0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
You don't bend time
The equivalence principle is already easy enough for a layman to understand.No, your swimming pool model cannot properly replicate gravitational phenomena. It makes incorrect predictions. Water waves travel at various different speeds, whereas gravitational waves always travel at the speed of light. Water causes chromatic aberrations when it bends light, whereas gravitational lensing doesn't. Water has drag and viscosity, whereas space-time doesn't.
The equivalence principle very elegantly explains gravitational lensing. The equivalence principle basically says that, if you were inside of a room with no windows, you wouldn't be able to tell whether the room was sitting still on the surface of the Earth or whether it was out in space away from a gravity source accelerating upwards at a rate 9.8 m/s/s. No experiment could distinguish between the two scenarios.Now imagine that you have a flashlight held sideways in this upward accelerating room. When you switch the flashlight on, the light beam moves out of the flashlight in a straight line. However, the floor of the room is accelerating upwards toward the light beam. From your own perspective (if your senses were good enough) it would look like the light beam was falling towards the floor.Since the equivalence principle states that the behavior of light in this accelerating room is identical to the behavior of light in a room in a gravitational field, that means the equivalence principle predicts not only that light will bend in a gravitational field, but also how much it will bend.
This explanation, whoever made it, is not specific
Quote from: MrIntelligentDesign on 20/02/2022 23:48:37This explanation, whoever made it, is not specificThe guy that made that explanation is Einstein.
am I right?
.. wandering if a man fall from roof and a man on space. That is equal phenomena, hence Equivalence Principle...am I right?
Quote from: MrIntelligentDesign on 21/02/2022 00:05:46am I right?No, you are wrong as usual. When Einstein was working on GR he was long gone from the patent office.Shouldn't be working on your attempt to disprove Evolution?
Quote from: MrIntelligentDesign on 21/02/2022 00:05:46.. wandering if a man fall from roof and a man on space. That is equal phenomena, hence Equivalence Principle...am I right?There is work there. You could never question the assessment that scientists make to explain a black hole, unless you are able to understand the basics of physics. Clearly just ignoring the basic rules of physics, I can tell you in advance that you are wrong in your paper without even having read it.
@MrIntelligentDesign Sorry to talk to you like that, but you have to learn physics first. And yet you haven't tackled quantum mechanics. All this to say that you cannot say that such and such a phenomenon or object in physics is false without having studied it.
I like how "the trampoline analogy" is mostly hassled for using gravity to help explain gravity, and here a replacement is touted that uses balloons and a pool of water. How does _that_ avoid the self-reference problem?
Quote from: pzkpfw on 21/02/2022 03:04:34I like how "the trampoline analogy" is mostly hassled for using gravity to help explain gravity, and here a replacement is touted that uses balloons and a pool of water. How does _that_ avoid the self-reference problem?What do you mean?
Quote from: MrIntelligentDesign on 21/02/2022 08:06:21Quote from: pzkpfw on 21/02/2022 03:04:34I like how "the trampoline analogy" is mostly hassled for using gravity to help explain gravity, and here a replacement is touted that uses balloons and a pool of water. How does _that_ avoid the self-reference problem?What do you mean?Did you see the cartoon?The big problem with the trampoline analogy is that it uses gravity (pulling the trampoline down) to explain gravity.So it isn't much use.In your model, the water only stays in the pool because of gravity, so it has the same problem.Water waves would be using gravity to explain gravity. [ Invalid Attachment ]
Oh Quantum Mechanics, I am planning to write a science articles to be submitted in science journals about Uncertainty Principle and Bell's Inequality Equation. I think that they are both wrong...
No, totally different!
Quote from: MrIntelligentDesign on 21/02/2022 08:47:19No, totally different!In what way, please explain.