0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Every piece of mass has its own little gravitational field.

As you add more mass the gravitational field gets more intense and space shrinks

The time clock on the other hand dilates (slows) as more mass is added to a particular point. .

It is confusing for sure.

Read my discussions on the science forum as the scientists explained things to me since I was always confused on what Einstein meant until recently

For myself I am trying to add something on to Einstein's work. So first I must understand it and then add to it. But you are trying to reinterpret it and that is basically an impossible task.

The science experts here are very knowledgeable. they appear to me to understand Einstein's work quite well.

I restudied it and compared the equations with the Einsteinian Doppler equations in the classified library. Yet I was not really that interested in relativity and general relativity.

In my hands is Relativity (The Special and General Theory) by Albert Einstein First published in 1920 and turned into pdf ebook by Jose Menendez. So I read Einstein's words and look at the experts and compare them.

You have your own ideas which gives you an understanding of the universe in terms of your ideas. They make sense to you. But millions of physicists and scientists and mathematicians in the world agree with the scientists herein

GoC #23Explain the results of the MM experiment without physical length contraction.

Explain the results of the MM experiment without physical length contraction.

Couldnt be the case that mass of an object is occuring from space, within the object, giving us the impression that the mass bellong to matter? The same couldnt be applied to dark mass, being the exposed product of the whole matter of a galaxy when observed at distance? I do acknowledge that your a realist man, and loyal to relativity and for this "mass cannot be from space".. I'm fine with that, but trying to visualize the mechanics, couldn't be the case that we are right only confused not about what mass is, but where it is originated, and when it is originated? What I have in mind, is that relativity may allowed mass being from space, if we "consider for a moment" that mass only occurs on the presence of atomic structure, how to know that the mass of a piece of rock, is not given to the rock by from the space within the atoms that forms that rock? How we know that mass is not space when it is "temporarily" not at C, due the presence of atomic structure?

I do not question relativity, no reasons for it, it's just what if our relativity is a misinterpreted version of the real one?

The very reliability of relativity is the own prove that we misinterpreted something on it, if relativity cant and most likely isn't wrong, week than we must be "separating" one of its main factors from the true source...

Couldn't be mass the product resultant of the electron and photon correlation of spinning C, happening and existing within a field of expanding linear C? If mass causes space to dilate itself, do not know if is "possible", but always sounded logic to me that: "Mass is the dilatation of space"