Basically closest you can get is by just putting a camera on one side of the window and a monitor on the other side. Biggest problem being of course it'll only look like a window when viewed at the same angle as the camera is pointing.
Which is something I doubt you could get around, don't...