Understanding Spacetime: Clarifying Misconceptions and the Role of Gravity

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Simon76
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spacetime
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion clarifies misconceptions about spacetime, gravity, and the expansion of the universe. It establishes that moving faster than light is not feasible for matter, as it would imply moving backward in time. The speed of light is influenced by gravitational forces, which compress mass and diminish in effect with distance. The conversation also touches on the universe's accelerating expansion and questions the traditional portrayal of atomic structure, suggesting a more fluid representation of atomic effects.

PREREQUISITES
  • Basic understanding of Einstein's Theory of Relativity
  • Familiarity with gravitational effects on spacetime
  • Knowledge of the concept of cosmic expansion
  • Awareness of atomic theory and quantum mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study Einstein's Theory of General Relativity in detail
  • Explore the effects of gravity on light propagation
  • Research the methods used to measure cosmic expansion, such as Type Ia supernovae
  • Investigate quantum field theory and its implications for atomic structure
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, amateur astronomers, and anyone interested in understanding the complexities of spacetime and gravity.

Simon76
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Please clarify / correct my misunderstanding. I'm not a physics pro (just a personal interest). Also, please excuse the complete lack of technical terms!


It has been said that to move beyond the speed of light is to move backwards in time? (Though it's also stated that this isn't possible for matter?)

The speed of light isn't constant - that is to say it is affected by forces such as gravity?

Gravity appears to cause "compression" of mass ie higher density, and has a huge range, though it's effects appear to dimish sharply with range? (or vice versus depending on your perspective)



I heard a comment some time back about the rate of the universe expanding at an increasing rate.

First question: What methods were used / how do we determine the universe is growing at an increasing rate when we the observer are sat in a gravitational field and are thus subject to the same distortion of space/time?

Is the typical "schooled" approach entirely misleading, portraying atoms etc as having fixed bounds and areas they "occupy", and would it be more accurate to portray the "effect" of am atom as being those of numerous flows or fields or "folds"?

If this is the case, can they "scale" up or down? To put it in other words, can 1 cubic meter of space "on paper" represent 2 cubic meters, with the propagation of all waves ie space/time being at 1 constant unit, but 1 cubic meter on this planet "on paper" representing 2000 cubic meters of space, with waves propagation at a much higher rate?

Sorry if the last bit makes little sense - hopefully someone will understand what I'm getting at despite the bad wording.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Dr Einstein wrote a plain English exposition of Relativity which I have seen posted as a .pdf file on the web. In fact I just tried the terms 'Einstein, relativity, .pdf' as seeds for a google search and can report ready availability.
I think that your questions are easier to ask than to answer, and that Einstein will set you right.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K