UM-Bot Posted July 5, 2018 #1 Share Posted July 5, 2018 A new study has managed to prove that Einstein's theory still holds up even under extreme conditions. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/319404/general-relativity-is-proven-right-once-again 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted July 5, 2018 #2 Share Posted July 5, 2018 7 hours ago, UM-Bot said: A new study has managed to prove that Einstein's theory still holds up even under extreme conditions. https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/news/319404/general-relativity-is-proven-right-once-again Well... except for gravity at the quantum and galactic scales. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolci Posted July 8, 2018 #3 Share Posted July 8, 2018 On 05/07/2018 at 6:32 PM, RabidMongoose said: Well... except for gravity at the quantum and galactic scales. Those are hardly the exception as for them to be exception they would need well-defined boundaries where those scales start and end. But since it's all a spectrum the theory either applies across the spectrum with no exception or it does not apply anywhere but will be more accurate at certain scales and less accurate at others. No? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted July 8, 2018 #4 Share Posted July 8, 2018 9 hours ago, Rolci said: Those are hardly the exception as for them to be exception they would need well-defined boundaries where those scales start and end. But since it's all a spectrum the theory either applies across the spectrum with no exception or it does not apply anywhere but will be more accurate at certain scales and less accurate at others. No? Maths isn't reality and doesnt accurately represent reality. The problem is its irrational numbers with there being an infinite number of them between 0 and 1 (or any other two numbers you might pick). If you take any aspect of the universe such as area and keep dividing it in two you eventually reach the point you cannot divide any further. Not being able to divide any further is at odds with irrational numbers. It means maths gives you answers that can never exist in our universe. It also means that the relationship between variables in an algebraic formula can never exist in our universe. General Relativity is an algebraic formula giving answers and explaining relationships between variables which dont exist in our universe for the reasons above. Hence it will get thrown out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted July 8, 2018 #5 Share Posted July 8, 2018 30 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said: Maths isn't reality and doesnt accurately represent reality. The problem is its irrational numbers with there being an infinite number of them between 0 and 1 (or any other two numbers you might pick). If you take any aspect of the universe such as area and keep dividing it in two you eventually reach the point you cannot divide any further. Not being able to divide any further is at odds with irrational numbers. It means maths gives you answers that can never exist in our universe. It also means that the relationship between variables in an algebraic formula can never exist in our universe. General Relativity is an algebraic formula giving answers and explaining relationships between variables which dont exist in our universe for the reasons above. Hence it will get thrown out. Really? Please express pi in number "you cannot divide any further". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted July 8, 2018 #6 Share Posted July 8, 2018 2 hours ago, bmk1245 said: Really? Please express pi in number "you cannot divide any further". Precisely, as it has infinite decimal places so does the area of a circle as predicted by maths. Something which is impossible as area comes in discrete units. If you quote the area of a circle to 56 decimal places your answer is incompatible with reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmk1245 Posted July 9, 2018 #7 Share Posted July 9, 2018 18 hours ago, RabidMongoose said: Precisely, as it has infinite decimal places so does the area of a circle as predicted by maths. Something which is impossible as area comes in discrete units. If you quote the area of a circle to 56 decimal places your answer is incompatible with reality. Please elaborate "area comes in discrete units". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Wellington Posted July 9, 2018 #8 Share Posted July 9, 2018 (edited) 11 hours ago, bmk1245 said: Please elaborate "area comes in discrete units". The problem with maths is it assumes the universe isn't made out of fundamental building blocks. However at the smallest scale we have such building blocks. Length, width, and depth, come in planck length units. So do mass and time. Irrational numbers are incompatible with reality and because there are an infinite number of them between any two whole numbers the relationships between variables in algebraic formulas also are incompatible with reality. The difference between what maths predicts and what is might be small but if it aint right then it aint right. I have often said that maths based physics will get thrown out at some point. We might have to wait 1000 years but it will go. Edited July 9, 2018 by RabidMongoose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolci Posted July 17, 2018 #9 Share Posted July 17, 2018 On 09/07/2018 at 8:30 PM, RabidMongoose said: The problem with maths is it assumes the universe isn't made out of fundamental building blocks. However at the smallest scale we have such building blocks. Length, width, and depth, come in planck length units. So do mass and time. From Wiki: "The Planck length is the scale at which quantum gravitational effects are believed to begin to be apparent, where interactions require a working theory of quantum gravity to be analyzed.[5] The Planck area is the area by which the surface of a spherical black holeincreases when the black hole swallows one bit of information.[6] The Planck length is sometimes misconceived as the minimum length of spacetime, but this is not accepted by conventional physics, as this would require violation or modification of Lorentz symmetry." To believe that things like time comes in quanta would require one to believe that the universe came into existence when it had an age of 10-43 seconds. By which time it has cooled down to T=1032K. Which is infinitely far from infinitely hot. To claim that time did not exist before that would be to claim that the Universe was never hotter than this temperature. Just because gravity hadn't broken away from the rest of the forces before that and we do not understand quantum gravity yet does not mean that time did not exist. Or that there was a "first" (or any) quantum of time. Am I the only one feeling uncomfortable with this? Anyway, as for quanta, they used to think that atoms were undivideable, indeed that's what the very word "atom" means. Every time a smaller component is discovered they are quick to proclaim they have found the ultimate smallest unit. Haven't we learned from all that? Units of space and time? Therefore indescribable by mathematics? Haven't you read Why Beauty Is Truth: The History of Symmetry? Strongly recommended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now