General_Relativity19 said:I read in a book that relativity and Newtonian physics don't work with each other or something like that. Like when Einstein founded Relativity, Newtonian physics were partialy disregarded because Newtonian physics didn't account for relativity. Can Newtonian physics be like converted to work with relativity?
Too true! One thing sorely lacking in GR is a mechanism for gravity and inertia. Mediating particles like gravitons and Higgs bosons have been postulated, making the model more cumbersome and speculative.Chronos said:Newtonian gravity was never wrong, just incomplete. Physicists already knew that before GR came along. GR basically just adds a correction to compensate for relative motion. But, then again, no one is claiming that GR is the final solution either. Most physicist think the chances are good that GR is just another stop along the way toward an even more complete theory [hopefully one that will allow it to coexist with Quantum Theory].
I've wonder if particle are extended vibrating objects, then wouldn't their spatial properties and frequence be effected by strong gravitational fields? For example, the frequence would be slower near massive objects wouldn't it?turbo-1 said:If a mechanism can be modeled that either densifies or polarizes the ZPE EM field in the presence of mass, lots of GR's problems can be solved simultaneously. These include anomalous galaxy rotation curves, excess cluster lensing, and excess cluster gravitational binding.
However, these frequency and spatial distortion would have the same effect on all particles interacting at a particular stop. It would not be as if a distorted particle were interacting with non-distorted particles. All particle would be equally distorted at the point of interaction. So the interaction would not be affected by the distorting effects of gravity. I suppose the only exception would be if the gravity were so great that it gave tidal effects on the scale of a string. This would seem to prove that particle interactions are unaffected by gravitational fields, or should I say by the background metric. Does this sound right? Thanks.Mike2 said:I've wonder if particle are extended vibrating objects, then wouldn't their spatial properties and frequence be effected by strong gravitational fields? For example, the frequence would be slower near massive objects wouldn't it?
Relativity and Newtonian Physics are two different theories used to explain the behavior of objects in space and time. The main difference between the two is that Newtonian Physics is based on classical mechanics and does not take into account the effects of gravity and the speed of light, while Relativity is a more modern theory that takes these factors into consideration.
Both theories have been extensively tested and have been found to accurately predict the behavior of objects in most situations. However, Relativity has been found to be more accurate when dealing with objects moving at very high speeds or in strong gravitational fields.
Yes, in certain situations, both theories can be used together. Newtonian Physics is still very useful for describing the behavior of objects at everyday speeds and distances, while Relativity is necessary for describing the behavior of objects at high speeds or in strong gravitational fields.
Einstein's theory of Relativity revolutionized our understanding of the universe by introducing the concept of space-time and how gravity affects it. It also led to important discoveries such as the bending of light around massive objects and the equivalence of mass and energy.
Relativity is important for modern science because it provides a more accurate and comprehensive understanding of the behavior of objects in space and time. It has also led to the development of technologies such as GPS and has been used to make important predictions, such as the existence of black holes.