Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of

# A fatal flaw in relativity

90 replies to this topic

### #1 Elfin

Elfin

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 538 posts
• Joined:01 Aug 2013
• Gender:Female
• Location:UK

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:04 PM

Can someone please explain what's wrong with this, because as I understood it, the theory of relativity states that there is no difference whatsover between observing a moving object from a stationary one, and the other way round. If this is the case, then there is no difference in saying that the earth rotates on its axis in 24 hours, and that the entire universe rotates around the earth in 24 hours.

Diameter of observable universe: 93 billion light years (http://en.wikipedia....rvable_universe).

Circumference of observable edge of universe is therefore: 292.02 billion light years (Pi x diameter).

Rotational speed of observable edge of universe from the point of view of the earth is therefore 292.02 billion light years per 24 hours, which is 12.1675 billion light years an hour (292.02 billion divided by 24).

Since the speed of light is a mere 671 million miles an hour (http://en.wikipedia..../Speed_of_light) this means that from the point of view of the earth, the observable edge of the universe, with all its billions of galaxies and all the rest, is travelling at about 18 times the speed of light (12.1675 billion divided by 671 million = 18.133383).

### #2 grc

grc

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 555 posts
• Joined:20 Aug 2004
• Gender:Male
• Location:The wrong end of the rainbow...

• Out of my mind, back in five minutes.

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:23 PM

Hmm...

"Bigfoot is blurry!" -Mitch Hedberg

### #3 Elfin

Elfin

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 538 posts
• Joined:01 Aug 2013
• Gender:Female
• Location:UK

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:24 PM

Woops just realised I made a gross error in that last statement and confused light years with miles. An easy mistake to make...

Since a light year is 5.878625 trillion miles (http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Light_year), the true figure is that the edge of the universe is travelling at 105.81525 trillion times the speed of light (18 times 5.878 625 trillion). Is that right? Sounds quite large.

### #4 DecoNoir

DecoNoir

The Entertainer

• Member
• 2,784 posts
• Joined:19 Jun 2013
• Gender:Male
• Location:The Imaginaerum

• ... The Aristocrats.

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:26 PM

Oy, took me a second to understand. I believed, at least in my layman terms of physics, that the speed of light limit only affects matter and energy actually moving, whilst the universe appears to rotate around Earth from our point of view, its not actually moving in such a way. Therefore no laws of physics are actually being violated.

However I'm certainly no physicist, if there are any who'd like to correct me, then feel free.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

### #5 grc

grc

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 555 posts
• Joined:20 Aug 2004
• Gender:Male
• Location:The wrong end of the rainbow...

• Out of my mind, back in five minutes.

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:31 PM

Elfin, please get your facts right before you take on Einstein. But i like the fact that you have a brain and you are not afraid to use it.

"Bigfoot is blurry!" -Mitch Hedberg

### #6 Einsteinium

Einsteinium

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,303 posts
• Joined:09 Nov 2012
• Gender:Male
• Location:Wisconsin USA

• "Work out your own salvation. Do not depend on others."
-Buddha

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:33 PM

Elfin, on 23 August 2013 - 05:04 PM, said:

Can someone please explain what's wrong with this, because as I understood it, the theory of relativity states that there is no difference whatsover between observing a moving object from a stationary one, and the other way round. If this is the case, then there is no difference in saying that the earth rotates on its axis in 24 hours, and that the entire universe rotates around the earth in 24 hours.

Diameter of observable universe: 93 billion light years (http://en.wikipedia....rvable_universe).

Circumference of observable edge of universe is therefore: 292.02 billion light years (Pi x diameter).

Rotational speed of observable edge of universe from the point of view of the earth is therefore 292.02 billion light years per 24 hours, which is 12.1675 billion light years an hour (292.02 billion divided by 24).

Since the speed of light is a mere 671 million miles an hour (http://en.wikipedia..../Speed_of_light) this means that from the point of view of the earth, the observable edge of the universe, with all its billions of galaxies and all the rest, is travelling at about 18 times the speed of light (12.1675 billion divided by 671 million = 18.133383).

You are sort of correct but you must understand that it does not make sense to state that the universe is revolving around the earth. If you look at the relative motion of all the galaxies in the universe, the sun, the earth, etc. it is much easier to understand in terms of the earth rotating, and revolving around the sun, etc.

Also, relativity states that nothing can go faster than the speed of light relative to anything else. For example if you are travelling at 90% the speed of light relative to the earth, and an object is travelling in the exact opposite direction at 90% the speed of light relative to the earth, common sense says that relative to you, the other object should be travelling at 180% the speed of light! This is not possible! So what is going on? Well it turns out that time actually changes to bring the objects back under the speed of light. Time is relative also and at great speeds it is time that changes to keep the universe working like clockwork and keep the speed of light the speed limit. So to answer your question common sense would state that the edge of the universe is moving faster than the speed of light relative to the rotation of the earth, but in actuality time itself speeds up or slows down to prevent that from happening.

Now there are many unknowns here, such as is there even an edge to the universe? Nobody knows, Also the exact size of the universe is not known.

### #7 questionmark

questionmark

Cinicus Magnus

• Member
• 39,791 posts
• Joined:26 Jun 2007
• Gender:Male
• Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

• In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 23 August 2013 - 05:47 PM

I was about to type out a long answer but Einsteinium got most of it.

The basic error in your assumption is that the Earth is the center of anything. That same error was committed by many in the past and all were proven wrong.

Edited by questionmark, 23 August 2013 - 05:47 PM.

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

### #8 Elfin

Elfin

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 538 posts
• Joined:01 Aug 2013
• Gender:Female
• Location:UK

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:00 PM

questionmark, on 23 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

I was about to type out a long answer but Einsteinium got most of it.

The basic error in your assumption is that the Earth is the center of anything. That same error was committed by many in the past and all were proven wrong.

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm using a famous relativistic maxim, that your point of observation is irrelevant. There should be no difference, therefore, in saying that the earth revolves on its axis in 24 hours, and that the universe revolves around the earth in 24 hours. It would work the same on any other planet or revolving body. E.g. imagine you're on a merry-go-round. The entire universe therefore revolves around you in a few minutes.

Edited by Elfin, 23 August 2013 - 06:01 PM.

### #9 Kaa-Tzik

Kaa-Tzik

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,021 posts
• Joined:23 Aug 2013
• Gender:Male

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:06 PM

There is a very good sci-fi book that explains some of this for lay-people. Tau Zero by Poul Anderson

### #10 Einsteinium

Einsteinium

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,303 posts
• Joined:09 Nov 2012
• Gender:Male
• Location:Wisconsin USA

• "Work out your own salvation. Do not depend on others."
-Buddha

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:19 PM

Elfin, on 23 August 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm using a famous relativistic maxim, that your point of observation is irrelevant. There should be no difference, therefore, in saying that the earth revolves on its axis in 24 hours, and that the universe revolves around the earth in 24 hours. It would work the same on any other planet or revolving body. E.g. imagine you're on a merry-go-round. The entire universe therefore revolves around you in a few minutes.

It does not make sense though to state that the universe is revolving around you. Just consider the gravitational attraction necessary to cause the entire universe to revolve around you, the forces required just are not there. The earth would have to be the most massive black hole in the universe to put it lightly to even consider this. You have to consider everything, forces and motion are intertwined and one does not make sense without the other. If you consider forces, mass, inertia, etc. in your thinking then no it does not make sense to think of it this way. Rotational motion is a little different than linear motion which is what is usually talked about in the context of relativistic motion.

### #11 DecoNoir

DecoNoir

The Entertainer

• Member
• 2,784 posts
• Joined:19 Jun 2013
• Gender:Male
• Location:The Imaginaerum

• ... The Aristocrats.

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:33 PM

Elfin, on 23 August 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

I'm not assuming that at all. I'm using a famous relativistic maxim, that your point of observation is irrelevant. There should be no difference, therefore, in saying that the earth revolves on its axis in 24 hours, and that the universe revolves around the earth in 24 hours. It would work the same on any other planet or revolving body. E.g. imagine you're on a merry-go-round. The entire universe therefore revolves around you in a few minutes.

From the point of view of either of the two points that may be true. However, in order to get a more accurate observation, one would have to observe both points from a third "neutral" position, and observe the movement relative to each other. When a car moves past a parked car, the parked car appears to whiz by from the perspective of the moving car, however, a pedestrian on the sidewalk could see that one car is moving and the other isn't. Same principle would apply even on a cosmic scale.

I reject your reality, and substitute my own! Mostly because yours is boring as hell.

### #12 bison

bison

Psychic Spy

• Member
• 1,740 posts
• Joined:13 Apr 2011

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:34 PM

The theory of relativity tells us that there is no preferred frame of reference, when observing the motion of one object with respect to another.  If Earth were at the center of a universe that was revolving around it, the velocity of a distant point in that universe would be zero, with respect to the center of the Earth, the supposed point around which the universe revolves. If the relative velocity is zero, there is no exceeding of light speed.

### #13 pallidin

pallidin

Omnipotent Entity

• Member
• 9,106 posts
• Joined:09 Dec 2004
• Gender:Male
• Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

• "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 23 August 2013 - 06:53 PM

All this time I thought that I was the center of the universe, with my wife spinning circles around me.

Dang.

### #14 pallidin

pallidin

Omnipotent Entity

• Member
• 9,106 posts
• Joined:09 Dec 2004
• Gender:Male
• Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

• "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 23 August 2013 - 07:04 PM

@ Elfin...

You subject question and it's answer is rather complex, as there are inherent "unknowns"

However, you might find this site www.physicsforums.com to be assistive.

Should you go there please let us know what you find as a possible answer. Some of their experts and Mods are VERY high end.

### #15 Elfin

Elfin

Remote Viewer

• Member
• 538 posts
• Joined:01 Aug 2013
• Gender:Female
• Location:UK

Posted 23 August 2013 - 11:08 PM

Einsteinium, on 23 August 2013 - 06:19 PM, said:

It does not make sense though to state that the universe is revolving around you. Just consider the gravitational attraction necessary to cause the entire universe to revolve around you, the forces required just are not there. The earth would have to be the most massive black hole in the universe to put it lightly to even consider this. You have to consider everything, forces and motion are intertwined and one does not make sense without the other. If you consider forces, mass, inertia, etc. in your thinking then no it does not make sense to think of it this way. Rotational motion is a little different than linear motion which is what is usually talked about in the context of relativistic motion.

So the basic maxim of relativity, that you it doesn't matter from which point you view things, isn't actually true?

#### 0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users