Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 When I see a picture of space being bent by gravity it is always 2D. Why is it portrayed as 2D? If space is bent by gravity surely it would be bent more like a funnel shape, but a funnel shape would have uneffected areas of gravity, so you could try a ball shape, but now space is completely wrapped around the planet. What would be a proper 3D representation of the bending of space? I think that space doesnt bend like that at all. What if space is the force, and gravity is a result of the force being deminished. For example, space is treacle, and the nearer you get to a planet, the tracle turns more and more to a liquid state. This thinning of space, would be caused because it is stretched towards the planet, or around the planet. This thinning would cause objects to fall faster, and faster towards the planet because the treacle is becoming gas. Hence you end up with big Gas planets! Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 That's not what we think it really "looks like", it's just easier to represent it like that than it is to draw (or indeed interpret) a bent or stretched 3D volume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I liked the Simpsons version the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 If we had paper with 3D modelling software built into it, it would not be a problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I remmeber seeing a TV docu, and showed a model of a 4d hyper cube, WOW! Though it looked nothing like a cube at all, and explaination as to how they arrived at that particular shape was a little sketchy, it was non the less fascinating! I do actualy like Pinch`s idea/illustration, seems a pretty neat way to demonstrate the effects Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Search for hypercube on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 I have tried to draw my Space Treacle! LOL! The dark areas would be the thick part of space where things would move more slowly. The whiter parts are where space has been stretched around a planet, or thinned out into a less sticky state. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Sorry, this Module isn't active! [ Go Back ] Sayo, I shall thnx, but I`ll have to do it manualy I recon. Pinch, tell ya what that reminds me of a bit, ever seen that experiment done where you put a magnet under a peice of paper then sprinkle Iron dust over it, it`s a bit like the flux lines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 Maybe Space has it's own Mandelbrot like plants. So you have magnetism, and gravity sharing this pattern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 I could be wrong here so don`t quote me. I seem to remeber something along the lines of magnetism,Gravity and maybe electricity? being part of Einsteins feilds that he was trying to Unify before he died. I know it mentioned in the book "Philladelphia Experiment" (not the fictionalisation in the film), but the book by Charles Miguel Alende (sp?). as I say, I`m not 100% sure or in possesion of all the facts here, but I remmember it was something along those lines I`m sure someone will correct it or fill in the gaps for us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 So maybe magnetism works in reverse too! Things aren't pulled towards the magnet, the magnet has thinned out the materials around it so that they fall through the material more rapidly, hence they head into the weakened direction. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Hmmm... I`m not quite sure HOW that works to be honest. I do know that with a powerfull enough magnetic feild that even non ferro magnetic material is affected! strangest thing I ever saw was an insect suspended in mid air while surounded by a huge peice of magnetic aparatus, I think it was some lab in Sweden or something. and it had no nasty effects on the creature either, it was like some sort of anti-gravity feild (but of course it wasnt, it was just this magnet thing). Neat stuff though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Search for threads with posts regarding Hypercubes: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=10274&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 Thnx sayo, appreciated I think Mr_L gives the best explaination in: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1209&highlight=hypercube but I must confess that the shape I saw on the TV Docu looked nothing like that description? maybe it was a cross section or something? it seemed to have 4 sided cones sticking out of it everywhere LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 So I have made an Image of how I think that both Gravity, and Magnetism work! Magnetism could possibly thin the resistance of perticles around an object, and Gravity would be the thinning of space around an object. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT2095 Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 ROFLOL I`m not laughing AT you, more like WITH you, that graphic is CLASS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 LOL! The bottle was embossed with the words 'Magnetic Liniment'!..and that was a coincidence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VendingMenace Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 hey all, LOVE the bottle picture, pincho. Very nice! As far as magnitism goes, it does not really require a thinning of particles. Magnetic feild lines are able to impose force on moving electrical charges. This force does not require any special thinning of the space around it, much the same way that pusing a crate does not require any thinning of space around it. The magnetic feild is just able to "push" moving electrons. As far as gravity goes, it may not be so wrong to think about a thickning of space around a large mass (something with lots of gravity). That is because if you were to draw a series of lines equally spaced all throughout sapce, then in areas that have large gravity wells, these lines would all bend closer together, in a way increasing the density of space in that area. HOWEVER, it is quite dangerous to think of gravity or bending of space this way, becuase it is easy to lose one's perspective. Remember that for an observer in this "bent" space, like us for example, the space looks perfectly straight. It is quite hard to observe the effects of the bending of space while one is in it. Thus, always thinking about gravity as a thickening of particles is somewhat misleading. The density of space changes in one way of htinking. But to an observer from the inside, all the lengths change as well, so we observe the density in a strong gravitational field to be the same as for an area that has weak gravity. Does that make sense? Probably, the best way to think about gravitation is that it "bends" space, but it does not change the density of space (hence, no thickning). That is, it changes the geometry of space. In the presense of a gravity feild, space is no longer Euclidean. Things can be observed to take apparent curved paths, due to the geometry of the curved space, but if we look closer, we find that they are actually following straight paths, just in a curved space. (of course this requires us to redifine "straight line" somewhat, but it is still a good owrking definition) One the other hand we do not really see a density change in space, at least not one that i am aware of. I could be wrong, as i have not really taken a hard core course in GR. One last thing... What if space is the force, and gravity is a result of the force being deminished I think this may be a even better question; What if mass bends space, and gravity is just an observed result of bent space? That way, mass only causes gravity secondarily, if you will. Mass is not directly equated to gravity. Rather, gravity is a result of the bending of space, which is caused by mass. I only say this becuase i think often people think that it is gravity that causes space to bend, but i think it is better to think of mass as bending space, with gravity as a result. Well, i think that is it for now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 As far as gravity goes, it may not be so wrong to think about a thickning of space around a large mass (something with lots of gravity). That is because if you were to draw a series of lines equally spaced all throughout sapce, then in areas that have large gravity wells, these lines would all bend closer together, in a way increasing the density of space in that area. This is my theory back to front. I said that space thins towards a large object. I don't believe that space bends at all. I think that it thins out. The impossible to see particles of space are distributed throughout a grid network evenly. They are pulled together because they travel between each other, faster than they do through each other. When they gather together to form dust, then planets their distribution leaves large gaps, or a thinning of space. These gaps are once again easier to travel through than denser areas of space. Light takes a path through the less dense areas of space, and so it bends with the gravity created. It is just not having to push so hard, like treacle, and water. Space particles must be the smallest thing that there is, but they must create everything. I shall make a new picture of this. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 Using my theory, a black hole would be such a thin part of space that nothing could resist the sudden speed increase from travelling through resin to suddenly travelling through air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 Here is a picture that shows how the distribution of space particles is shared between all objects. A planet has stole the distribution of particles leaving behind a weakened state of particles. This weakened state is easier to travel through, so gravity takes place. It would get easier, and easier to travel through towards the planet. Not all of these details are shown well in the diagram, a 3D diagram would be much better. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VendingMenace Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 so you say that gravity thins space? And that light and other things travel faster through this thinned out space?? This cannot be. For instance, the gravitational feild of the earth is stronger slightly below the surface of the earth. By your theory then, light would travel faster when it is in the surface of the earth. However, visible light does not go through the earth, so it does not travel fast through the earth. perhaps i am missunderstanding you? Using my theory, a black hole would be such a thin part of space that nothing could resist the sudden speed increase from travelling through resin to suddenly travelling through air. ok, but then what would keep things (like light) from exiting the black hole. In your analogy, sure things increase in speed when going from resin to air, but that does not mean that things will not go back from air to resin. Again, i think the problem lies in that the idea that space is bent explains and predicts our observations quite well. I am not sure that thinning of space gives us any better pridictions and explinations that does the bending of space. :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VendingMenace Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 A planet has stole the distribution of particles leaving behind a weakened state of particles. This weakened state is easier to travel through, so gravity takes place. But by this reasoning, there would be very little gravity when inside the earth. This, however, is not the case. How would you explain that there is gravity in the earth, where particles are very dense (and hence not thin at all)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 Actually if gravity is stronger just below the surface of the Earth then light would travel faster through it, but it is obviously blocked by the earth itself. Anyway even the old theory has light being pulled by gravity. The gravity inside the Earth must be like the blotting paper effect. There must be a leakage into the Earth through all the fragments. You need to think of space as a weakening of liquid, but the liquid is unbelievebly diluted, yet pretty strong, like a spider web liquid. Also you say that things could travel back into the resin through a black hole, but you are not accounting for a graduation in the change from Resin to air. The graduation would be like a power curve. The lessening of power towards the centre of the black hole, the thinning of the liquid all the way to the centre, easier and easier mobility in a 3D spherical state. This could be compared to a bouncing bomb that skipped over water. It has less resistance to go forwards than downwards, now turn that into a 3D curve in your head. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinch Paxton Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 Ok so here's the dilution of Space around a Black Hole, or even a Planet if you just imagine a lesser degree. As you can see, this weakening of space is hard to cross once you accept a 3D weakening effect. Pincho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now