|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Tags: between, inconsistancy, proof |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
May 11th 04
posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
|
|||
|
|||
The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof
Mitchell wrote:
I am going to use what Randy said to Tom to demonstrate an inconsistancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and the General. Tom, I would think answering the question very literally, there should be a different answer. The horizon itself moves at c. Any photons on the horizon move at c. A free falling object for a shell observer would see the object's velocity approaching -c at the limit of the horizon. So without an explicit specified other observer, seems to me the answer would have to be: What is the velocity at the event horizon? c therefo What is the rate of change of velocity at the event horizon? 0 This is a problem. According to Special Relativity matter can't reach light speed. If it did time would end for it. In General relativity matter does reach light speed. This is the knowledge that begins to reveal problems with GR. It is incomplete and needs to be consistant with SR. You can correlate the end of time at the event horizon with matter reaching(falling at) the speed of light. This prediction is the begining of evidence demonstating that the theory of gravity must become a limited strength theory(GR). Thankyou for the opertunity Randy and Tom. Show me where I am wrong. Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls -- Could you please clarify if you talk about the horizon of cosmology here, or about the event horizon of black holes? Bye, Bjoern 
|
| Ads |
|
#2
May 12th 04
posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
|
|||
|
|||
|
The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ...
Mitchell wrote: I am going to use what Randy said to Tom to demonstrate an inconsistancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and the General. Tom, I would think answering the question very literally, there should be a different answer. The horizon itself moves at c. Any photons on the horizon move at c. A free falling object for a shell observer would see the object's velocity approaching -c at the limit of the horizon. So without an explicit specified other observer, seems to me the answer would have to be: What is the velocity at the event horizon? c therefo What is the rate of change of velocity at the event horizon? 0 This is a problem. According to Special Relativity matter can't reach light speed. If it did time would end for it. In General relativity matter does reach light speed. This is the knowledge that begins to reveal problems with GR. It is incomplete and needs to be consistant with SR. You can correlate the end of time at the event horizon with matter reaching(falling at) the speed of light. This prediction is the begining of evidence demonstating that the theory of gravity must become a limited strength theory(GR). Thankyou for the opertunity Randy and Tom. Show me where I am wrong. Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls -- Could you please clarify if you talk about the horizon of cosmology here, or about the event horizon of black holes? Bye, Bjoern Black holes Bjoern.
|
|
#3
May 12th 04
posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
|
|||
|
|||
|
The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof
Mitchell wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ... Mitchell wrote: I am going to use what Randy said to Tom to demonstrate an inconsistancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and the General. Tom, I would think answering the question very literally, there should be a different answer. The horizon itself moves at c. Any photons on the horizon move at c. A free falling object for a shell observer would see the object's velocity approaching -c at the limit of the horizon. So without an explicit specified other observer, seems to me the answer would have to be: What is the velocity at the event horizon? c therefo What is the rate of change of velocity at the event horizon? 0 This is a problem. According to Special Relativity matter can't reach light speed. If it did time would end for it. In General relativity matter does reach light speed. This is the knowledge that begins to reveal problems with GR. It is incomplete and needs to be consistant with SR. You can correlate the end of time at the event horizon with matter reaching(falling at) the speed of light. This prediction is the begining of evidence demonstating that the theory of gravity must become a limited strength theory(GR). Thankyou for the opertunity Randy and Tom. Show me where I am wrong. Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls -- Could you please clarify if you talk about the horizon of cosmology here, or about the event horizon of black holes? Bye, Bjoern Black holes Bjoern. Well, then I'm at a loss to understand why you wrote above "The horizon itself moves at c." Why on earth do you think so??? Bye, Bjoern
|
|
#4
May 14th 04
posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
|
|||
|
|||
|
The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ...
Mitchell wrote: Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ... Mitchell wrote: I am going to use what Randy said to Tom to demonstrate an inconsistancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and the General. Tom, I would think answering the question very literally, there should be a different answer. The horizon itself moves at c. Any photons on the horizon move at c. A free falling object for a shell observer would see the object's velocity approaching -c at the limit of the horizon. So without an explicit specified other observer, seems to me the answer would have to be: What is the velocity at the event horizon? c therefo What is the rate of change of velocity at the event horizon? 0 This is a problem. According to Special Relativity matter can't reach light speed. If it did time would end for it. In General relativity matter does reach light speed. This is the knowledge that begins to reveal problems with GR. It is incomplete and needs to be consistant with SR. You can correlate the end of time at the event horizon with matter reaching(falling at) the speed of light. This prediction is the begining of evidence demonstating that the theory of gravity must become a limited strength theory(GR). Thankyou for the opertunity Randy and Tom. Show me where I am wrong. Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls -- Could you please clarify if you talk about the horizon of cosmology here, or about the event horizon of black holes? Bye, Bjoern Black holes Bjoern. Well, then I'm at a loss to understand why you wrote above "The horizon itself moves at c." Why on earth do you think so??? Bye, Bjoern Please do not say what I do not say Bjoern. I did not say that the horizon moves that way but reletivistically I guess you could. I think it is Dirk that has used that argument. Mitch Raemsch -- Light falls --
|
|
#5
May 14th 04
posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics
|
|||
|
|||
|
The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof
Mitchell wrote:
Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ... Mitchell wrote: Bjoern Feuerbacher wrote in message ... Mitchell wrote: I am going to use what Randy said to Tom to demonstrate an inconsistancy between the Special Theory of Relativity and the General. Tom, I would think answering the question very literally, there should be a different answer. The horizon itself moves at c. Any photons on the horizon move at c. A free falling object for a shell observer would see the object's velocity approaching -c at the limit of the horizon. So without an explicit specified other observer, seems to me the answer would have to be: What is the velocity at the event horizon? c therefo What is the rate of change of velocity at the event horizon? 0 This is a problem. According to Special Relativity matter can't reach light speed. If it did time would end for it. In General relativity matter does reach light speed. This is the knowledge that begins to reveal problems with GR. It is incomplete and needs to be consistant with SR. You can correlate the end of time at the event horizon with matter reaching(falling at) the speed of light. This prediction is the begining of evidence demonstating that the theory of gravity must become a limited strength theory(GR). Thankyou for the opertunity Randy and Tom. Show me where I am wrong. Mitch Raemsch -- Light Falls -- Could you please clarify if you talk about the horizon of cosmology here, or about the event horizon of black holes? Bye, Bjoern Black holes Bjoern. Well, then I'm at a loss to understand why you wrote above "The horizon itself moves at c." Why on earth do you think so??? Bye, Bjoern Please do not say what I do not say Bjoern. I did not say that the horizon moves that way Oh, sorry. Looking into the original post, I see that you said that "Randy" said this to "Tom". Unfortunately you didn't say in which post or thread this was, so I don't know the context. Using a Google search, this comes apparently from this thread: http://www.google.de/groups?hl=de&lr=&ie=UTF-8&threadm=7xDnc.174%24bd6.5839%40eagle.america.net &rnum=1&prev=/groups%3Fas_epq%3DTom%252C%2520I%2520would%2520thi nk%2520answering%26ie%3DUTF-8%26lr%3D%26hl%3Dde And I see that Randy has corrected this statement about the horizon in the very next post! Anyway, you didn't dispute this, so I thought that this is your opinion, too. but reletivistically I guess you could. Why? I think it is Dirk that has used that argument. No, it was Randy M. Dumse, and he corrected himself. Bye, Bjoern
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| rename it as Guiding-Proofs-Validation Nursing-theorem to theInfinitude of Twin Primes proof; proof of infinitude of irrationals | a_plutonium | Physics - General Discussion | 0 | March 6th 06 07:44 PM |
| proof that our physical space is Riemannian geometry proof or disproof of Riem geom + Loba geom = Eucl geom | a_plutonium@hotmail.com | Physics - General Discussion | 2 | December 14th 05 08:12 AM |
| The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof | Mitchell | Physics - General Discussion | 12 | May 14th 04 02:04 PM |
| The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof | Sam Wormley | The Theory of Relativity | 4 | May 11th 04 07:50 PM |
| The inconsistancy between GR and SR proof | Bill Rowe | The Theory of Relativity | 0 | May 11th 04 06:00 AM |
Linear Mode
