Recent content by Micheth

Thank you. For me that (grav. fields not canceling out but net accleration being zero) is kind of counterintuitive, but that's the way it goes I guess. Kind of a weird thought experiment, but if a sentient entity were somehow living in a void at the center of the Earth (somehow not destroyed...

That is to say, how does time behave in a region of space where multiple gravitational fields cancel out their accelerating effects? I understand that time "slows down" in a gravitational field, but does this depend on the actual presence of the field, or instead the actual net acceleration...

Does it completely destroy the utility of SR to simply take the viewpoint that it really is only valid to talk about accelerated bodies as moving? In other words, to say that the moving twin is in fact unjustified in saying the whole universe moved away from him and then toward him, which would...

Thanks for the reply. I have to admit I have a very difficult time wrapping my mind around the concept of a "different type of correlation than probability"! As i understand, once the state has been established (measured) at one end, the other end automatically knows to be opposite. This without...

Hi, those who have responded to any of my previous posts may remember me as one with little mathematical background beyond college calculus, and only a layman's understanding of physics, though I have read a *lot* of layman-oriented material. But I do have a very strong sense that the universe -...

That makes me wonder, what about the "inbetween" scales...? If there is no separation between objects (or fluids) on "smaller scales" (galaxy clusters as smaller scales hurts my brain! :-) ) but only on larger scales, then what about say, galaxies that are not technically gravitationally bound...

But why wouldn't it apply equally to everything everywhere? Wouldn't the safest assumption be that it does?

But if the expansion applies equally to all aspects of the universe, even bound A&B would have been further distant from each other had they not been bound, correct? Therefore, their being bound (i.e. not being further distant from each other, = not moving apart) must have overcome what would...

Hm? I thought "being further from each other" is exactly the point of universal expansion? That is, increased distance between entities. Given (non-gravitationally/force-bound) entities A and B, let the universe expand another XX million years and it will then take me X amount of time longer to...

Hello Peter, I didn't mean to suggest I think the expansion is a force, i think I understand that it's meant to be rather something difficult to put into words, maybe more like extra space being "created" where none was before, or the space itself being somehow magnified, rather than a "force"...

(1): (2): Hi, another layman butting in here... If I read the above correctly, aren't (1) and (2) contradictory? In (1), if the forces (in the case of the ruler, electromagnetic rather than gravitational) are overcoming the expansion, to me that implies that the forces must actually be a...

The difference with that case being that the written letters in the rocket are determined beforehand, right? Whereas the spin of the photon on the other side of the galaxy hasn't yet been determined, so that information hasn't yet been "transmitted".

Hello^^ It's always interesting to ponder the various ways that quantum entanglement *appears* to allow transmission of faster-than-light information, but on closer examination, actually doesn't. One that occurred to me today was the situation of two persons who receive each of a pair of...

Hm? wiki says the h in the Rydberg formula is something different, not Planck's constant. Ah well.

I understand about h being needed to make the equality, but how did we determine h? Was it not by dividing the energy of photons we observe by their frequency? Perhaps that's not right but I think certainly some empirical method is used? Which is why I ask, if there were energy of frequency v...