Can we know that space is 'curved'

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

do you actually think about what you say? what are the properties of dark matter? It has gravity, thus it has mass, and inertia. You add it to your block, and your block is heavier. It's indistinguishable from adding more of anything to it (be it peanut butter or lead). The rest of your post falls into the very, very, rudimentary logical fallacy: DOES NOT FOLLOW. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

..Gravity is only attractive, it won't repel, no matter how you position the objects This can be, and has been, proved by using various several ton spheres in just such arrangements and very precise scales. .. jatslo - There is a heck of lot more than gravity going on. I am curious as to how you can test this theorem. How the heck did you get several ton spheres into space? Maybe there is some dark matter within the core of everything that acts like a great attracter? Better yet, if I found some great attracter, I could bring it to Earth and make a weightless spacecraft. I could then surf the gravitational waves of the universe at infinite speeds. ?? There is a heck of lot more than gravity going on... Such as? Please elaborate... ..I am curious as to how you can test this theorem... Test what? Simply put, "Gravity" (Gravitational Force) is an effect generated by the presence of "mass." What is there you wish to "test" concerning gravity. Are you saying that flipping two large objects, upside-down, is going to affect a change in the way gravity influences them? ..Maybe there is some dark matter within the core of everything that acts like a great attracter?.. Like mass maybe? Are you saying there is some mysterious material inside the Earth which emits "gravity?" How about in a moon?.. in an asteroid? in a real big rock? in a mountain? in a large watermelon? ..Better yet, if I found some great attracter, I could bring it to Earth and make a weightless spacecraft.. Wouldn't it stick? ..I could then surf the gravitational waves of the universe at infinite speeds... Don't forge <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

The rest of your post falls into the very, very, rudimentary logical fallacy: DOES NOT FOLLOW. Some day before I die, I hope you eat your words. To deny the existence of negative gravity based off of observations is the same as stating that there is nothing left to be discovered. I guess we have already explained everything there is to explain, so why bother debating it.

kmarinas86 · Apr 6, 2005

Are you saying that flipping two large objects, upside-down, is going to affect a change in the way gravity influences them? Watch him say yes to this <img src="/images/icons/tongue.gif" /> Maybe there is some dark matter within the core of everything that acts like a great attracter? Dark matter? See the Cyclical Multiverse Theory.... at your own risk Better yet, if I found some great attracter, I could bring it to Earth and make a weightless spacecraft Define "great attractor" I could then surf the gravitational waves of the universe at infinite speeds Now you're trippin' =P

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

a_lost_packet_-What would make the North poles of the planets repel each other? jatslo - The electromagnetic emissions probably wouldn’t do the trick by itself, or at least not when considering two equal masses, so I thought I would throw in some dark matter. For example, for the sake of arguing, let’s say that both of the planet cores are comprised of x amount of dark matter, in which dark matter repels dark matter, and attracts the traditional matter. Now we have two forces repelling each other at their North Poles, as opposed to one force, which x+emi is a greater force combined than the traditional gravity by itself is. It’s a really different picture when your talking about radically different masses, because the gravity of one mass is greater than the EMI and dark matter of the smaller mass; however, the EMI trick might still work ;o) I just couldn't resist quoting your entire post.. The electromagnetic emissions probably wouldn’t do the trick by itself, or at least not when considering two equal masses, . OK. What's the "electromagnetic emission" variable which depends on mass? ..so I thought I would throw in some dark matter.. Well now, can't just go slinging that stuff around you know. Better use a bucket. For example, for the sake of arguing.. Oh. Good. Well, for the sake of "listening" I'll listen. By the way, does any of this answer the question? I'll wait and read on... ..let’s say that both of the planet cores are comprised of x amount of dark matter, in which dark matter repels dark matter, and attracts the traditional matter. Err. If dark matter repulses itself, then you are saying it is a single particle? If not, <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

i_think · Apr 6, 2005

"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." --- Sherlock Holmes It's a nice quote, but I think in the world of science, whatever remains is only a possibility and not necessarily the truth. <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Okay, if you say so?

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

Okay, then explain how you get from Dark matter = weightless spacecraft. Because the presence of darkmatter is found by finding a large, extended source of gravity comming from a non-luminous source. I.e. it has gravity, it has mass, which means it doesn't make a weightless anything. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

Jatslo - To deny the existence of negative gravity based off of observations .. Negative Gravity? Well, you could have negative mass which isn't outlawed by Einstein. But, what would you put it in? How would you work with it? Instead of me talking about negative mass (which I truthfully don't know a whole lot about) why don't you explain "negative gravity." What is negative gravity? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

Saiph - Okay, then explain how you get from Dark matter = weightless spacecraft. I have no idea but I bet he says it has something to do with metallic hydrogen. <slaps his two coppers onto the table and waits /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

I wish he'd realize metallic hydrogen was just a) dense (due to the high pressure) and b) has lots of free electrons allowing easy conduction. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Hydrogen is weightless on Earth, why wouldn't metal hydrogen be weightless?

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

It isn't weightless, anywhere. It is, however, less massive than the components of air, and so is "boyant", and rises to the top. For the same reason air-filled boxes rise to the surface of a pool. They aren't weightless, they're just less dense than water, and thus are boyant. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

a_lost_packet_ · Apr 6, 2005

jatslo - Hydrogen is weightless on Earth, why wouldn't metal hydrogen be weightless? I believe Crystalline Hydrogen is the lightest crystal on Earth. (Lightest known substance too maybe?) But, it still isn't "weightless." <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> I put on my robe and wizard hat... </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Right, it has mass, but my point still stands. Metal hydrogen might float away.

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

actually, that's a different point. Metallic hydrogen is under extreme pressure (otherwise it can't be metallic hydrogen). As such, the density is very high, and much higher than air, and most other materials. It'll sink. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

What is the atomic weight, density, color of metal hydrogen, and how will metal hydrogen interact with other particles and waves? They are going to make metal hydrogen the same way they make diamonds. Do you suggest that we stop trying, and let China discover Metal Hydrogen first? Why wouldn't hydrogen be responsible for curvature? Hydrogen represents 90% of the known elements; the universe is made of 90% dark matter. Why wouldn't metal hydrogen exist as dark matter?

Saiph · Apr 6, 2005

well, the atomic weight is the same. As for the rest, you do the leg work, you're claiming it's the wonder material. From an article you cited it's already been replicated in the lab, and it was shown it cannot exist except under incredibly high pressures. As such it can't be in the vacuum of space, and thus can't be dark matter (which is diffuse, since we can see through it, and in the vacuum). <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 6, 2005

Here's that source the_lost_packet_ found: http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/6/4/6/1

Saiph · Apr 7, 2005

okay, now list off the properties of metallic hydrogen in the article, calculate the others you care about (density for instance). That done, tell me how those properties work under what conditions to make what you say possible. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 7, 2005

Like artificial diamonds, metal hydrogen in its purest state is transparent/translucent. Metal hydrogen is probably a hybrid crystalline metal. Metal hydrogen is 1000's of times harder that diamonds. Metal hydrogen can withstand extreme temperatures, 20k degree temperatures, or maybe -1000 degrees Kelvin. Metal hydrogen oscillates between extreme temps without fracturing its structure. Metal hydrogen absorbs/conducts light. etc. etc. etc... My brain is starting to hurt!

kmarinas86 · Apr 7, 2005

-1000 degrees Kelvin ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm !!! ????

Saiph · Apr 7, 2005

Okay, where'd you get all that? Metallic hydrogen is, afaik, liquid (I may be wrong). It cannot be both transparent, and absorb light. If it conducts electricity so well, it really isn't going to be transparent due to the photo-electric effect having a very low energy requirement. So even the things you listed are evidently self-contradictory. Show me where you got this, or how you derived it. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

Saiph · Apr 7, 2005

and as kamarinas pointed out.... -1000 kelvin....eh? You can't go below 0 kelvin. Actually, you can't even reach 0 kelvin. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> --------------------SaiphMOD@gmail.com -------------------"This is my Timey Wimey Detector. Goes "bing" when there's stuff. It also fries eggs at 30 paces, wether you want it to or not actually. I've learned to stay away from hens: It's not pretty when they blow" -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink" </div>

jatslo · Apr 7, 2005

You can't go below 0 kelvin. Just because we can't go below Kelvin, does not mean that it is not possible.

Can we know that space is 'curved'

Saiph

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

jatslo

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

i_think

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

a_lost_packet_

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

kmarinas86

Guest

Saiph

Guest

Saiph

Guest

jatslo

Guest

Similar threads

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page