Is the Universe in an Eternal Cycle of Expansion and Rebirth?

[DavidGTaylor]

Yes! But some quick comments.

On the comment from cosvis, I agree with you completely: red-shift is not the same as "blurring".

Secondly: Yes Mr./Ms./Your Worship/Highness "Cepheid". I would agree gigantically with you on the idea of setting up a separate thread and very much appreciate your making that intelligent and perceptive observation. This was just the closest thread I could come to start, and I hoped I could attract some attention. Just one last comment before I leave and TRY to start something devoted to Relativistic Perspective. The equations relate "Real" velocity with a travelers perception of the "Relativistic" velocity appearing to be greater because of time slowdown. The equations work and have been verified for length, mass & time (to, yes, a pointless precision). Aren't ADDITIONAL equations that agree entirely with Special Relativity worth SOME debate?

Just take a peek at the attached "Relativistic vs. Non-Relativistic Perspective Space-Time Perspectives.pdf" If you consider those equations invalid, then all of Relativity is invalid because they are simply derived from Dr. A's time equation. Sometimes there are more sophisticated mathematical tools applied to a problem than it deserves.

E=mc^2 is deduced in the end from nothing more than applying simple algebra and binomial theorem to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation.

 

[twofish-quant]

Just one last comment before I leave and TRY to start something devoted to Relativistic Perspective. The equations relate "Real" velocity with a travelers perception of the "Relativistic" velocity appearing to be greater because of time slowdown.

1) Thinking about "time slowing down" is a horrible and incorrect way of thinking about special relativity.

This is a better way. Take a coke can. If you look at from one angle, it looks like a circle. If you look at it from another angle, it looks like a rectangle. At no time does the can actually change, but there are just different ways of seeing the can depending on what angle you look at it from.

Special relativity works exactly the same way. Time doesn't slow down. Time doesn't speed up. What happens is that if you have a series of events, you can describe them in different ways, but nothing actually slows down or speeds up.

2) Having two velocities is also very bad. The problem is all observers will agree about how fast two objects are moving relative to each other.

3) The equations work and have been verified for length, mass & time (to, yes, a pointless precision). Aren't ADDITIONAL equations that agree entirely with Special Relativity worth SOME debate?

No. In physics, math is a bad thing. You want to keep things simple, and adding extra equations just confuses things. If you have equations that agree completely with special relativity, then it's useless. You want to minimize the number of equations, and if you want to describe something, it's best if you can get it down to zero equations.

Imagine a coke can spinning. Most people can do that without thinking about math, and it turns out that if you want to write out the equations that describe a spinning coke can, they end up to be rather complex.

When you ask me a question about relativity, I just imagine things rotating. It's a weird sort of rotation, but it's still rotation, and it's only when I need to formalize something do I need to write down the equations.

To be blunt, I think you are getting too involved in the equations, and you aren't seeing the underlying theory at all.

E=mc^2 is deduced in the end from nothing more than applying simple algebra and binomial theorem to the Lorentz-Fitzgerald equation.

Well... Yeah.

 

[Godofgamblers]

One fundamental characteristic of nature is that it repeats itself. There is no event which only happens once. ON the contrary, events repeat themselves over and over again, be they sunrises, seasons, orbits, etc etc.

Which is why we must conclude, however strange it may seem, that the BB happens on a regular basis.

Entropy seems to affect gravity as well. The ultimate irony is that in a universe where every thing is attracted to each other, as entropy increases and erodes gravity, every thing will be separate and alone.

 

[nismaratwork]

One fundamental characteristic of nature is that it repeats itself. There is no event which only happens once. ON the contrary, events repeat themselves over and over again, be they sunrises, seasons, orbits, etc etc.

Which is why we must conclude, however strange it may seem, that the BB happens on a regular basis.

Entropy seems to affect gravity as well. The ultimate irony is that in a universe where every thing is attracted to each other, as entropy increases and erodes gravity, every thing will be separate and alone.

I don't agree, and frankly, you've made a HUGE claim which you now need to back with sources.

 

[DavidGTaylor]

1) Thinking about "time slowing down" is a horrible and incorrect way of thinking about special relativity . . . This is a better way. Take a coke can. If you look at from one angle, it looks like a circle. If you look at it from another angle, it looks like a rectangle. At no time does the can actually change, but there are just different ways of seeing the can depending on what angle you look at it from.

"Slowing down" may be a politically incorrect word to apply to time time dilation. But doesn't riding an object traveling at approximately 2.11E+08m/s (whatever the velocity you would need for a distortion value of 2) mean that in the time the second hand makes a full rotation around the face of your wristwatch the non-relativistically affected second hand on the watch you left on your dresser at home will move twice. You will perceive this to mean that things around you are moving faster. For the distorted object, the progression of time has slowed down. Can't really think of another way to say it.

But again, I hope I can start a new thought/discussion on this, but for now, I will be a good boy and make a comment directly related to Big Bang Alternatives: if time slows down because of general relativity, couldn't it be reasonable that the time slowdown means that while all of the interactions between objects slowdown, any velocity a particle/object has wouldn't decline in the same fashion? Its energy wouldn't disappear, so it would move at the same velocity. But all photons/gluons would have to slowdown (if viewed from an outside perspective), otherwise all interaction in matter/energy would change. As you added energy to a system undergoing G.R. distortion, it would increase the velocity of its composite particles and they would speed up. That speed up would increase more and more as the temperature rose and the particles (at any level) became more and more independent of each other. You can maintain a time dilation in terms of particle interaction as long as they are dependent on each other and maintain their form/structure. Time dilation must have different effects on independent particles (gas, plasma and to a lesser extent, liquids) than it would on solid objects. Do the particles at the centre of a Big Bang move slowly because of G.R. distortion, or do they simply interact with one another more weakly because of that same distortion and not slow down? Does it get colder at the center of a Cosmic Egg?

 

[nismaratwork]

"Slowing down" may be a politically incorrect word to apply to time time dilation. But doesn't riding an object traveling at approximately 2.11E+08m/s (whatever the velocity you would need for a distortion value of 2) mean that in the time the second hand makes a full rotation around the face of your wristwatch the non-relativistically affected second hand on the watch you left on your dresser at home will move twice. You will perceive this to mean that things around you are moving faster. For the distorted object, the progression of time has slowed down. Can't really think of another way to say it.

But again, I hope I can start a new thought/discussion on this, but for now, I will be a good boy and make a comment directly related to Big Bang Alternatives: if time slows down because of general relativity, couldn't it be reasonable that the time slowdown means that while all of the interactions between objects slowdown, any velocity a particle/object has wouldn't decline in the same fashion? Its energy wouldn't disappear, so it would move at the same velocity. But all photons/gluons would have to slowdown (if viewed from an outside perspective), otherwise all interaction in matter/energy would change. As you added energy to a system undergoing G.R. distortion, it would increase the velocity of its composite particles and they would speed up. That speed up would increase more and more as the temperature rose and the particles (at any level) became more and more independent of each other. You can maintain a time dilation in terms of particle interaction as long as they are dependent on each other and maintain their form/structure. Time dilation must have different effects on independent particles (gas, plasma and to a lesser extent, liquids) than it would on solid objects. Do the particles at the centre of a Big Bang move slowly because of G.R. distortion, or do they simply interact with one another more weakly because of that same distortion and not slow down? Does it get colder at the center of a Cosmic Egg?

For an observer moving at that speed, they wouldn't notice any difference in their day-to-day lives; it's only by comparison with non co-moving observers that a difference becomes apparent.

 

[twofish-quant]

"Slowing down" may be a politically incorrect word to apply to time time dilation.

It's wrong.

But doesn't riding an object traveling at approximately 2.11E+08m/s (whatever the velocity you would need for a distortion value of 2) mean that in the time the second hand makes a full rotation around the face of your wristwatch the non-relativistically affected second hand on the watch you left on your dresser at home will move twice.

No it doesn't. The problem is that since there are no preferred reference frames, you can either say that you are moving and your house is still or that your house if moving and you are still. So if moving "slows things down" then you have both watches moving slower than the other.

In fact what the situation is that you can't compare watch movements at a distance.

You will perceive this to mean that things around you are moving faster. For the distorted object, the progression of time has slowed down. Can't really think of another way to say it.

That's not how relativity works. Nothing is being distorted.

if time slows down because of general relativity, couldn't it be reasonable that the time slowdown means that while all of the interactions between objects slowdown, any velocity a particle/object has wouldn't decline in the same fashion?

General relativity doesn't cause time to slow down.

 

[nismaratwork]

It's wrong.



No it doesn't. The problem is that since there are no preferred reference frames, you can either say that you are moving and your house is still or that your house if moving and you are still. So if moving "slows things down" then you have both watches moving slower than the other.

In fact what the situation is that you can't compare watch movements at a distance.



That's not how relativity works. Nothing is being distorted.



General relativity doesn't cause time to slow down.

I don't believe he understands what you're saying... he's been raised on the notion that time slows down, or speeds up, this missing the whole concept of RELATIVITY, and appreciating only some of its more exotic consequences. Do you know how to teach someone in that position first principles and work from there, because if so, I'd like to 'watch' and learn your technique.

 

[Redbelly98]

I don't believe he understands what you're saying... he's been raised on the notion that time slows down, or speeds up, this missing the whole concept of RELATIVITY, and appreciating only some of its more exotic consequences. Do you know how to teach someone in that position first principles and work from there, because if so, I'd like to 'watch' and learn your technique.

I agree with your sentiment, but teaching basic relativity wasn't the intent of this thread.

Thread closed pending moderation.

EDIT: this thread will remain closed.