Movement of Mass: Constant Distortion Since Universe Began

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter wetwonder
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mass Movement
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the movement of mass and its implications for space-time distortion. Participants explore concepts related to motion, reference frames, and the nature of space-time, with a focus on whether mass can ever be considered stationary and how it interacts with the fabric of space-time.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that all mass is always in motion, implying a constant distortion of space-time due to the presence of mass.
  • Another participant counters that it is possible to find a reference frame where an object is stationary, challenging the notion of perpetual motion.
  • A question is raised about whether there exists observable matter that does not undergo continual change in position within space-time.
  • Another participant asserts that motion is relative, emphasizing that "position" in space-time is not absolute but depends on the observer's frame of reference.
  • There is a discussion about the concept of "leaving a wake" in space-time, with a participant arguing against this idea.
  • A later comment seeks clarification on whether any object can be observed that does not warp space-time relative to another object.
  • One participant notes that terms like "continually" and "constantly" imply a process, while the curvature of space-time is described as a static condition based on energy distribution.
  • A request for context is made to better understand the underlying ideas being discussed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of motion and reference frames, with no consensus reached on whether mass can ever be considered stationary or if all mass continually distorts space-time.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the definitions of motion and position in space-time, as well as the implications of energy distribution on space-time curvature.

wetwonder
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Am I right in thinking that any bit of mass, eg. me, or my spoon, or a planet, can never not be moving? And also as the matter inside me changes to something else, re-assembles later, etc, for-"ever."

So respective to that, space time is constantly distorting in it's path? From the beginning of the universe, there has been a constant distortion caused by all mass - and will be ongoing?

(Presume, moving relative to some other mass.)
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
wetwonder said:
Am I right in thinking that any bit of mass, eg. me, or my spoon, or a planet, can never not be moving?
No.
You can always find a reference frame in which some object is stationary.

And also as the matter inside me changes to something else, re-assembles later, etc, for-"ever."
Matter is energy and energy cannot be created or destroyed - only change form.
That what you are thinking of.

So respective to that, space time is constantly distorting in it's path? From the beginning of the universe, there has been a constant distortion caused by all mass - and will be ongoing?
If you mean the curvature of space-time is related to the energy density?
 
Is there an example of matter that we can observe that is not making a continual/constant change of position in space time?

I guess in other words everything has a velocity, and is making a wake from distortion of space time?
 
Last edited:
wetwonder said:
Is there an example of matter that we can observe that is not making a continual/constant change of position in space time?
There's no such thing as a "position" in space-time, only in space, and there motion can only be defined relative to something else. I may say that I am rest on the surface of the Earth while a train moves past me at 100 km/hr, but someone on the train will, with equal justification, say that he and the train are at rest while I and the ground are moving backwards at 100 km/hr.

I guess in other words everything has a velocity, and is making a wake from distortion of space time?
There is no such thing as "leaving a wake" in space-time.
 
hmm-
 
I understand. May I restate that last comment? Is there an example of an object that we can observe that is not continually/constantly warping space time relative to another object?
 
"continually" and "constantly" kinda suggest a process ... the curving of space-time due to a an energy distribution is not a process so much as something that just is there.

Perhaps if you gave us some clue about the context against which you are asking these questions?
What is the idea you are wrestling with?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
12K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K