Re: Space-Time Is Not Curved?


"G. L. Bradford" <glbrad01@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dLudncnCUcgufC3ZnZ2dnUVZ_rKdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I'm reading some things where it is mentioned that there increasing
agreement -- albeit unspecified -- that space is not curved by the matter
in it.

It isn't - space-time is. For weak gravitational field the curvature of
space is negligible.

That gravity does not curve space, meaning also that gravity and any
curvature of space are not indistinguishably one and the same thing. This
is probably right, but doesn't change what should be an acutely obvious
picture that [distance-space-time] in any line must and does curve. And,
must curve more and more the longer that line is. But, to go off in a
tangent for a second, that in no way means a circle back to any originating
point. A spring curves and curves, and curves, but never curves back to
starting point.

To get back on subject, continuous motion of all objects and events in
the Universe, everywhere in space-time, means that no observer at any
distance not indistinguishable from zero will be able to truly position
objects and/or events in any straight line out from any point of
observation.

Your logic escapes me.

First of all, the object and/or event, or object event, will have moved --
traveled -- in space, and conditionally evolved in time, in the intervening
time it takes information of the object event to reach the observer.

Yep- but we can calculate it.

Secondly, the observer and observation platform whatever it may be, the
observer's own frame, will also have moved -- traveled -- in space, and
conditionally evolved in time, in the same intervening time. All this
continuity of motion in more than one dimension, coupled to inevitable
information transmission lag time, inexorably curves the line of
space-time between there and here, wherever "there" is and wherever "here"
is, so to speak. And the longer the intervening time-line (the longer the
information transmission lag time), the more acute will grow the
curvature.

You are very confused.

Bill


There are at least two Universes. The real Universe and the
informational -- or observed -- universe. The informational universe seems
simple enough as to space-times lines when you are simply observing it.
But try to actually travel those lines of information to any destination,
older to newer to newest concerning the destination, you would find
yourself speeding up into worsening curves the longer that space-time line
of information was that you would be tracking along in the line, all due
to the fact that there is no such thing as "slow motion," much less "stop
action," in the real Universe outside of relativity to some observer. Also
outside of two or more entities coming together to become a localized unit
of some kind in space-time, thus forming in the doing a localized
self-contained bubble or field, or frame, of the same overall space-time
for all as 'one' singularly identifiable higher level unit entity. These
are the exceptions to the rule, but only relatively speaking or
specifically concerning that specified level and localized frame. A galaxy
is one such singular entity, a unit whole, but go down one level of it
into it, it's a different ballgame. It isn't 'one' any longer. It is
quanta dynamic. Thus curving informational lines between all component
units -- all of them being in constant motion.

If you HAD to travel those curved informational lines toward some real
point in space, to some destination, that's physical curvature you would
HAVE to physically adhere to. But if you could ignore those curved
informational lines and "lead" (as it is called) your destination in
space-time to its real location where it would be [when] you arrived in
that same space (relative to your own more or less real location when you
start out), and travel that line straight to that point, then you would be
cutting through curvatures rather than following them, effectively
"wormholing" space and time to your destination.

A star will [broad]cast its position to all points of space at all times.
But since it is motion in space at all times, and all other entities in
space are in motion at all, that information it broadcasts becomes
meaningless with regard to reality almost immediately. More meaningless
the greater the distance the particular broadcast travels (the star
remaining in constant motion traveling its line during every second of the
broadcast wave's travel out in an ever expanding wave front). Only a
single point along that wave line ever arrives to a single observer. Only
single points along each proceeding wave line ever arrives to a single
observer. A line of points forming a line perpendicular to the line of
each wave, older information on the observer's end of that line, newest
information in that line just departing the source now somewhere else in
space-time than the older information arrived to the distant observer
informs that observer the source to be. A traveler, though, traveling to
that star via leading it, will travel through many such lines of points,
through many such oncoming wave lines, wave fronts, perpendicular to those
lines of points. Though the traveler is cutting through all the
informational lines and their curvatures he will still striking
informational points in a wholly different type of line than any observer
in any so-called inertial frame. From the information he receives, in the
way he receives it, the destination star would be picking up speed across
and through the star field along a line of sight on its way to their
rendevous point. The faster he proceeds toward that chosen rendevous
point, the faster the star appears (contrasting with the background) to be
proceeding, racing him toward that same rendevous point. It is of course
nothing but the informational universe that is involved with his
observations. Regarding the real Universe, the real star is already
acutely close to the chosen rendevous point in space, if not already
there. The traveler is doing nothing more nor less than traveling a line
of older information to ever newer -- though still old -- information
broadcasts faster than any observer in any distant inertial frame could
ever get information.

A central problem with the above scenario is that the traveler in
navigating to some rendevous point in space must already know that
rendevous point and navigate via coordinate points of a far more distant
background Universe rather than any foreground, just as a navigator at sea
does not navigate according to the sea and clouds around him but according
to time and according to the distant stars and star groupings of the sky
over him (his background Universe). That is (tongue in cheek), just as
long as those stars, any one of them that is, is never his destination (he
would then have to navigate according to a different background because
that background used on Earth to navigate by would [speedily] dissolve
into ever changing chaos, ever changing rearrangments of local star
fields, he (as then a space navigator) could not then use to navigate his
way by).

Picking a rendevous point to navigate to wouldn't work beyond a certain
distance. The worsening informational line curvature would then be just
too great. Also the traveler's pick-up in velocity [with regard to cutting
such space-time curvature] would become just to hellish. He would run into
a growing conversion to material thickness to the galactic disk that
didn't exist for him in starting out (was nothing but seemingly empty
space, but empty no more (now more or less a space of galactic disk around
him far too materially crowded for any safe navigation anywhere through
the disk [while at his velocity]. Effectively "wormholing" space and time
wouldn't be working any more)). The traveler still has an option. Leave
the galactic disk in going perpendicular to it to get above or below it
(in getting hyperspatially relative to it), travel over or under it then
drop back down (or up) into it toward a chosen point within it.

That all the seeming empty space and all the matter, mass and energy
(including whatever of "dark") of a galaxy would gradually progress to
shrinking and solidifying into some quality like "wet cement" or "brick
wall" -- so to speak -- around a traveler traveling at ever increasing
speeds [through] a galactic disk seems never to have occurred to
physicists, cosmologists, or even sci-fi writers. The traveler's only
option then is to get out of it, reach out and up to a different, far more
speed friendly, level of space-time (go 'hyper'). Relative to that
traveler, the galaxy is no longer a hundred thousand light years in
diameter, just as relative to an astronaut in any orbital space above the
Earth, or in any solar systemic space outside the Earth, the Earth is no
longer the fraction of a light second in diameter it was before -- when he
or she was sitting, standing, or traveling [on] Earth. Every single
dimension of Earth, and every single thing of Earth, its whole frame as a
whole unit, shrinks [spatially] relative to him or her, with distance,
including distance -- or increased difference -- in velocity, from it.
Relative to the Earth, the astronaut has accelerated in an expansion of
his own frame of space-time. His second isn't any longer than it was when
he was sitting, standing, or traveling upon the Earth, its just that the
Earth shrunk to the size of a very large, very round, ball-shaped building
nearby, relative to him and his frame of space-time which never once
changes in its dimensions for him whether he is on Earth or off; or within
the galaxy or outside of it. His straight lines and curved lines has gone
through no changes at all, but the curve line and lines of a more distant
Earth for him now have become hellishly curved lines. Informational
universe-wise the equivalent of adding to, or multiplying, the [relative]
distance -- therefore the information lag time -- between him, or her, and
Earth.

GLB



.

Quantcast