Machs principles

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

harper05

Guest
I know,.. I had to do it... Their cool though..

Machs principle, or principles..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_principle

a more in-depth explanation is also offered by Wikipedia here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach%27s_principle

Ok, what kills me is number 7, If you take away all matter, there is no more space.
Compared to number 4, the universe is spatially closed.

To me, In an open infinite universe number 7 would make more sense, if all you have is open endless space(no matter) you have nothing? So, is it because the absence of matter makes it physically impossible to view the left over space, or the absence of matter would cancel out the existence of space? However in a closed space, without matter you would still have a closed space without matter... not to be redundant :)

And in reverse the presence of matter is what makes space observable or exist at all? very cool things to ponder.

Because if you take away all the matter certainly there would still be space,,, right??

Also * Mach5: The total energy, angular and linear momentum of the universe are zero.. Huh???? What does this even mean?
 
S

spacecadet11

Guest
"SPACE" Response #1

The concept of space..is just that..a concept. It owes its existence to material objects that interact and there interactions are the events that take place in the Universe. There is no such thing as a 'closed' space. Any limiting factors that you are bringing in are limiting factors you are placing on material objects and there interactions in our Universe.
In English...there is a certain confusion..when we say 'empty' space and nothing...there appears to be a material existence to this 'nothing' or void. Empty space or (nothing) is just that..devoid of either matter and or 'events' that will take place between them. It is also where are concept of time comes from as well.
Note: There is no thing as 'left-over empty space'...what you are saying is left-over 'nothing' or left over "0" objects...sorry...not rational.
Thanks for any return response.
Bye
SC
 
D

darkmatter4brains

Guest
It's been a while since I looked at mach's principles, but they really tend more towards philosophilal viewpoints than they do actual laws.

Einstein liked a few of them, but ended up steering away from them eventually as he created his theories of relativity, mainly because the principles didn't really reflect reality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts