Question Can someone help me visualize the General Theory of Relativity in 3 dimensions?

Apr 5, 2020
377
407
560
We all know about the General Theory of Relativity. It was proposed by Albert Einstein, the most controversial physicist of all time. The theory is the best theory (till now) we have got about Gravity. There's no better theory about Gravity than this till now, accepted by a majority of the Scientific Community. Till now, we have described GR like this:
But, you know, I find this image of GR to be kind of vague. Because, you know, it's kind of 2-dimensional, which contains only Latitude and Longitude. We all know that there are infinite planes in the universe, this is just one plane. I want to visualize it in a 3D way which consists Altitude as well. Can anyone help me visualize it in a 3-dimensional way?

PS: It would be good if you can help me visualize it in a 4D way as well, :)
 
Nov 6, 2020
59
15
45
We all know about the General Theory of Relativity. It was proposed by Albert Einstein, the most controversial physicist of all time. The theory is the best theory (till now) we have got about Gravity. There's no better theory about Gravity than this till now, accepted by a majority of the Scientific Community. Till now, we have described GR like this:
But, you know, I find this image of GR to be kind of vague. Because, you know, it's kind of 2-dimensional, which contains only Latitude and Longitude. We all know that there are infinite planes in the universe, this is just one plane. I want to visualize it in a 3D way which consists Altitude as well. Can anyone help me visualize it in a 3-dimensional way?

PS: It would be good if you can help me visualize it in a 4D way as well, :)
Sure: In essence, the image in your post does represent 3 dimensions, almost. The only 2D part of the image is the fabric or membrane. What you're missing is velocity. The membrane that the spheres rest upon is merely a 2D representation of space-time. Without orbital velocity one would assume that the small sphere would simply roll down the slope towards the bottom of the large sphere at the center - but that's false! We all know that in reality, the larger sphere's gravity would pull it towards it's center of mass.

Without it's orbital velocity, the small sphere would avoid the space/time representation's slope, and make a bee-line to the central mass of the larger sphere. Here's how to convert that 2D membrane into 3D reality. So what you have to imagine is that instead of the large sphere creating a slope in space/time - it is creating a well that objects can fall into equally from all directions. The only thing that can keep a smaller object from falling in is orbital velocity. If it's fast enough it can escape by increasingly larger orbits. If it's too slow it will spiral down into the larger sphere's gravity well towards it's point of center mass. The more massive the object, the greater it's gravity or it's gravity "well", it's attraction.

So, what they try to represent by showing a sloped membrane is the method by which the smaller object "falls" towards the larger one - how the larger object creates a well in space-time - what causes the attraction. All you have to do is change it from a membrane to more like a sea urchin, with spikes radiating from all possible points to the center of mass yet still remember that it's the warping of space-time that creates the attraction.

A note about velocity and time - the 4th dimension. If an object is massive enough it can create a black hole. An infinite gravity well - per say. The 4th dimension is time. On Earth a skydiver with air resistance reaches terminal velocity at 118 MPH or so. But a black hole - ahhhh... the faster you are pulled into the gravity well the slower time passes. Once your terminal velocity reaches the speed of light (and believe me, it is terminal) - time stops - for you - and your fall into the central mass of the black hole lasts forever. So - imagine falling forever - there's your 4D visual. It's a bit more complicated than that, what with all the stretching your body experiences as your head is at the speed of light while your feet are not quite there yet but for simplicity's sake, let's just leave it at falling - forever. You won't be needing a parachute.
 
Feb 18, 2020
1,201
859
1,570
Gosh! You do ask some questions. :)

Let's try a black hole. The normal representation falls down because you can only approach the bh on a flat plane like your diagram. Flat, that is, until you start getting closer.
Instead of looking down from above, and seeing a hole in the centre, imagine you are in space. You see (or don't see) a sphere into which matter is being drawn. You may see, according to some descriptions, a static image at the even horizon.
Anyway, to start answering your question, see a sphere which can be approached equally from any direction. What happens if you look at your bh on paper from underneath the paper. This problem disappears when you imagine it as a sphere. We'll have to leave any more dimensional jumps for the moment. :)
 
Mar 5, 2020
380
64
260
General Relativity uses geodesics.

Friends don’t let friends use geodesics.

To help you see in 4D I would have to get a medical release before doing the upgrade😊.

Current displays are in 2D and there are high level engineering programs that can move you through 3D models.

A fourth dimension can be ported through a haptic interface.

Einstein was said to be able to hold (not visualize) three and four dimensional objects in his mind. Your mind knows where your hands and feet are at all times. This (sense) can be repurposed as a non-visual form of spatial imagination. The amount of concentration required is not trivial. Some intellectually challenging professions have their people work with their hands in order to strengthen this talent.

Einstein appeared slow as a child so this talent can have a price.
 
Apr 5, 2020
377
407
560
Gosh! You do ask some questions. :)

Let's try a black hole. The normal representation falls down because you can only approach the bh on a flat plane like your diagram. Flat, that is, until you start getting closer.
Instead of looking down from above, and seeing a hole in the centre, imagine you are in space. You see (or don't see) a sphere into which matter is being drawn. You may see, according to some descriptions, a static image at the even horizon.
Anyway, to start answering your question, see a sphere which can be approached equally from any direction. What happens if you look at your bh on paper from underneath the paper. This problem disappears when you imagine it as a sphere. We'll have to leave any more dimensional jumps for the moment. :)
But, you know, I am trying to figure out why a plane that is going through the center of an object bend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
Feb 18, 2020
1,201
859
1,570
But, you know, I am trying to figure out why a plane that is going through the center of an object bend.
If I understand correctly:
It is like we 'think' the Earth is flat - not actually, but the curvature is so slight that it is as if it were flat. My sphere is just like the Earth with all gravity pulling inwards (perpendicularly) towards the centre. Now you know that is a simplification so I will say I understand that gravity is directed towards the CoG and not the actual centre of the planet - also that large masses can distort gravity very slightly from that.
 
Oct 21, 2019
249
102
260
We all know about the General Theory of Relativity. It was proposed by Albert Einstein, the most controversial physicist of all time. The theory is the best theory (till now) we have got about Gravity. There's no better theory about Gravity than this till now, accepted by a majority of the Scientific Community.
I disagree. IMO, the warping of “space” is a poor representation of gravity. It lends itself to many

But, you know, I find this image of GR to be kind of vague. Because, you know, it's kind of 2-dimensional, which contains only Latitude and Longitude. We all know that there are infinite planes in the universe, this is just one plane. I want to visualize it in a 3D way which consists Altitude as well. Can anyone help me visualize it in a 3-dimensional way?
That’s easy. I did that about 12 years ago. This is the 3D segment from a larger explanation.
In order for the wormhole/space travel concept to work, the wormhole would have to be a “shortcut” to another area of space. Now, this is not a mathematical explanation, but it explains graphically why the “fold in space/wormhole hypothesis is unrealistic in the real universe. The inaccurate and totally misleading misrepresentation of space as a flat sheet or membrane makes it look easy. But, space is not flat like a sheet of paper, it is solid like a bowling ball. It is easy to fold a sheet of paper, but not quite so easy to fold a bowling ball. IMO, too many people have taken the woefully inadequate 2D flat sheet model and applied it literally to the 3D Universe.

A better and more reasonable representation of space and gravity would be that of a giant sponge the size of the Universe. The effect of gravity (i.e. a star) would be like reaching in to a point deep within the sponge and pinching some of the sponge material. You would end up with a region of dense sponge at the point of the “pinch”, immediately surrounded by a region of rarified density which gradually reverts to the original density as you move further from the “pinch”. The density of the sponge surrounding the “pinch” is analogously inversely proportional to the gravitational force of the star. Notice that no matter how hard you pinch an area, it never brings it any closer to any other area. It only changes the density of the sponge in that immediate vicinity, and that change in density varies inversely with distance from the pinched area. With this more accurate model, all those notions about folding space vanish.
 
Mar 30, 2020
14
0
10
The drawing Figure 2.4 in the following paper may help:


Figure 2.4 – A dot representing matter that stretches the elastic field inward in a 3D space.
 
Mar 5, 2020
380
64
260
How do you show the rate of time at one point in space?

What you need is a cursor that can be moved through three dimensional space.

That cursor will have a readout of the properties for that point in space. It can leave a marker that will show up in a database. You can then compare the properties of several points.

If you try to display all of the information in a static form it will be opaque and useless.

You can sample the field to make sense of it.
 
My take on relativity (bad base math idea) works but for the wrong reason.
Speed of light and more important black holes and the ability of black holes to alter the speed of light are proof that relativity cause is wrong.

Quantum fluctuation as the beast that is space and time, a black hole compresses the local area of fluctuation space and compresses time.
Why light can travel at a different speed near a black hole because it is in compressed space/time.
Black hole simply an area of compressed time/space and reason it doesn't shrink forever and become an infinite mass point is the compression of time in that region.
No singularity and no crazy physics in a black hole.

IMO relativity looks at the effects of everything but not the cause.

Our universe quantum fluctuation forever with endless big bang universe's in all formats of size and activity in it. JMO
 
Mar 30, 2020
14
0
10
Here is a good video on 3D visualize general relativity.

A new way to visualize General Relativity

5:21 in the following video and some other times, the 3D visualize general relativity is the same as the "Figure 2.4 – A dot representing matter that stretches the elastic field inward in a 3D space." in my paper which link shared in above post.

Our explanation on Gravity is much simpler, without a timeline as the 4th dimension which causes so many paradoxes and so much confusion.
 
Nov 6, 2020
59
15
45
We all know about the General Theory of Relativity. It was proposed by Albert Einstein, the most controversial physicist of all time. The theory is the best theory (till now) we have got about Gravity. There's no better theory about Gravity than this till now, accepted by a majority of the Scientific Community. Till now, we have described GR like this:
But, you know, I find this image of GR to be kind of vague. Because, you know, it's kind of 2-dimensional, which contains only Latitude and Longitude. We all know that there are infinite planes in the universe, this is just one plane. I want to visualize it in a 3D way which consists Altitude as well. Can anyone help me visualize it in a 3-dimensional way?

PS: It would be good if you can help me visualize it in a 4D way as well, :)
Sure: In essence, the image in your post does represent 3 dimensions, almost. The only 2D part of the image is the fabric or membrane. What you're missing is velocity. The membrane that the spheres rest upon is merely a 2D representation of space-time. Without orbital velocity one would assume that the small sphere would simply roll down the slope towards the bottom of the large sphere at the center - but that's false! We all know that in reality, the larger sphere's gravity would pull it towards it's center of mass.

Without it's orbital velocity, the small sphere would avoid the space/time representation's slope, and make a bee-line to the central mass of the larger sphere. Here's how to convert that 2D membrane into 3D reality. So what you have to imagine is that instead of the large sphere creating a slope in space/time - it is creating a well that objects can fall into equally from all directions. The only thing that can keep a smaller object from falling in is orbital velocity. If it's fast enough it can escape by increasingly larger orbits. If it's too slow it will spiral down into the larger sphere's gravity well towards it's point of center mass. The more massive the object, the greater it's gravity or it's gravity "well", it's attraction.

So, what they try to represent by showing a sloped membrane is the method by which the smaller object "falls" towards the larger one - how the larger object creates a well in space-time - what causes the attraction. All you have to do is change it from a membrane to more like a sea urchin, with spikes radiating from all possible points to the center of mass yet still remember that it's the warping of space-time that creates the attraction.

A note about velocity and time - the 4th dimension. If an object is massive enough it can create a black hole. An infinite gravity well - per say. The 4th dimension is time. On Earth a skydiver with air resistance reaches terminal velocity at 118 MPH or so. But a black hole - ahhhh... the faster you are pulled into the gravity well the slower time passes. Once your terminal velocity reaches the speed of light (and believe me, it is terminal) - time stops - for you - and your fall into the central mass of the black hole lasts forever. So - imagine falling forever - there's your 4D visual. It's a bit more complicated than that, what with all the stretching your body experiences as your head is at the speed of light while your feet are not quite there yet but for simplicity's sake, let's just leave it at falling - forever. You won't be needing a parachute.
 
Here is a good video on 3D visualize general relativity.

A new way to visualize General Relativity

5:21 in the following video and some other times, the 3D visualize general relativity is the same as the "Figure 2.4 – A dot representing matter that stretches the elastic field inward in a 3D space." in my paper which link shared in above post.

Our explanation on Gravity is much simpler, without a timeline as the 4th dimension which causes so many paradoxes and so much confusion.
Or gravity simply travels between quantum fluctuation with no speed limit because it is between quanta orbits and (void) has no speed limit or size.
Gravity just a compression of fluctuation.

Light travels at the valley of fluctuation with a set speed limit and why light interacts with everything.
Neutrinos at the crest with set speed limit and why the can travel through planets without interacting since they travel at the same place as the crest nothing else can exist at that point other than a freak event of fluctuation particle creation/ destruction.

JMO
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY