A few questions

[PJay_A]

<p>1. If you were to travel the speed of light along side a light beam and if it were possible to actually see the individual photons of that light beam, what would you see? Would these photons appear as actual physical things and non-moving floating in the space next to you? Would they appear in more than one location at a time? If time was to stand still in this very situation, would this somehow affect the photons you're syncted with?</p><p>2. When photons are caught by the gravity of a black hole, is it possible (instead of being absorbed into the black hole) that the particles could fall into an indefinate orbit around the back hole, in effect creating invisible (to us) orbiting light?</p><p>3. If the famous photon beam split experiment were to be conducted in space where there can be found a clear line of sight path to a black hole, having split the light either in the direction of the black hole or away from it, giving enough time for the photons to actually reach the black hole's surface, and before these photons are detected: Would these photons be in a state of being absorbed into the black hole and not being absorbed simultaneously?</p><p>4. If the fabric of the Universe consists of a matrix of space-time, as explained by Einstein, then anything that affects space should affect time and visa versa; and, therefore the expansion of the Universe and space logically must have a direct affect on time; and, therefore can it not be concluded that the constant forward momentum of the expansion of the Universe and space may be inexplicably linked as the cause and force behind the forward and constant momentum of time?</p><p>5. When we see gravity warping space-time, where exactly - in what dimension - is it warping to? If space has already ocupied 3 dimensions and we can imagine time being a fourth, we are left with no other known dimensional plane that would allow any "warping room". Is it therefore possible that the existence of matter is inter-dependent on the existance of one or more yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions? Could it be possible that when light is seen curving around an object in space that what is really happening is that the light never really curves around the object but actually passes through the object (not litterally through on the dimensions our eyes can observe both the "curved" light and object, but never actually touches the object)? In other words the "curved" light and the object are actually located in different dimensions of the same space and the only way our brains can process the strange reality of this situation is by creating a visual mirage in the form of light curvature.</p><p>6. If there is anything to my suspicision of yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions that's quite litterally right in front of eyes in plain sight, then methods that were used to determine that the Universe is flat may be wrong and the Universe may actually have shape, but maybe not a 3D shape? Maybe a clue to the extradimensional shape of the Universe can be found by studying the Universe from the inside out by observing the Universe' backbone super structure with hyper-shape and fractal math patterns?</p>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>1. If you were to travel the speed of light along side a light beam and if it were possible to actually see the individual photons of that light beam, what would you see? Would these photons appear as actual physical things and non-moving floating in the space next to you? Would they appear in more than one location at a time? If time was to stand still in this very situation, would this somehow affect the photons you're syncted with?2. When photons are caught by the gravity of a black hole, is it possible (instead of being absorbed into the black hole) that the particles could fall into an indefinate orbit around the back hole, in effect creating invisible (to us) orbiting light?3. If the famous photon beam split experiment were to be conducted in space where there can be found a clear line of sight path to a black hole, having split the light either in the direction of the black hole or away from it, giving enough time for the photons to actually reach the black hole's surface, and before these photons are detected: Would these photons be in a state of being absorbed into the black hole and not being absorbed simultaneously?4. If the fabric of the Universe consists of a matrix of space-time, as explained by Einstein, then anything that affects space should affect time and visa versa; and, therefore the expansion of the Universe and space logically must have a direct affect on time; and, therefore can it not be concluded that the constant forward momentum of the expansion of the Universe and space may be inexplicably linked as the cause and force behind the forward and constant momentum of time?5. When we see gravity warping space-time, where exactly - in what dimension - is it warping to? If space has already ocupied 3 dimensions and we can imagine time being a fourth, we are left with no other known dimensional plane that would allow any "warping room". Is it therefore possible that the existence of matter is inter-dependent on the existance of one or more yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions? Could it be possible that when light is seen curving around an object in space that what is really happening is that the light never really curves around the object but actually passes through the object (not litterally through on the dimensions our eyes can observe both the "curved" light and object, but never actually touches the object)? In other words the "curved" light and the object are actually located in different dimensions of the same space and the only way our brains can process the strange reality of this situation is by creating a visual mirage in the form of light curvature.6. If there is anything to my suspicision of yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions that's quite litterally right in front of eyes in plain sight, then methods that were used to determine that the Universe is flat may be wrong and the Universe may actually have shape, but maybe not a 3D shape? Maybe a clue to the extradimensional shape of the Universe can be found by studying the Universe from the inside out by observing the Universe' backbone super structure with hyper-shape and fractal math patterns? <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>You have a lot of questions.&nbsp; But from the wording it is clear to me that before you can seek and understand answers you need to get a bit of background.&nbsp; Then perhaps you might be able to phrase the questions in a context in which they would be more amenable to a succinct answer.</p><p>There is a book that you ought to read that will give a better background in general relativity and what is meant by "warping" (which does not require any extra room for things to "warp into").&nbsp; It is written for a general audience, but it is written by a true expert in general relativity.&nbsp; The book is <em>Black Holes and Time Warps; Einstein's Outrageous Legacy</em> and the author is KipThorne.&nbsp; Kip Thorne is the Richard Feynman Professor of Physics at Cal Tech and a co-author with Charles Misner and John Archibald Wheeler of the book <em>Gravitation</em> which is the standard graduate-level text for general relativity.&nbsp; Thorne was student of Wheeler, as was Feynman (and Misner).</p><p>Read that book (it is available in paperback form or on the used book market at a reasonable price) and then perhaps we can address your questions in way that will be more understandable.&nbsp; <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jim48]

<p><strong>Okay. Here are the answers: </strong></p><p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. a.Yes b. Yes c. No d. Absolutely!</strong></p><p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. Yes</strong></p><p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Well of course not! Are you stupid, or what?</strong></p><p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4. Yes. Good one!</strong></p><p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 5.&nbsp;a.&nbsp;The 7th b. Yes c. Yes. Smart kid!</strong></p><p><strong>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 6. a. Yes. (see the 7th dimension above) b. No, but nice try!</strong></p><p><strong>I hope I have been of some help. Please feel free to ask me anything anytime!</strong></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[Mee_n_Mac]

<p>You've got quite a list there don't ya.&nbsp; I'll give you my best guesses .... FWTW</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>1. If you were to travel the speed of light along side a light beam and if it were possible to actually see the individual photons of that light beam, what would you see? Would these photons appear as actual physical things and non-moving floating in the space next to you? Would they appear in more than one location at a time? If time was to stand still in this very situation, would this somehow affect the photons you're syncted with? Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>I have no idea.&nbsp; Wasn't this one of the questions Einstein supposedly pondered ?</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>2. When photons are caught by the gravity of a black hole, is it possible (instead of being absorbed into the black hole) that the particles could fall into an indefinate orbit around the back hole, in effect creating invisible (to us) orbiting light? Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>Isn't the the definition of a BHs event horizon ? If light were to come at a BH on a tangential trajectory at the event horizon radius I think it gets bent into a circular "orbit". </p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>3. If the famous photon beam split experiment were to be conducted in space where there can be found a clear line of sight path to a black hole, having split the light either in the direction of the black hole or away from it, giving enough time for the photons to actually reach the black hole's surface, and before these photons are detected: Would these photons be in a state of being absorbed into the black hole and not being absorbed simultaneously? Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>Huh ?&nbsp; Is one leg of the split&nbsp;beam experiment now supposed to be inside of the&nbsp;BHs event horizon ?&nbsp;</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>4. If the fabric of the Universe consists of a matrix of space-time, as explained by Einstein, then anything that affects space should affect time and visa versa; and, therefore the expansion of the Universe and space logically must have a direct affect on time; and, therefore can it not be concluded that the constant forward momentum of the expansion of the Universe and space may be inexplicably linked as the cause and force behind the forward and constant momentum of time? Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>No.</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>5. When we see gravity warping space-time, where exactly - in what dimension - is it warping to? If space has already ocupied 3 dimensions and we can imagine time being a fourth, we are left with no other known dimensional plane that would allow any "warping room". Is it therefore possible that the existence of matter is inter-dependent on the existance of one or more yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions? Could it be possible that when light is seen curving around an object in space that what is really happening is that the light never really curves around the object but actually passes through the object (not litterally through on the dimensions our eyes can observe both the "curved" light and object, but never actually touches the object)? In other words the "curved" light and the object are actually located in different dimensions of the same space and the only way our brains can process the strange reality of this situation is by creating a visual mirage in the form of light curvature. Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>Imagine the warping of space to be a distortion.&nbsp; Where mass is present space-time warps to become more "dense". I'm&nbsp;don't understand the 2'nd part of your question but from what I can gather .... no.&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>6. If there is anything to my suspicision of yet-to-be-discovered spacial dimensions that's quite litterally right in front of eyes in plain sight, then methods that were used to determine that the Universe is flat may be wrong and the Universe may actually have shape, but maybe not a 3D shape? Maybe a clue to the extradimensional shape of the Universe can be found by studying the Universe from the inside out by observing the Universe' backbone super structure with hyper-shape and fractal math patterns? <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV><br /><br />Got me.&nbsp; There was an interesting article on the possible nature of space-time in Scientific American a few months ago.&nbsp; The authors speculated that ST may be fractal in nature at very small scales but still yeild the macroscopic results we observe, no extra dimension needed.&nbsp; When you get the answer be sure that Nobel prize thing follows.</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p>-----------------------------------------------------</p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask not what your Forum Software can do do on you,</font></p><p><font color="#ff0000">Ask it to, please for the love of all that's Holy, <strong>STOP</strong> !</font></p> </div>

 

[PJay_A]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Okay. Here are the answers: &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. a.Yes b. Yes c. No d. Absolutely!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 2. Yes&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 3. Well of course not! Are you stupid, or what?&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 4. Yes. Good one!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 5.&nbsp;a.&nbsp;The 7th b. Yes c. Yes. Smart kid!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 6. a. Yes. (see the 7th dimension above) b. No, but nice try!I hope I have been of some help. Please feel free to ask me anything anytime! <br />Posted by jim48</DIV><br /><br />First, let me say that I really do appreciate everyone's reply here and want to thank everyone who has replied so far. Thank you!</p><p>Jim, what do you mean by "seventh dimension"? Are you talking about one of the dimensions predicated by "M Theory" or any of the String theories? Can you explain what exactly this seventh dimension is and/or provide a link where I can learn more?</p>

 

[vogon13]

<p>&nbsp;</p><p>To start with,&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>you can't see a photon with other photons.&nbsp; If a photon is zipping by you, you can't shine a flashlight on it, and see the flashlight light photons that bounce off the original photon because they don't.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>If they did,since they would be of substantially similar energy as the one you are looking at, they would 'zorch' it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>First, let me say that I really do appreciate everyone's reply here and want to thank everyone who has replied so far. Thank you!Jim, what do you mean by "seventh dimension"? Are you talking about one of the dimensions predicated by "M Theory" or any of the String theories? Can you explain what exactly this seventh dimension is and/or provide a link where I can learn more? <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>If you are serious you can safely ignore Jim.&nbsp; <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;To start with,&nbsp;&nbsp;you can't see a photon with other photons.&nbsp; If a photon is zipping by you, you can't shine a flashlight on it, and see the flashlight light photons that bounce off the original photon because they don't.&nbsp;If they did,since they would be of substantially similar energy as the one you are looking at, they would 'zorch' it.&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by vogon13</DIV></p><p>Zorch ?&nbsp; A technical term no doubt. <br /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jim48]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>First, let me say that I really do appreciate everyone's reply here and want to thank everyone who has replied so far. Thank you!Jim, what do you mean by "seventh dimension"? Are you talking about one of the dimensions predicated by "M Theory" or any of the String theories? Can you explain what exactly this seventh dimension is and/or provide a link where I can learn more? <br />Posted by PJay_A</DIV><br /><br /><strong>I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question?</strong> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[jim48]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;If you are serious you can safely ignore Jim.&nbsp; <br />Posted by DrRocket</DIV><br /><br /><strong>Baa! How dare you! <em>Indeed!</em> Away with you, you bubble-headed booby! Have no fear, <em>Smith</em> is here!</strong> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[vogon13]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>Zorch ?&nbsp; A technical term no doubt. <br /> Posted by DrRocket</DIV></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>'Zorch' is a condensed version of about 8 chapters worth of a&nbsp; college level physics text.</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p><p>&nbsp;</p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[DrRocket]

<p><BR/>Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>&nbsp;'Zorch' is a condensed version of about 8 chapters worth of a&nbsp; college level physics text.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br />Posted by vogon13</DIV></p><p>At least.</p><p>Photon-photon scattering is a pretty specialized topic, a quantum electrodynamics phenomenon with no classical analog.&nbsp; Which text did you have in mind ?&nbsp; </p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>