# question on time dialation

G

#### Guest

##### Guest
in case anybody in unfamiliar with time dialation, its the theory that everybody and everything moves through an amount of space and time. if you move through more space, then less time passes for you than if you were moving slowly. if you move slowly or not at all, you move through time only. hence, you would age faster than everyone else. of course, as people on earth, we never move nearly fast enough to make any signifigant time difference. to do that, you would have to be moving close to the speed of light.

this theory has been proven when they compared the time on a jet after a flight, the concord i believe, to the "real" time to everyone else. there was a time difference of billionths of seconds.

supposedly, if you move at the speed of light, you move through all space and no time. therefore, you would not age, time would pass for everybody and except you, similar to traveling in the future.

my question is this: if you did move at the speed of light for any amount of time, wouldnt that mean that infinite time will pass on the outside? since no time passes as you move through space at the speed of light, how would you stop going that speed? where and how could you stop and what time would you arrive in?

It's all relative. At the speed of light, time seems to stop (as judged from an observer) but the spaceship occupants will still be able to move and stop the ship whenever they want. However, where/when they'll be is the question.

i see what you're saying, but no time would pass in the ship even after infinite time passes outside of it, theoretically.

Yes and no.

A traveller in a spaceship orbiting the Sun at or near the speed of light still sees the Earth revolve around the Sun the same number of times as an Earthbound observer.

It is the travellers biological clock that slows down.

In other words, we've come to think of a year as one revolution of the sun, and have carried it over to our biological definition of time.

In reality (or Relativity if you will), this is not necessarily true, depending on the observer's point of view.

The above scenario is a well known analogy in physics. Carl Sagan calculated that travelling at 99.99999999etc % of light, the known universe could be transversed in 59 years, from the travellers viewpoint and as recorded by his clock. However, if he could keep the earth in sight during that period, he would see it spin around the sun very fast indeed. Millions of times no doubt.

But the question is, as i understand it, does time stop for the traveller AT the speed of light. Einstein said it did. But as yet we have no way to prove this do we. Even tho all experiments into time dilation HAVE come out as predicted. So,,,,,,

ME?:
If my clock fails to maintain interval accuracy for what ever reason, does this mean that I am experiencing time dialation?

I have heard that the increase of kenetic energy within the ship due to acceleration results in an acceleration of all molecules in the ship.

By accelerating the molecules time apears to speed up inside the ship so that at an infinite energy density that an infinite amount of time passing inside the ship at the velocity of light would be but an instant to the stationary outside viewer.

A good example of this conscept is the acceleration of molecules of a heated substance. As the number of thermal photons within that mass increases causing the temperature to rise, the velocity of the molecules accelerates.

Conversely, as the temperature of a mass aproaches zero kelvins the velocity of the molecules and subatomic particles approaches zero velocity.

Now can anyone tell me why the experiments on the plane suggest that time slows down as the kenetic energy builds up resulting in an increasein temperature due to molecular friction and time speeds up when photonic energies are applied?

I have two possible solutions. The first is that kenetic energy is of a gravitational nature mediated by gravitons or perhaps the higgs boson. While photons or light belongs to the energy spectrum.

If all the above is true then it points to the theory or (hypothesis) I stated before that as energy density increases the spacetime that the energy occupies decreases density.

This is because energy occupies space-time and if one increases the quantity of space that a given quanta of energy occupies then obviously the energy is defined as having a lower energy density with respect to that space which increased in volume.

The suggested mathematical formula for the ratio (and this is a guess) is S=1/e^2, where e^2 is the energy density, and S is the density of the volume of space that the energy occupies which is the volume of space. This is what causes gravity.

For by increasing the energy density in a given region of space one decreases the density of space in that region. Thus we have a region of high energy and within that same space the region of low space time density.

Now since as an energy field expands over a given region of space the density of the field decreases to the inverted square of the distance to the source the space time density will increase in density to the inverted sqaure of the distance to the source.

That is why the mathematical law for the decrease in strength of a magnetic field is the same as the law for the decrease in strength of the gravitational field. The magnetic field decreases it's pull as a result of having a higher density closer to the center of the field.

Gravity decreases in strength because space has a lower density as one moves closer to the center mass of the gravitational field. The gravitational pull is caused by the imbalance between the spaceof high density and lower energy density farther away from the center mass of the fields.

The space-time of higher density and pressure flows toward the space-timeof lowerer density. This flow what causes objects to fall. Also the magnetic pull of a magnet is caused the electro magnetic photons being carried by the spacetime toward the mass.

The electromagnetic photons must be special in that they are so susceptible to the gravitation flow. The speed and velocity of all other photons in the electromagnetic spectrum appear to be affected by the flow space to the lower energy density of space by a far lesser amount then the peculiar magnetic photons.

Anyone think that some harmonic multiple of the magnetic photon at some frequency or wavelength much lower and possibly much higher then we have currently the technology to duplicated might have similar kenetic charateristics of the magnetic photons?

inquisitively,

Edwin G. Schasteen

rgrunt:

"By accelerating the molecules time apears to speed up inside the ship so that at an infinite energy density that an infinite amount of time passing inside the ship at the velocity of light would be but an instant to the stationary outside viewer."

According to thus far observed measurements, it works exactly opposite to this. At least with the Space Shuttle and the previous experiments with Jet Aircraft and the Apollo Missions.

In other words, the traveller at the speed of light would see the external universe pass infiniately FAST while HIS observance of time within appeared normal.

Hence the calculation that the near light traveller would see the Earth rotate millions of times around the Sun while he aged only five (or "x" number of) years.

Timemaster 1A:

(grin)

Deviper:

Thanks that is what I suspected but was unsure.

Would this support my theory that the density of spacetime within the ship decreases as the energy density within the ship increases?

Would a region of space of zero density appear to travel infinitely slower through time then a region of comparitively infinitely dense space?

As you stated before, time is slower for the person inside of the ship due to the extremely low space-time density in the ship, and not slowed because of the extremely high energy density of the ship.

This is because one travels through space while occupying that space where as on travels through energy without occupying the space to which the quantums of energy occupy. Thus the increased energy density within the ship decreases the value of relative space-time density and possibly the true space-time density within the ship and results in the decrease of time flow speed within the ship--as a result of the low space-time density and not the high energy density.

Otherwise the opposite that Einstein calculated would be true--that is-- as the energy within a ship increases time slows down for the ship because of the increase in energy density within the ship.

Does all of this make any since? Do you really think that increasing energy density within a region decreases the space-time density creating low pressure space-time region within that region of energy.

Would this not also cause a gravitational flow to acurr? As space-time of greater density flows toward the region of space-time of lower energy density towards the center of an energy field or mass?

inquisitively,

Edwin G. Schasteen [email protected]
[email protected]

rgrunt:

Hmmmm. Interesting.

I am intrigued by your thoughts and yet am a bit confused on a purely semantical level. Help me here. I need some clarification of your meaning of the term "density".

As in where you say...

"Would this support my theory that the density of spacetime within the ship decreases as the energy density within the ship increases?"

I am confused by what you mean by the "density" of Space-Time.

... or as in...

"Would a region of space of zero density appear to travel infinitely slower through time then a region of comparitively infinitely dense space?"

"Appear" to whom? The traveller or the observer OF the traveller?

and...

"As you stated before, time is slower for the person inside..."

(as has been observed)....but...

"...due to the extremely low space-time density in the ship, and not slowed because of the extremely high energy density of the ship."

Actually, I cannot say (and did not say) what any of this is "due" to. As far as I know, NOBODY can expalin WHY Time Dilation occurs, only report what has been observed that confirms what Einstein said would be so. The observations are well documented that confirm his predictions. I know of no one that can explain WHY it is so, any more than anyone can explain why gravity exists.

And then...

"This is because one travels through space while occupying that space where as one travels through energy..."

Also not sure what you mean by "travels through energy"... This one evades me entirely.

"... without occupying the space to which the quantums of energy occupy."

Sorry. You lost me here. I mean how could this be POSSIBLY so? And then...

"Thus the increased energy density within the ship decreases the value of relative space-time density and possibly the true space-time density within the ship and results in the decrease of time flow speed within the ship--as a result of the low space-time density and not the high energy density."

Hmmm... Please understand that the "thus" you begin this sentence with is a "thus" of YOUR deduction and not mine. And so...

"Otherwise the opposite that Einstein calculated would be true..."

Yes, I could "suppose" that it would, but then, it has been observed to NOT be so. And even PREDICTED as such resulting in the confirmation of said predictions.

So...

"Does all of this make any since?" (sic)

Yes...and no. But I think it is a semantical problem at this time as to the parts that don't.

"Do you really think that increasing energy density..."

Again, not sure what you mean by "energy density", but then I don't claim to be a Quantum mechanic. And finally,

"Would this not also cause a gravitational flow to acurr? (sic) As space-time of greater density flows toward the region of space-time of lower energy density towards the center of an energy field or mass?"

Hmmm. This sounds interesting. It's just that I'm not sure how you arrived at this conclusion based on what you have hypothesized earlier. But I surely can't take issue with it since I don't know.

Could you explain this "density" idea a bit further?

Thank you.

Dear Deviper,

I would be glad to reexplain the points you hit on. This is new conscept and I am still a beginner when it comes to explaining ideas in text.

I hope through practice I will eventually develop the writting and expressive skills to a level that I will be able to communicate clearly my idea's. I look forward to each new post as I see small improvements in my ability to express myself. This motivates me as I am constantly seeing improvement and finding new ways to adjust my manners of writing thanks to the support of all of you...my friends..teaching me as we go by giving your priceless wealth of knowlege that each of you has spent your times aquiring.

All of this exchange of knowlege and teamwork is what I believe will make time travel a reality and not a fantasy.

As for the density of energy I mean quantums of energy per unit volume. I view space-time as a container for energy and mass.

A good analogy to use to visualize this conscept is a glass filled with water. Now the glass is space and the water is energy or mass.

Now each glass differs in size and therfore can hold only so much water. Once the glass is filled the water starts to overflow.

Now each quantum of energy such as a photon is a nothing more then the maximum amount of energy that can be conained in that particular volume of space.

Space might be seen in terms of being quantized although this would not be entirely accurate. What I mean by density of space time is pretty much the same as with any other quantity that has density.

Suppose one takes a one gallon container that has one gallon of air inside. If you vacuum out half of a gallon of air from that container the remaining air inside that container will expand due to the molecular forces of heat trying to accelerate the air molecules apart.

Thus you will have less air per given volume...half a gallon of air in a one gallon cantainer. Know if you take fifty or one hundred gallons of air and try to cram it into a one gallon container the air will force its way out of the container because the molecular forces of the air has risen to such a level as to breach the structural integrity of the container.

Now space-time can stretch just like the air. Now in reality a circumferance of energy contains a volume of energy. In other words the outer most material of a partical such as the electron is made of energy.

This first layer of energy is spherical whether in the wave form or in the form of a partical. This shell of energy contains the energy that occupies the volume of the partical.

Now all energy occupies space. Know if one increases the volume of space in that region that is if one increases the density of space the energy will expand to fill that given region of space.

Really what I am trying to say is that to cram a bunch space into a quantity of energy is the same thing as stretching energy out over a greater area of space.

Like the earth imagine that we take all the mass in the earth and stretch the earth out to occupy the entire solar system. The density of the earth would be much lower in comparison to the density of space.

Now imagine that you take the entire quantity of space that takes up the entire volume of our solar system and cram all of that space into the earth so that the density of the space is much greater in comparison to the density of the earth....But wait a minute...wasn't the density of space in comparison to the earth density much greater when we stretched the earth out to occupy the entire region of the solar system..the answer is yes.

So to compress space to a given region of energy (such as compressing the space that makes up the space of our solar system) is the same as expanding out a quantity of energy over a greater volume of space.

Thus to increase the volume of energy contained is a given region is to increase the density of that energy and decrease the density of space.

To increase the volume of space in a given region is to increase the density of space and decrease the density of energy in that region. Thus by increasing a given volume of energy in a given region we create a region of high pressure energy and low presure space-time.

This low pressure space time is what causes time to slow down to the viewer in the accelerated spaceship. The increased energy density is what causes the molecules of that ship to appear accelerated to the outside viewer.

And the reason that the molecules are accelerated is because it is easier for particals of energy to move through space-time of lower density then it is for particals of energy or mass to move in a region of space-time of greater density.

Thus molecules accelerate in a region of high energy density due to the decrease in volume density of space.

Imagine thowing a base ball through the air. You can through that base ball much faster in the air then you can the water. This is because the air is less dense then the water. The same principal applies to space-time.

what do you think? Is this more clear.

Edwin G. Schasteen

rgrunt:

Thank you for the further explanation. I'm trying hard to see what you are getting at and am still sure that it is clearer to you at this point than it is to me.

Your analogy at the quantum level does help, and I have to say while your hypothesis is highly speculative, at some point, EVERYONE'S hypotheses at the quantum level are highly speculative. Even the Quantum Theorists! However, if I understand your conclusion correctly, to wit...

"This low pressure space time is what causes time to slow down to the viewer in the accelerated spaceship. The increased energy density is what causes the molecules of that ship to appear accelerated to the outside viewer."

...I'd still have to say you have it backwards. (If I understand you correctly.)

The traveller does not notice HIS time doing anything but flowing along as usual. (As does the observer see HIS.) The traveler however sees the universe OUTSIDE his realm speeding up. Not slowing down. (If indeed one can see ANYTHING at light speed.) The observer sees the traveller SLOWING DOWN not speeding up. If the observer could actually directly OBSERVE the traveler personally, the observer would notice that the traveler is not aging as fast.

Remember, the traveller on the 59 year journy around the universe at light speed sees the Earth go around the Sun MILLIONS of Times. From the view of the Earth, millions of years have passed because we measure a "year" as ONE revolution of the Earth around the Sun. This is the part that trips most people up in the time dilation scenario. But the traveler's biological AND actual mechanical clocks have slowed down.

There is no "Time Travel" involved in any of it per se. It's all a matter of the effect of the RELATIVE PASSAGE of time within the same timeline for two different individuals whose velocities relative to each other is quite different.

It actually occurs ever day in a measurable manner with ever comercial jet airliner in the air at the time. BARELY measurable, but measurable nonetheless.

Something about one individual travelling FASTER than another makes time "run" slower (for him), the one going faster. We don't know WHY yet. Only that it does. And is precisely predictable by Einstein's Relativity Theory.

When one is traveling at near light speed, the effect is EXTREMELY pronounced.

Actually, we ASSUME this because thus far, every measurement of time dilation relative to specific velocity difference has proven to be as predicted. The bigger (faster) the difference in velocity, the proportionally greater the dilation. By the amount predicted.

Thus far we can't actually measure the dilation at near light speed yet can we. But if it increases as relativity says it should, based on what we CAN measure we have to assume it to be so. At this juncture anyway.

For instance, the Space Shuttle's time dilation is precisly as much more pronounced than that of a jet airliner by precisely the proportional difference in the velocities they travel. This is well documented. Therefore we have no reason NOT to assume it will be as predicted at velocities we cannot yet confirm by placing a clock on something going that fast.

There is a counteracting effect caused by a spinning gravitational force, )in this case, the Earth's) that we are only beginning to understand. It's called "Frame Dragging" and an experiment to measure it involving a spinning ball, within a chamber, in orbit around the Earth is under way at NASA. (I don't believe it's been launched yet but I'm not sure.)

New hypotheses are always hard to prove. But when one can be so well resolved into a theory that can be confirmed by what the theory PREDICTS, bingo. What have what becomes accepted as a reality. Confirmation of prediction is the hammer that drives the nail home.

Frame Dragging appears to counteract Time Dilation. But appearantly not enough to keep Time Dilation from being MORE pronounced even at jet airliner speeds.

Frame Dragging is a hypothesis that is so close to becoming a theory that the experiment to measure the theory's ability to confirm the prediction is now what is under way.

GOOD science is usually very slow, and very thorough. It has to be. Otherwise it is not good science.

P.S. rgrunt:

Over on the "Topic limited to 11 pages..." thread, WanderingSoul offers up the following link:

A good one.

Does relate to your thoughts on the "energy density" issue?

rgrunt:

"Gravity decreases in strength because space has a lower density as one moves closer to the center mass of the gravitational field. The gravitational pull is caused by the imbalance between the spaceof high density and lower energy density farther away from the center mass of the fields."

What evidence do you have for this statement? My equation show that gravity increases as you get closer to the center. For example g = 9.807 m/sec^2 on the surface of the earth, however 1000 miles down g = 17.584 m/sec^2.

Perhaps you should refine your ideal of space density in the following way. We do not exist in space, rather we are space! We exist on many diferent levels IE molecular, atomic and so on. At our most basic level we are dense space. Just as space does not exist relative to our level, we do not exist relative space. Relative to space we are nothing more then dense waves in the ocean of space.

Timemaster1a,

Oops! I accidently transposed the phrases or conscepts when I was typing them down. What I meant to say was exactly the opposite...that gravity increases towards the center mass of the field as a result of the lower space-time pressure(which is caused by having a lower density with respect to the denser space-time further away from the field.) The Gravitational field of high pressure that is further away from the center of the field will accelerate towards the gravitational field of lower pressure and density closer to the center of the field. The area where the space-time continuum is least dense is the center of the gravitational field and will therefore have the greatest gravitational pull as you numbers support. I appologize for the mixup I was in a hurry when I typed the posting.

Regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen. Deviper I will post to you this afternoon.

Dear Deviper,

This makes since, I misinterprited your stated results of the experiments 'the opposite proves to be true'.

When you made this statement in your post I thought that you meant that instead of time slowing for the observer in the ship as the ship accelerates to the velocity of light like Einstein predicted, that measured time in the space shuttle was actually measured as being faster in the shuttle thus showing that the opposite of that which Einstein predicted is actually true.

This was my mistake however my theory still is supported by the results. For as the energy density within the ship increases to infinity the space-time density within the ship appoaches zero.

Now having an infinite quantity of energy within the region of space inside the ship of zero density results in an infinite acceleration of all mass within the ship instantaneously to the outside viewer.

However on the inside of the ship the viewers see thier time as flowing the same. Since the rate of increase in energy density is in proportion to the decrease in space-time density it is safe to assume that no extra quantity is added or taken away from the system.

Thus only density is exchanged at the quantum level. Now since all of the space-time density within the ship has been transfered to the energy adding causing the energy density to rise to infinity there is zero space-time density within the ship.

Now I assume that energy occupying a region of space of zero density would act the same as energy occupying a region of zero space quantity.

So energy occupying zero space has no room to move within any finite period of time.

So all objects within a ship traveling at the velocity of light would travel one increment in space in an infinite period of time for an infinity number of zero motions equals a motion of one.

So if one were traveling at the velocity of light and if three instants past to the viewer in the ship then three infinite periods of time will have gone by.

It is my assumption that once a single infinite period of time in a single universe would correspond to an infinite quantity of time to be accumulated in that universe.

That universe will no longer be able to age in that the universe will have reached the limit to it's ability to store history within it's linear time past. However if one subscribes to both lateral time and linear time conscept one might consider that a parallel universe is always slightly in the future or slightly in the past so that if one were to view an infinite distance through lateral time in one direction one would view a universe that exists infinitely in the future where the big bang was an infinite period of time in the past.

If one turns around an looks infinitely in the other direction through lateral time one would view a universe at the big bang stage.

One might ask well if the universe will end an infinite number of time intants from the big bang then why isn't our universe already infinitely old? well the answer is simple...our universe is infinitely years old.

Time advances as a result of decompresion of time from a period (big bang) to infinity in the future. As space expands so does time.

Thus infinitely in the past the space-time density is nearly zero and the energy density is nearly infinite. Infinitely in the future from the big bang space-time density is infinite and the energy density of the universe is zero.

At that time the universe will be infinitely big and the temperature of the background radiation will be zero kelvins. Thus if one were to graph out the expansion of time of both backward accelerating time and forward accelerating time one would see that time traveling forward expands like a cone with the apex of the cone located at the big bang and the infinite base of the cone located at the infinite future of one of the universes.

Since time expands laterally as well as linearly the second time from past to infinite future will be located at right angles to the first time cone so that the infinite base of the time cone is at the present and the apex is at an infinite time in the past and a secone set of lines is continued on past the first cone so as to traverse to infinitely in the future laterally from the infinite base of latteral time in the present.

This transverse time will be symbolyzed by a fading color symbolyzing the increase in space-time density as the time of the lateral universe aproached the present.

The lower cone since it is in the past is superluminal and has a negative time and force component. The infinite base of lateral time just an instant just an instant away is a source of infinite energy since the space-time density of the that point in time is infinite.

If one were to increase the energy density of a photon field to infinitely small point the space-time density within the past would decrease from infinity to zero simultaneous to the decrease in space-time density in the present at that point.

This results in the acumulation of tachyon density at that instant in the past and an acumulation of infinite energy density in the present.

If one were to therefore pry a gap in the space-time continuum and bridge this gap by compressing an energy to beyond a point one would affectively enable the interaction and exhange of both energies of infinite density within both universes simultaneously.

Thus the energy of the past tachyons would flood into this universe and to fill the space of zero density in the present. And the energy in the present would flow into the past universe to occupy the space of zero density in the past.

Each energy quantum both from the past in the form of a tachyon and the present in the form of a photon will be infinitely dense.

In addition to being infinitely dense both particles will be carrying an extra kenetic energy as a result of their motion through time to displace each other in each of the universes.

If one draws tachyons in a greater quantity then one is giving photons more photons will travel be forced to travel through the gap to displace the tachyons to keep a balance.

This will result in the stretching the bandwidth of the photons as they approach the hole in space. Thus introducing a photon field of lower bandwidth will in conjunction with the regular photon field will increase the amount of tacyon energy entering the universe.

The second photon wave will come in phase to the first and will be either a carrier wave.....

To Time02112. I think that this is the answer to bringing the parallel propagating fields of the device we discussed in phase to increase the energy density of the fields to infinity without having to compress the fields.

.....or a modulated wave. The crests of these waves will therfore add to increase the double the amplitude of the waves flowing into the gap from the present universe.

This increase in amplitude constitutes an increase to the amount of energy being introduced through the gap and into the past which requires a greater amount of tachyon energy to flow through the gap to displace the lost electromagnetic photons to the past.

This results in further stretching of band width of light entering the gap from the present which in turn results in a doubling of amplitude of the modulated light wave thus resulting in an sustained accelerated exchange of energies between the past and present resulting in greater and greater amounts of energy of infinite density flowing from one universe to the other...I have not even considered the energy flow of linear past interacting with this system in which case the energy entering this universe will not double with each instant but will quadruple...... Two paths of tachyons one from linear past and the other from transverse past exchanging energies from linear present and transverse future.

One can halt the system by closing the gap but we must remember that as greater and greater quantities of energy enter the universe the kenetic energy carried by these particles will be getting greater and greater.

It is thinkable that the amount of kenetic energy built up by the increasing volumes of energy exchange could reach a critical point where by shutting the gap of space-time will not be able to stop the flow of energies from breaking through the space-time continuum resulting in a permanent tearing of the space-time continuum and ultimately resulting in the destruction of the universe.

It is imperative that a form of calculas be developed to determine if there is a critical stage and what that critical stage is.

Regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen

rgrunt:

Yes, now we're back on track here. I was puzzled by why your theory would predict the opposite of what is observed to be true.

In fact, your theory is also backed up by the opposing points of view (traveller/observer) when the traveler approaches a Black Hole. Regardless of velocity.

The mere proximity of the traveller to a Black Hole causes the observer to see the travelers progress slow to such a degree that upon the traveler crossing the Event Horizon, the Observer's view is that the traveler has approached an infinitely long period to make the transition. (The result of gravity density.) At the outer edge of the event horizon, the traveller would appear to be frozen in time to the observer. (All other concessions being made to the condition of the traveler that is. Like the fact that the Black Hole would rend the traveler's body into funcamental matter at some point the nearer he got.)

But that's beside the point of the relative point of view.

Yup. I gotcha now.

Interesting.

P.S. rgrunt:

In fact, I think this last post i made goes to why the "Frame dragging" experiment is being conducted since it depicts how the gravitional effect is counteracting to to the Time Dilation effect of velocity.

Particularly when the Black Hole is spinning.

If I remember correctly.

Dear Deviper,

Thanks for the knowlege. I was also reading the other day that electrons of high energy interactions apear to behave as point like particles while electrons of low energy interactions appear to ocsillate to form a fuzzy looking spheres.

I believe this supports my theory for an electron involved in a higher interaction would be working within a region of higher energy density and lower space-time density and volume which would make the electron to apear much smaller even as small as a point if the energy density is extremely great and the space-time density extremely small and/or space-time volume in which the energy propagates is extremely small.

I find the black-hole model very interesting in that the density of gravity increases toward infinity. This would, as you sayed, signify that the space-time density of a black hole at the event horizon is zero. This would mean that the pressure of space-time at that point in space would be infinitely less then the pressure of all space-time with a pressure and density greater then one.

A density of less then one is a fractional density and appears to be a density of zero. Only beyond the event horizon is the density of space-time truelly zero.

Now for the inertial model. If one were to attempt to throw a ball through water the ball would go a very short distance due to the thickness or density of the medium through which the ball is propagating(moving through).

If one takes that same ball and applies the same amount of kenetic energy to throuw the ball through the air, a medium of much lesser density then the medium water, the ball will go much further in lesser time then that same ball traveled when thrown through the water.

The reason that molecules speed up when heated up is because by increasing the thermal energy density within the region of molecules one decreases the density of space through which the molecules are moving. It is not the energy gained by the thermal photons that causes the molecules to accelerate but the decrease in density of the medium (space) enabling the molecules to travel much farther in lesser time.

Thus the kenetic energy of molecules never change only the density of the medium through which the molecules accelerate. I think that it is interesting how the same physics that keep us from throwing a ball though water decreases it's speed is also the same physics that is responcible for the acceleration of molecules when heat is added.

what do you think? Every body feel free to reply and counter I learn this way.

Regards,

Edwin G. Schasteen

• Replies
4
Views
428
Replies
3
Views
32
• • Replies
11
Views
395
General chit-chat
Help Users
• No one is chatting at the moment. Num7: John, may You brighten this day and decorate it with everlasting happiness.