Einstein & relativity

**xxein@bellsouth.net** · #1 June 28th 05 posted to sci.physics.relativity

Gerhard@AMSwb wrote:
Hi All,
I know that I am coming in from the cold, maybe someone will throw me
blanket and make place around the warm fire of knowledge.....

I have recently read about the Life of Einstein, yet, I still do not
understand the special/general laws of relativity and how it impacts on
science as a hole, what with e=mc(2) ?

Could someone here point me to website or papers which explain to me in very
'lay-mans' terms what it is all about and what are practical applications/
or examples etc?

Thanks for your time?

Gerhard
email :

xxein: It would be wise to think about such physical issues for
yourself before you adopt someone else's belief. Do a comparison study
of what you are willing to believe against a universe that acts only
one way. This would include the notion of an objective reality vs. the
subjectiveness awareness that we have of it. The "Wizard of Oz",
"Though the Looking Glass", "Alice in Wonderland" or however you relate
to this example, would be a good start.

We humans tend to make relationships that only serve a limited human
function. What is the universe's definition of 'having sex'? That is
how far away we are in understanding a physic of this universe. We
live in a cloud of subjectiveness of our own creation.

As kids, we knew that adults didn't know how to have fun, to explore
and learn new things. They were busy with surviving. They had to
adopt a mindset to survive amongst the conditions in which they found
themselves. They became conditioned to a subjectively viewed avalanche
of everyone else's subjectiveness.

That is who we are. Messed up in subjective relationships that are
hard to get rid of. The universe doesn't have this problem. Now, how
do we get this understanding? It is up to you. It can't be taught
from a false perspective.

But you are free to adopt any thinking you want.

**mtm** · #2 June 28th 05 posted to sci.physics.relativity

wrote:

understand the special/general laws of relativity and how it impacts on
science as a hole, what with e=mc(2) ?
..........
We humans tend to make relationships that only serve a limited human
function. What is the universe's definition of 'having sex'?

What textbooks are you reading ?

**xxein@bellsouth.net** · #3 June 29th 05 posted to sci.physics.relativity

mtm wrote:
wrote:

understand the special/general laws of relativity and how it impacts on
science as a hole, what with e=mc(2) ?
..........
We humans tend to make relationships that only serve a limited human
function. What is the universe's definition of 'having sex'?

What textbooks are you reading ?

xxein: That's just an off-the-wall comment as to how we tend to be
anthropocentric. Seemingly, everything "has to" be described as to how
it relates to us, our lives and measurements that we choose to do to
make a sense of our existence.

The universe has no such explanatory purpose and exists as itself with
preemptory physical laws that define its timely behavior.

We tend to make up and believe reasons for how and why things happen by
over-generalizing and grouping (physical) behaviors to satisfy a "human
perspective" of knowledge. That is why we make measurements, but we
fail to realize how subjective those measurements really are.

The Doppler effect of light with a time dilation is a perfect example.
One's FOR measures it to be such, but another, along the same line of
travel (with different velocity), measures it differently. SO - we
make a generalized law that describes the relation of these different
measurements. We start to get non-physical with the addition of
velocities and say that it is ok because we have a math that describes
it. Instead, we should follow the physicalness of it and realise that
no generalization of a FOR can "assume" a rest/objective position wrt
measuring speed of light as a one-way measure. But both the derived
math AND the physicalness can support the notion of the reciprocal
two-way measure of the speed of light to obtain a high degree of
accuracy for the speed of light. Just because we cannot determine a
physical motion wrt light, it doesn't physically follow that we can
ignore it. Nor does a mathematical substitute form the objective
reality. It can only form a subjective relationship.

There are those that are completely satisfied with the subjectively
measured mathematical relationship (so what is sex?) I don't deny that
relationship but it cannot inherently form a proper understanding of
the actual physics this universe, under which, this universe operates.
We might as well vote whether or not we will accept the functionality
of this universe. But even that does not give us the leeway to
describe it as anything other than its intrinsic self (anthropocentric
thoughts, anyone?).

Textbook? It is written. We are too illiterate to read it.

So let's go back to that sex thing. Reduce it to a pin-prick. A
self-awareness. Life. A self-regulated field of energy that can grow
(remain the same or deteriorate). All external stress is not equal and
some is rejected to maintain the original field. Other stresses are
allowed to add energy or substitute existing micro-fields and thus
change the overall field to more, or less, energy (an addition to
original complexity and still remaining sensitive to entropy).

There are local changes that occur in this universe that preserve the
global entropy and seem to increase energy on a local scene
temporarily. How does this communicate? What is the basic foundation
of entropy besides an expanding universe?

At what level does a pin-prick in a micro-field of energy give it an
understanding of the rest of the universe? Should I tell you how to
raise your kids, also?

Why does the universe show us a timely occurrence by virtue of light?
If you want to answer by invoking a god, that is your own decision to
make.

The universe is simple. It is our anthropocentric view of it that
causes problems.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Poincaré & Einstein	Sam Wormley	Physics - General Discussion	1	September 1st 05 04:38 PM
Galileo's Relativity & Newton's Relativity.	Daniel Weston	The Theory of Relativity	2	October 30th 04 11:38 PM
Einstein & Quantum Gravity	Thomas Larsson	Current Physics Research (Moderated)	13	May 20th 04 06:51 PM
Einstein & Quantum Gravity	Doctordick	Current Physics Research (Moderated)	0	May 15th 04 09:47 AM
Einstein & Quantum Gravity	Alfred Einstead	Current Physics Research (Moderated)	0	May 6th 04 02:52 PM