Starship Asterisk*

by **gordhaddow** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 4:44 pm

A classic question.
The detectors appear to work - even Joseph Weber's aluminum bar recorded 'events' back in the late '60s. The apparent problem was to be able to discriminate between 'gravitational events' and 'cosmic-ray events', either of which could (mathematically) produce the same result.

by **harry** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:25 am

Hello all

Bamaone23
Answer: "The galactic plane runs along the middle of this image while the galactic center itself is the bright spot at picture center."
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040411.html

I was out in the sunlight today and i got burnt,,,,,,,,,,,,smile,,,,,,,,,someone is trying to pay me back.

Have a nice day

by **l3p3r** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:05 am

Oops! Perhaps I should have checked this link instead

well I'm happy at least that I thought of it...

by **l3p3r** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 6:01 am

Those enormous expensive detectors to try and measure gravity waves might be useful for testing if there is a 'speed of gravity.'

If there are patterns of gravitational fluctuation associated with a super nova and gravity has a limited 'speed' then we should detect these fluctuations at the same time we see the star become bright in the sky - and if we do not (and say we had the machine running for 30 years and we detected the 'gravity waves' near the beginning of operation then that would indicate an instantaneous transmission time (for a star 30 light years away) for the effects of gravity - which would be cool!

I don't think these detectors work yet, but it seems like a reasonable experiment?

Another test (maybe, I'm throwing it up here):
If a planet it orbiting a star (fancy that.) and is, say, 30 light minutes away then the direction of its gravitational attraction to the star should be 'offset' by a certain very very small amount IF the effects of gravity have a 'transmission time'. That is, the direction in which the planet will be accelerated by the star will be percieved as directly towards the star by people standing on the planet with very accurate instruments. But if gravities effect is instantaneous then people standing on the planet will percieve the planet being accelerated ever so slighlty to one side of the star they can see (the star where it was 30 minutes previously)

Does that sit well with anyone?

by **S. Bilderback** » Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:10 am

BMAONE23 wrote:This is one of Harry's links.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040411.html

I have a couple of questions about this image.

1) Is the single small bright spot in the exact center of the image the galactic center or is it the two larger but slightly less luminous patches slightly to the right of center?

2) If it is the two luminous features then is there any idea as to the "halo" feature that surrounds them?

Interestingly, this "Halo" feature is rotated 90 deg from the galactic plane.

1. Its all so close to the center, I would call "all of it" the center. The exact center of rotation will wander.

2. A very hot nebula from a very big boom! It's too big to be a star being ripped apart

If you look very close at the center of the picture, real close, you can see my ex-girlfreind.

About that "infinite improbablility" thing . . . I said I was working on it!

by **BMAONE23** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 10:24 pm

This is one of Harry's links.
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040411.html

I have a couple of questions about this image.

1) Is the single small bright spot in the exact center of the image the galactic center or is it the two larger but slightly less luminous patches slightly to the right of center?

2) If it is the two luminous features then is there any idea as to the "halo" feature that surrounds them?

Interestingly, this "Halo" feature is rotated 90 deg from the galactic plane.

by **Empeda2** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 4:28 pm

S. Bilderback wrote:There will be none of that in my universe.

What about infinite improbablility?.....

(Sorry - not intending to make this a hitchhiker's thread as well...)

by **S. Bilderback** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 1:11 pm

harry wrote:The speed of light is constant.
But! relative to some objects it can be reduced to zero.
Gravity will affect the speed of light and its direction relative to the objects around it.

Keep smiling

The speed of light can be reduce to zero only if you allow X/0 to be a valid equation.

There will be none of that in my universe.

by **harry** » Tue Dec 13, 2005 11:52 am

Getting back on the topic
The centre of our Galaxy

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040411.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap051023.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041106.html
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap041107.html

by **harry** » Wed Nov 23, 2005 6:14 am

The speed of light is constant.
But! relative to some objects it can be reduced to zero.
Gravity will affect the speed of light and its direction relative to the objects around it.

Keep smiling

by **BMAONE23** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:36 pm

If we could travel at 186,000 miles per second the Earth would continue to rotate and time would pass there at its same rate. Time would pass for us on board ship at the same rate as on earth. the only difference is that our view of the planets timeframe wouldn't change as we would be viewing the reflected photons traveling away from the planet at the same relative speed that we are traveling. If we travel faster, we would view the reflected photons that left earth prior to our departure. (in effect, we could see ourselves leave earth, (in reverse) but it would only be the photonic image or our departure. Only the reflected light that we would be traveling faster than).

If we stopped we could see our image catch up with us. how fun

by **craterchains** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:52 pm

QUOTE "If we move away from planet earth at the speed of light the time clock receiving info from earth will remain constant." UNQUOTE"

Thus if we are moving towards another star system we would see that systems "time transmitting clock" moving twice as fast.

Norval

by **Empeda2** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 1:33 pm

harry wrote: Light allows us to communicate. We can see objects in the past.
If we move away from planet earth at the speed of light the time clock receiving info from earth will remain constant.

Hi harry,
that's not strictly true though is it? We enter all sorts of relativity problems here do we not? Light travels at c irrelevent of the frame of reference, hence why we have to incorporate horrible mass, length and time dilations (Lorenz tranforms? - It's been a while....).

by **harry** » Tue Nov 22, 2005 5:36 am

Hello Empeda2

Time Travel and wormholes are like santa clause and the easter bunny. If you believe in them than you will find reason why they "are".

Light allows us to communicate. We can see objects in the past.
If we move away from planet earth at the speed of light the time clock receiving info from earth will remain constant.

Yes I do have an inside phone line. Smile

by **S. Bilderback** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 11:56 pm

The "Twins Paradox" is also time travel on a grander scale - still one way.

by **BMAONE23** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:04 pm

Easy Time Travel

Tools needed:

1) A confortable chair
2) A good book or NOVA on TV
3) A clock

Experiment:

Sit in the comfortable chair with the clock in front of you. (if you are going to watch NOVA on TV be certain to place the clock on top of the TV in plain sight. If you decide on the Book option, be certain not to fall asleep or you will miss the effects.
While watching NOVA 8pm to 9pm you will notice something happen: the hands of the clock will move. you are being magically transported through time. By the end of the show, you will have been transported 1 hour through time. (Just keep in mind, this is a one way trip (no do overs))

by **Empeda2** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 2:12 pm

harry wrote: But!!!!! worm holes and time travel are not possible.

You seem very sure of that - do you have a direct line?

by **harry** » Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:13 am

Hello S.bilderback

It woul be nice to use a wormhole. But!!!!! worm holes and time travel are not possible.
Foget about zero and mathematics as we see them.
A Singularity has many definitions. When I use the word singulaity it means that all basic particals are the same and compressed into an extreme high density plasma not an imaginary point. The high dansity plasma (Black Hole) of M87 is several light months across and is about 3 billion times the mass of our sun. Look at info on Galaxy M87.

by **S. Bilderback** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 4:17 pm

I do not like to concept of singularities, it involves dividing by zero. There is no mathematical representation to what is under the event horizon, just speculations based on opinions. It is more probable that if one could breach an event horizons, they would enter a wormhole - a wormhole is mathematically possible a singulatity is not.

by **craterchains** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 2:07 pm

Harry
Yes, wrong impressions are often a problem, kind of like assumptions.

Norval

by **harry** » Sun Nov 20, 2005 6:15 am

Hello Createrchains
A Black Hole is not a hole it is a massive singularity where all matter that enters is broken down to the basic particals that make up atoms and by the huge gravitational forces it is compressed billions of times into an extreme mass with extraordinary gravity attracting to it everything. What you do have is flares (perpendicular to the circular galaxy) created by the blackhole that give the wrong impression that you can go from one side to the next.

by **ta152h0** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:22 pm

I have often wondered if the genesis of stars is similar to the generation of current eddies inside a operating alternator in a car. Current eddies produce magnetic " things " with centers associated with said "things". Wonder if black holes are similar acting as if they contain tremendous masses, but not really. Just looks that way.
Pass me a ice cold one

by **S. Bilderback** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:01 pm

In accordance with the string theory, the force of gravity may be an instantaneous force with no connection to the speed of light (or information) regardless of the relative time frame.

Mathematically, gravity or the graviton has to be an open-ended loop in the 4 dimensional world where space/time exists and the loop back to the string is completed on one of the other 11 dimensional planes.

http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/g ... _limit.asp
Here's a site that may help explain why.

If gravity moved at the speed of light, then gravity could never escape the clutches of a black hole.

by **harry** » Sat Nov 19, 2005 7:42 am

Gravity is part of the medium of space and in many cases gravity controls the speed of light. Where we have extreme garvity such as at the Event Horizin the speed of light seems to be Zero.
Even in labs scientist have bent light and slowed it down by using electromagnets creating the artificial gravity.
Sunspots the very large gravitational convectional currents direct light and matter into the sun spot reducing the amount of light escaping.
So in an open area without external influences light will travel at the speed of light at the same speed as gravity.
If Gravity travels faster than light will go with it. The both go hand in hand.

by **S. Bilderback** » Mon Oct 31, 2005 11:20 pm

Åqua wrote:"There once was a lady named 'Bright', whose speed was much faster than light. She went out one day, in a relative way, and came back on the previous night!"

Praps gravity appears instantaneously everywhere, without having to travel to get there, because it exists in dimensions beyond our local space/time?

That is what the -Open Loop- theory of the graviton states. Some of its connecting forces don't interact with our 4 dimensional universe.

To test this theory all that is needed is an object of a mass great enough that gravity is the strongest force, send it at (near) the speed of light passed a stationary test object and see when the gravitational field pulls on the test object. If the test object is pulled by gravity before the speeding object passes, the speed of gravity is faster than light.

Starship Asterisk*

At the Center of the Milky Way

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: At the Center of the Milky Way

At The centre

Re: Time travel

Time travel

Re: Wormhole

Wormhole

cenert of this galaxy