What Common Misconceptions Do People Have About Relativity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter srikar97
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Relativity
srikar97
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Well...i have found the laws and theories related to relativity quite disturbing...few laws like the Newton's stating that any change in the sub-atomic particles in mass or destruction of it can cause change or shift in mass(in the whole universe) affecting the gravity of the universe.If it is so then gravitons must move much faster than speed of light which is constant.So does this mean that relativity is inappropriate?.I have an other reason to disprove it, which i had framed from my own imagination.As relativity says that space is a fabric which bends where there is more mass,if it is so won't the bent fabric provide obstruction(the curves surrounding an object) to the object?.For example if they are 2 black holes of similar masses then they don't tend to merge(according to me) because both the black holes sink equally and again the bent fabric will stop them from merging.Take the classic example of the trampoline and the metal ball,one ball is slightly heavier than the other(negligibly in few milligrams) then they don't tend to merge right?.And is it possible to bend the already bent space(example: the Earth bending the already bent space by the sun due to its mass)if yes then many other factors such as bent space due to gravity of black hole,sun and heavier planets must affect our earth,giving gravity a completely different meaning.Well i haven't done any serious calculations on it to approve this phenomenon for disapproval of relativity as i am just a 9th grader who is fascinated by physics.If my explanations is vague or difficult to understand do mention it and if i am incorrect in some areas do correct me.:confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi srikar97, as you are just a 9th grader perhaps you should try to learn a little first before claiming that the last century of physicists and Nobel prize winners are all wrong.

Here is the experimental evidence for SR:
http://www.edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

It is quite overwhelming. If you find SR disturbing, that is to be expected, but it appears to be the way things are. I would like to encourage you to continue studying and being curious, but I would strongly urge you to approach your studies with an open mind, learn the theory and the math, and look at the evidence before asserting a failure of relativity.
 
thank you for your advice ...and i will try to get more knowledge about the theory..:smile:
 
First learn about relativity, and understand it before you make any claims. This is a classic mistake people make. Instead of making ignorant claims it's always good to ask a question. You start with talking about relativity then you start talking about Newton.

You seem to have a couple questions you want to ask. You first want to know the speed of gravity. And how it's affected by relativity? Next you seem to be asking what does the bending of the fabric of space time actually mean?

Learning and understanding the basics of relativity is where you should start as stated before. Once you start to learn, if you have questions this is a great place to come. I see it all the time people claiming something is wrong, or why doesn't something happen. Normally the same sort of questions over and over. Instead of thinking something is wrong in the theory, instead ask why something happens the way it does.

One of the basic mistakes before starting to study this is thinking velocity is absolute. It's not velocity only exists when compared to another object. Another mistake lots of people make when first starting is thinking that there is one real answer for velocity, distance, time, even when events take place. Or there is a frame of reference that is correct. Once starting to actually learn and figure certain things out, a big problem people have is trying to combine reference frames when doing a calculation.
 
In Philippe G. Ciarlet's book 'An introduction to differential geometry', He gives the integrability conditions of the differential equations like this: $$ \partial_{i} F_{lj}=L^p_{ij} F_{lp},\,\,\,F_{ij}(x_0)=F^0_{ij}. $$ The integrability conditions for the existence of a global solution ##F_{lj}## is: $$ R^i_{jkl}\equiv\partial_k L^i_{jl}-\partial_l L^i_{jk}+L^h_{jl} L^i_{hk}-L^h_{jk} L^i_{hl}=0 $$ Then from the equation: $$\nabla_b e_a= \Gamma^c_{ab} e_c$$ Using cartesian basis ## e_I...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. The Relativator was sold by (as printed) Atomic Laboratories, Inc. 3086 Claremont Ave, Berkeley 5, California , which seems to be a division of Cenco Instruments (Central Scientific Company)... Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/relativator-circular-slide-rule-simulated-with-desmos/ by @robphy
Abstract The gravitational-wave signal GW250114 was observed by the two LIGO detectors with a network matched-filter signal-to-noise ratio of 80. The signal was emitted by the coalescence of two black holes with near-equal masses ## m_1=33.6_{-0.8}^{+1.2} M_{⊙} ## and ## m_2=32.2_{-1. 3}^{+0.8} M_{⊙}##, and small spins ##\chi_{1,2}\leq 0.26 ## (90% credibility) and negligible eccentricity ##e⁢\leq 0.03.## Postmerger data excluding the peak region are consistent with the dominant quadrupolar...

Similar threads

Back
Top