₦airaland Forum

MrSunesis:
You are right. I was actually relating to gravitational (potential) energy....energy generated as a result of gravity between objects.
But you miss my point...in that energy and matter relatable.

Well E=MC2 means that Energy and Matter are the same thing.

But, but, GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL energy is not gravity. It is DUE to gravitational field it is in. Just like acceleration due to gravity is not gravity, but due to gravity

LoJ:
Please would you mind quoting where I wrote that? I may have forgotten. If I ever wrote anything like that, then it's a typing mistake, for it is not my belief.

But still, please quote where I wrote that, so that I can correct.

Thank you in advance.

Cheers.

Inferring

LoJ:
Which point? I never claimed Science was perfect.

In case you forgot, my point from the post of the other brother was and still is:

- Everyone is entitled to his beliefs/thoughts about anything. But if any belief is to be held as absolute Truth - as far as the physical is concerned -, then there must be some scientific evidence.

I do not see whatever you said or I said that proves this false or inappropriate.

Greetings.

Bros, you were inferring that evidence makes stuff true.

LoJ:
Yes Micodon.

Science is not perfect. Science is a work in progress. But at least, at any point in time, BEFORE a theory may be accepted as true, there should be some evidence.

I never claimed there are no mistake in Science. However Experiments and criticism helps to correct those mistakes. So yes Science in a Work in progress. That should not be by no means, a pretext not to prove anything!

It like saying mean should not wear condoms to protect themselves, because one man still got aids despite wearing one.

Yes there are scientific mistakes and correction. It does not mean every opinion should be considered as a fact, without proof nor evidence. As simple as that.

Cheers.

Thank God you see the point

LoJ:
Hello Micodon. You free to disregard my posts and you're entitled to your judgments about me. As for I try as much as I can, to avoid name callings and disrespect.

With respect to your question: A Hypothesis/theory is a scientific proposal - yet to be verified via experimentation and verification - which aims at addressing a (scientific) problem. This definition is not all encompassing, but gives a faint idea of what I meant.

A scientific fact on the other hand is just that, a fact which upon experiment or research has been proven true beyond reasonable doubt. The Law of universal attraction and its consequence Gravity is a fact and can be scientifically demonstrated.

Again, everyone is free to think, believe whatever he is genuinely convinced about - provided he doesn't force it on others. But if a particular belief is to be accepted as Truth - especially in Science - it must be backed with scientific evidence/proofs. This a sane principle formulated by Euclid:

-What's asserted without proof can be denied without proof - Euclid

Greetings.

Then, Einstein in his relativity theories showed That Gravity is not the attraction between two bodies. That it is a warp in spacetime. So, fact?

You need to know that what we accept as fact today, may have limitations because of our present methods. Example, Dalton's atomic theories were accepted as fact, but were later modified. Water is colorless was accepted as fact. What we see Fact doesn't necessarily mean that it's true.

LoJ:
Hello Micodon.

Which scientist said dark matter exists for sure and has presented no proof/scientific evidence? Could you please name some of those scientist who claimed something physical exists without providing evidence? Do you mistake a theory/hypothesis for a (scientific) fact?

Greetings.

You do forget that one rule for having a scientific law is that it must be falsifiable

LoJ:
Hello Micodon.

Which scientist said dark matter exists for sure and has presented no proof/scientific evidence? Could you please name some of those scientist who claimed something physical exists without providing evidence? Do you mistake a theory/hypothesis for a (scientific) fact?

Greetings.

Sometimes your enthusiasm spoils good topics. May I ask you the difference between a Theory and a Law?

LoJ:
Hello Micodon.
Dark matter and dark energy Have done what?
Cheers

Scientists say they exist. Scientists have no proof of their existence

LoJ:
Hello.

You are entitled to think whatever you want. But in your previous post, you said know. If you want your convictions/thoughts on physical issues to be accepted as Truth, then you have to present (scientific) evidence.

Since you just think, then it's ok. It is your right.

Greetings.

Not always true. For example, dark matter and dark energy

erusen:
u are now changing the Scriptures

No, I'm not. Example, at Numbers 14:34,the Bible talks of a day for a year. At 2 Peter 3:8,the Bible talks of a day for a thousand years. There's several other principles like that in the Bible. When you see a day in the Bible, it's probably in relative terms, not our absolute 24 hour period. That's what many so-called Christians fail to understand. Study is needed

erusen:
the same bible that said the earth was created 6000 years ago

The Bible NEVER said that. People who do not understand the Bible think the 6 creative days are 6 literal days.

erusen:
there is no science nor logic in religion,religious people in science are confused they try as much as they can be bend science to fit their religion,does ur religion not sat the earth is flat?.

Actually, centuries before science discovered that the earth is a sphere, the Bible had already said it.

Setaje:
All I no is I have seen ufo's twice. The same kind that people said they have seen. A flying saucer. Here in Nigeria. Twice. Don't care if you don't believe but I no what I saw. I wasn't sleeping or in a truance. It was as real as seeing an airplane. Only that this one was exactly like a flying saucer.

You people have been watching too many movies. Please, if you don't mind, we are talking science here. I mean, REAL SCIENCE.

johnydon22:
Their cup of tea has nothing to do with me just like Eistein, Hawkins or 90% of the 21st century Physicist who don't is not my business.. More over they lived during the medieval ages

If these brilliant minds could accept religion, why call someone a slowpoke for doing same?

erusen:
and Kepler too yea,but it doesn't prove anything,they are tons more that do not do.like Einstein was a deist just like me

If these brilliant minds could accept religion, why call someone a slowpoke for doing same?

wirinet:
Opinion is divided as regard instantaneous or delayed propagation of gravity, and experiments do not support delayed propagation.
please read this article and tell me your thoughts
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/speed_of_gravity.asp

Later. But I can assure you, they're just gonna twist things around d

johnydon22:
Imagine this nonsense... Tell me how Nigeria is ever going to grow in science when her Youths are like this @erusen ..The bible that didn't know "day/night cannot come before the sun on planet earth..

Religion has literally turned Nigerian youths to simpletons.. i don't see a bright light at the end of the tunnel

What do you think of Gallileo, Newton, Bacon and others? I know they believed in religion.

wirinet:
I have not read anything physics for a decade, but i can't remembered Einstein agreeing with the ether hypothesis. Einstein say gravity as an after effect of mass distorting the space-time fabric, so removing that distortion should automatically remove the distortion ( maybe instantaneously). I might have to dust up my old books on fundamental physics.

I remembered Einstein was toying with the idea of gravity waves, but can't remember his conclusions.

Gravity is not the after effect of mass distorting space time. The distortion itself is gravity

wirinet:
I have not read anything physics for a decade, but i can't remembered Einstein agreeing with the ether hypothesis. Einstein say gravity as an after effect of mass distorting the space-time fabric, so removing that distortion should automatically remove the distortion ( maybe instantaneously). I might have to dust up my old books on fundamental physics.

I remembered Einstein was toying with the idea of gravity waves, but can't remember his conclusions.

Let's say you have a stretched rubber sheet... And you place an object of mass on the rubber sheet. Now place other smaller objects at other points on the rubber sheet. Now take out the large object. Does the rubber sheet just flatten out? Nope. The rubber sheet first recovers from the dent, goes up, down, up and so until it finally flattens out. This wave like disturbance acts on the other objects but not instantaneously. Time elapses, even though you might not notice. That is exactly what will happen if a star goes nova. Gravity propagates.

wirinet:
Gravity is the least understood force of nature. it does not seem to be affected by time, it is able to warp space-time. If a star goes nova, will there be a time lag between when the star explodes and when planets around it feel the loss of its gravity? tell me what you think.

And I should have you know that Gravity DOES NOT WARP SPACETIME.... GRAVITY IS THE WARP ITSELF

wirinet:
Gravity is the least understood force of nature. it does not seem to be affected by time, it is able to warp space-time. If a star goes nova, will there be a time lag between when the star explodes and when planets around it feel the loss of its gravity? tell me what you think.

Oh yes, there will be. The reason is that Space is not empty. Einstein said space is filled with the aether. So, when the star goes Nova, the aether will be distorted.. And this will propagate like a wave to the surroundings. For example, when you drop a stone in water, you see ripples propagate as waves from the point you dropped the stone, to wherever it can go... That's how gravity behaves. There's always a time lag, cos here, the waves have to travel through a medium

Philadelphia:
Gravity is not everywhere. There is no gravity in space but there is light in space.

There's gravity everywhere there's a body of mass. That means, wherever you go, ull experience gravity. At least, because of your own mass.

MrSunesis:
Gravity and light are both 'things' (if I were to refers to Tartar's usage if the term)....they are both energy and are correlated. According to the law of thermodynamics, energy can be transformed from one state to another.... That is wamhat makes Einstein's law possible.

Gravity is not energy, Bros. According to the Relativity theories, Gravity is not a real force sef. It's a warp... A curvature in the fabrics of spacetime

LoJ:
Please brother. It is better when you don't understand somthing to ask for clarification, instead of quickly talking about flaws in the calculations. Look at it again, the calculation is impeccable.

When an object O (x,y,z) is moving at the speed of the light C, then we have x+y+z = C. However For any object x+y+z+t must be = C. Therefore, in the case of an object (for instance a light proton) that is travelling at the speed of the light C, T = 0. For that object, time is not passing.

That's simple, obvious and absolutely mathematically demonstrable. There is even a scientific paradox that deals with that: It is the Twin paradox, you can google it.

Cheers

The Twin Paradox, brother.. Thanks for reminding us

sukkot:
there are many parallel dimensions in our universe. some dimensions can only be inhabited by spiritual beings. our own dimension is called the 3rd or 3D dimension. its for those who are vibrating on a very low frequency of vibration and have to acquire a body so that they can be led by their carnal desires of touch smell taste and feel. its a low dimension for the carnal. the ascended masters are on the 4th dimension. remember we are spiritual beings having a physical experience

What exactly are you saying? Bros, our dimension is not THE THIRD dimension. Our Universe is a 4 Dimensional one.. And at every point in time We are moving through them. There are three dimensions for space... Just like you have in your Cartesian coordinate system. so when you move from x to y to z, your direction of movement makes a circle... Like that.... And then the 4th Dimension is Time

great664:
I am an Accountant too but will be buying my physics textbook tomorrow to start with basic Physics, just love it and this post with comment open my eyes more to why I really love it....

Thanks for the thread but don't like the fact that most are Atheist, anyway they have right to their belief.

I love Astronomy, let's know our HOME,

cc
Johnydon22
HapyOne
Midon***
Please point which book should I get for a starter, just for leisure though, I have passion for Astronomy but its somehow late for me now...

Since you're just starting, you need to start with Astronomy for dummies and Astrophysics for dummies. I must warn you that you need to know basic physics and mathematics (calculus and that)

SherlockWayne007:
iDoubt time travel will be possible because time itself is just an abstract concept unlike space. We can move from one point in space to another because it is physical. But time is more or less just an idea

This is so wrong. Time is not just an Idea. In fact, time is inseparable from space. TIME IS A DIMENSION, AND WE TRAVEL THROUGH IT. We live in a continuum of spacetime... And this continuum is curved.

vivaciousvivi:
Let me beg to differ.
I agree life - as defined on earth is molecule or cell based. However that's the human definition. Again that restriction. Your comment on silicon again is restricted to the known elements on our periodic table again discovered and still being discovered by man. So what is there may be over a million elements that are currently existing / evolving across the planets?
Again you talk about solar or cosmic radiation defined by man's understanding and belief of what doses are "normal" and not harmful. But what if a planet doesn't even have need a star that radiates solar energy. And then again, what if there are planets that have upto 3 suns far larger than that of earth's yet lifeforms can thrive.
The number of what if's should not be ignored simply becsue man's science restricts our abilities to see a far bigger picture of possibilities!

You have been watching too much Hollywood

SherlockWayne007:
[color=#000000][/color]

There's a flaw in the calculation. Initially, you stated that X+Y+Z+T = C. Later on, you said T = C - (X+Y+Z), where X+Y+Z = C (neglecting 'T') and you got T = 0. But if X+Y+Z+T = C, then T = C - (X+Y+Z) will be T = C - (C-T). (Because X+Y+Z = C-T, not just 'C'). Therefore, T = C-C+T, which means T = T, and that doesn't prove anything

Bros, you have just twisted this equation and arrived at a wrong conclusion. Please, very simply make T the subject of the equation. Do not break anything down. Just make T the subject of the following equation.... C = X + Y + Z + T

johnydon22:

Time dilation is the relativity of time in contrast to a Constant which is the speed of light..

The speed of light remains exact same for a body either in motion or not but their perception of time varies.

"Four Velocity i think is the equivalence of velocity which is a vector value in our three dimensional space but this time in a four dimensional space.

bros, I didn't ask for definitions.... DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPTS? In a nutshell, every object in the universe is moving at 4 velocities (3 in the spatial dimensions and 1 in the time dimension). THE SUM OF THESE VELOCITIES ALWAYS EQUALS THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Therefore, when you go faster in the spatial dimensions, your velocity in the time dimension reduces relative to your velocity in the spatial dimensions. Let's represent this in a simple equation. X + Y + Z + T = c. Where X, Y, Z are the velocities in your Cartesian coordinates, T is your velocity in the time dimension, and c is the speed of light.

Now what happens when you reach a velocity that equals c in your spatial dimensions? We make T the subject of the formula, like so.... T = C - (X + Y +Z). Because x+y+z = c, T = 0. So at the speed of light, time stops for the object. That is why light photons are ageless... They travel at c, so T for them = 0.

Now what happens when You go past the speed of light in your spatial dimensions? That means (X + Y + Z) becomes greater than C. Therefore time becomes negative. What does it mean for time to flow in the negative direction? I leave you to answer that.


This is all fine Mathematically. But according to Einstein, the speed of light is the speed limit of the universe.. Nothing can go beyond it. That's where going back in time fails in practical

johnydon22:
I don't it is ever possible to travel back in time, not in this macro universe.. Time may slow down, run at different pace at space/time but never backwards.. If time travel was ever possible to mankind where are the visitors from the future?

You are saying what I said. We already do Time Travel. But we travel only forward in time. We can't go backwards in time in the practical world. But going back in time is THEORETICALLY possible. What do you know about "time dilation" and "four velocity"?

HapyOne:
I believe is possible or better still, it's already happening to some extent. For those of us that do believe in extraterrestrial powers/beings or what we commonly call witches and wizards or awon Iya ooo... These beings could disappear and appear in another place, I believe what is happening is just time manipulation, they are able to travel close or at the speed of light which makes everything still to them thus they can now move to their destination and reduce their speed to normal, making us think the just disappear and appear like that. For example if you look at a very fast running fan, at some point you might not see the blades of the fan, but they are their is just that they are moving two fast for you to notice imagine an human can do that and move that fast, you won't see the person. I believe this is another way of doing time travel, but maybe one is not travelling to the future can't really say.

About the future or past, recall the theory of special relativity.
The mechanism for traveling into the distant future is to use the time-dilation effect of Special Relativity, which states that a moving clock appears to tick more slowly the closer it approaches the speed of light. This effect, which has been overwhelmingly supported by experimental tests, applies to all types of clocks, including biological aging.

If one were to depart from the earth in a spaceship that could accelerate continuously at a comfortable one g (an acceleration that would produce a force equal to the gravity at the earth's surface), one would begin to approach the speed of light relative to the earth within about a year. As the ship continued to accelerate, it would come ever closer to the speed of light, and its clocks would appear to run at an ever slower rate relative to the earth. Under such circumstances, a round trip to the center of our galaxy and back to the earth--a distance of some 60,000 light-years--could be completed in only a little more than 40 years of ship time. Upon arriving back at the earth, the astronaut would be only 40 years older, while 60,000 years would have passed on the earth. Such a trip would pose formidable engineering problems, but I know is way possible maybe not now but very soon.

Time travel into the past, which is what people usually mean by time travel, is a much more uncertain proposition. There are many solutions to Einstein's equations of General Relativity that allow a person to follow a timeline that would result in her (or him) encountering herself...

And so on like that.....................

I know time travel is possible, and it will happen. I really need to correct some things in the past.

Just my thought though

We are already traveling through time, albeit in one direction. But lemme tell you... WE CAN NEVER GO BACK IN TIME. THERE WILL BE TOO MUCH CHAOS FOR THE UNIVERSE TO HANDLE.. please read about "time and causality"