What is Space made of?

[nimae]

 

Not exactly but I think you are referring to what is known as intrinsic geometry.

 

Perhaps if you would like to explain in greater detail?

 

This extract from

 

Elementary Geometry : Roe : Oxford University Press

 

might help. Read paragraph 12.1 in particular.

 

intrinsic1.jpg

 

 

 

Assuming that space just like most things is made of something else you get to the conclusion that there is a point without space. So then how could you have space ? You need a variable that interacts with every other variable. You could then measure the location of each variable based on its interactions with the main variable(s).

[studiot]

 

 

 

Assuming that space just like most things is made of something else you get to the conclusion that there is a point without space. So then how could you have space ? You need a variable that interacts with every other variable. You could then measure the location of each variable based on its interactions with the main variable(s).

 

 

What did you make of my reference?

 

 

One way to look at what you are asking is like this.

 

Consider the parabola y = x².

 

What do you need to be able to draw it (for it to exist) ?

 

Well you need the +x axis and the -x axis and the +y axis.

 

But you do not need the -y axis.

 

In fact you do not need the entire half plane below the x axis.

 

 

So you are asking the equivalent of

 

Does that half plane exist for my purposes?

 

Would you agree?

Edited December 9, 2016 by studiot

[Mordred]

nice reference and example Studiot. I don't want to add anything just yet. Might add confusion. My explanations often do lol.

Edited December 9, 2016 by Mordred

[nimae]

 

 

 

Would you agree?

 

 

I think that's not what i meant.

 

 

With the assumption that space isn't magically created we can come to only one conclusion, That something makes space. That something obviously exists before there is space, in a space-less zone.

 

We can also safely assume that maths and relativistic models still apply in this space-less zone. Whatever is there could be called information for our purposes.

 

 

In this space-less zone if you have one type of information that is very mathematically relativistic to every other type of information change then it would emulate geometry and space.

 

 

So for example if information x (matter) changes by 1, It's relation variable to y (the main relativistic info) changes by 1. This is space for all practical purposes.

[Mike Smith Cosmos]

.

You appear to have here, three possible sources for the truth , for what really is SPACE?

 

1) Is it the sum total of all Mathematical rules. .. Or

 

2) Is it the sum total of all of the standard model particles and fields , already discovered as well as those not yet descovered.

 

3) Is it the sum total of things going on that we ARE and/ or, ARE NOT YET AWARE , or we have not any conception of what they are or what is going on ?

 

Mike

 

Ps . I would suggest that the third definition is more likely to be nearer to the truth ( reality ) than the first or second , As the first two assume we currently have all the maths and all the particles and fields , and knowledge of everything that is going on ! ( which I would suggest is not true ) ?

Edited December 14, 2016 by Mike Smith Cosmos

[Strange]

4. It is just the distance between things.

 

Assuming that space just like most things is made of something else you get to the conclusion that there is a point without space. So then how could you have space ?

If you don't assume that, then you don't reach that conclusion.

 

And there is no real reason to assume that.

Edited December 14, 2016 by Strange

[swansont]

If you don't assume that, then you don't reach that conclusion.

 

And there is no real reason to assume that.

Or it's proof by contradiction

[VandD]

4. It is just the distance between things.

 

 

The distance between simulaneous events.

[Char lie]

Space is just made of nothing. There is no real space as we picture it. If you take earth as the observer, our planète is "touching" the sun.

Relativity stops time in earth movement towards the sun created by gravity. But when space contracts enough, time stop and so the mouvement.

It touches the sun as we never touched nothing.

Maths dictates that distance can only diminish to an infinitely small size, so we shall never create a contact...

Could maths be wrong?

 

I tell you.. no it can't.

 

Relativity makes us stop our move towards matter because of space contraction.

I'm working on origin of gravity and brownien movements.

Energie cannot be by itself, yes, but Then, how come matter provide energie? Where does it come from? What physical concept create this energie?

Differential pressure I tell you. Between empty space(Nothing, no matter) and non empty space(matter).

 

What has to be specified is that the actual volume occupied by matter is still occupied by nothing too. Our universe is 2 dimensional at the end. Creation of time is to be taken as a mistake, an anomaly. Reality is to be understood with no time factor. Because, time factor involves death and so emotions, and so disturbs the signal of understanding, giving worth to unworthy parameters.

You want to understand the universe, you have to start with creating the appropriate referential. Universe="infinity"(to be discussed later, because, universe is as infinite than finite.)

 

So knowing the universe is the same as knowing yourself, and if yourself is the universe, you don't a shit about time...

So take it out your thinking for more clarifications.

 

Thanks for reading.feedback much appreciated.

 

Best regards to all and happy new year!

 

Charles R.

[Itoero]

Space is imo a form of energy.

[StringJunky]

Space is imo a form of energy.

Space is what you measure: volume

[Itoero]

Space is what you measure: volume

So in theory, you can have space time without space?

[StringJunky]

So in theory, you can have space time without space?

Where'd you get that idea from, especially when 'space' is in its name?

Edited January 4, 2017 by StringJunky

[Itoero]

Where'd you get that idea from, especially when 'space' is in its name?

I don't know if this makes any sense but for space (a measurement) you need more then one particle...perhaps space time doesn't demand more then one particle.

[swansont]

I'm working on origin of gravity and brownien movements.

Energie cannot be by itself, yes, but Then, how come matter provide energie? Where does it come from? What physical concept create this energie?

Differential pressure I tell you. Between empty space(Nothing, no matter) and non empty space(matter).

Space is imo a form of energy.

 

!

Moderator Note

Speculation belongs in the speculations forum (and needs proper support for the discussion. Unsupported opinion is not enough). Please restrict feedback in this thread to mainstream physics, and stay on-topic.

[Brownsfan77]

Einstein's theory states gravity curves space. Everything he stated about gravity's effects are exactly the same as magnetism. In my opinion gravity is nothing more than magnetism, earth itself is a large magnet with a north and south pole. Using magnets and several types of lights including a laser I was able to distort the lights path. Einstein also said it is possible to bend light. Mankind has a northern and southern hemisphere, we also conduct electricity. Electricity can also be achieved using magnetism. This could also be the reason why meteors and what not are attracted to earth. Rubbing a balloon against your hair will cause it to stick to your head, static electricity or just magnetism. The thing that don't make sense is if coordinates constantly change, how does a vertical level work. Put a pencil on a ball level it and glue it, measure over 6 inches and glue another pencil after leveling it, the outcome will look like almost a V and not perpendicular like l l.

[Tom O'Neil]

What is Space made of?

FAQ article development, feel free to ask questions or make suggestions.

 

@Mordrid

 

 

 

Everything is constructed from information including space. Therefore, an underlying equation or code must exist for space to be present. Information is tangible so space must be tangible.

 

Space is like a hidden clock, upon a whole Rainbow of frequencies; where God encodes Phi with infinite degrees, for this matrix.

 

I would summarize that the equation includes phi for space to exist as-well as pi, likened to a minute electrical 4th dimensional web.

 

If space does not have properties then how would the universe expand without it?

Excellent Topic by the way!

You have to take into consideration the presence of a void or utter darkness too; which I think resembles a sphere prior to creation of space which may have been the template which also retains information.

Furthermore is space expanding like a sphere or is it oblong as in eliptical?

Edited January 25, 2017 by Tom O'Neil

[StringJunky]

Einstein's theory states gravity curves space.

Gravity is the curvature. Mass causes it. Mass tells space how to bend and space tells mass how to move.

 

 

Everything he stated about gravity's effects are exactly the same as magnetism......

The rate at which both diminish with distance is different.

[Strange]

Everything he stated about gravity's effects are exactly the same as magnetism.

 

 

Apart from:

 

1. Magnetism attracts and repels. Gravity only attracts.

 

2. You can shield magnetism but not gravity.

 

3. Gravity falls of with an inverse square law while magnetism follows an inverse cube law

 

4. All forms of mass and energy (and pressure and momentum flow and ...) cause gravity but not magnetism.

 

5. And on and on.

 

So certainly not "everything".

 

 

 

In my opinion gravity is nothing more than magnetism

 

Your opinion has little value. You should learn the basics of physics.

[Mordred]

Gravity is the curvature. Mass causes it. Mass tells space how to bend and space tells mass how to move.

 

I've always preferred stating the stress tensor instead of mass. Far more accurate but then many wouldn't know what the stress tensor is.

 

@Tom one can apply a numeric description to anything in nature. That does not mean numbers are intrinsic to anything.

 

Numbers are simply another form of language. A method of descriptive.

 

Strange and Stingyjunky already covered the important details to Brownsfan77 post but I will add

 

Any form of field can influence spacetime whether its electromagnetic, a matter field, the strong force etc.

 

Using electromagnetic field to bend light is just one example but not the only one. While its great you showed that an electromagnetic field can bend light. So can other forms of either force or matter fields. With or without the presence of an electromagnetic field such as two asteroids far removed from any magnetic field.

 

Another key distinction between gravity and any other force field is that gravity matches spin 2 statistics (which includes its thermodynamic character via Bose-Einstein statistics) No other known field does. Electromagnetic follows spin 1.

 

So a GW wave is significantly different from an electromagnetic wave. We have now detected GW waves and confirmed the spin 2.

Keep in mind a field is a mathematical abstract device to describe any collection of objects/events etc. Then again mass is also an abstract device to describe resistance to inertia change. Mathematics and physics simply describes what we understand as reality or aspects of it. Spacetime curvature is a mathematical geometric description of relations. Space is a description of volume, too often posters seek what it is fundamentally made up of due to trying to understand how it can curve. What curves includes additional relations causing resistance to inertia change.

Edited January 25, 2017 by Mordred

[StringJunky]

I've always preferred stating the stress tensor instead of mass. Far more accurate but then many wouldn't know what the stress tensor is.

I don't really but one day I'll tackle it when I can appreciate the maths.

[Mordred]

There is three main components to the stress tensor. Momentum, flux and vorticity.

[StringJunky]

There is three main components to the stress tensor. Momentum, flux and vorticity.

i know what momentum is but not the latter two, in terms of this subject matter. Are they straightforward to understand or are they purely mathematical?

[Mordred]

Not purely mathematical they are in essence fluid dynamic terms.

flux is particles/unit area/unit time) across surfaces of constant x, y and z.

Vorticity is a type of motion of those particles often described as the curl component. In essence describing rotational fluids. Classical examples being whirlpools etc. The curl component of the Maxwell equations being another example of vorticity. In essence vorticity is your angular momentum terms. Angular momentum being skew-symmetric

Edited January 25, 2017 by Mordred

[geordief]

So is there a relationship between mass and the stress tensor? (It is the stress-momentum tensor ,is it? )