Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Dark_Convoy, Apr 18, 2007.
I think I heard about this theory once on the discovery channel, good find DC.
This is pretty exciting for me, I have been waiting for results for 3 years - since the day they launched it.
For some reason space time and the effect massive objects have on it has always been interesting to me.
What I find pretty entertaining about it is that, when kids start saying "Man, I wish we could invent a time machine" or something to that extent, now, you can reply with, "Well, we live on one."
D_C, you really are in the wrong field of work...
i think the biggest thing when i started reading a bit on superstring theory (and how quantum mechanics in principle actually conflict with general relativity) is how we take these 'established' field of knowledge for granted.
just when you think we as human race figures stuff out, natures there with OMG N00B! post.
nature = jerk
The most incredible thing, to me, is that Einstein managed to perfect the general theory of relativity without access to any imperical evidence supporting it. It was all, well, theoretical.
Finding out we're wrong in a few places has got to be better than not bothering to find out at all, yeah?
Yeah, it's almost like he went "this is how it should work" in his head, then did all the math to see if it would add up.
Well, not entirely.
There was the Michelson-Morely experiment for example demostrating the invariability of the speed of light which was a pretty big plank for relativity etc.
This really opens up a whole new way of thinking about the nature of time and space.
I think we'll see more concepts arise from this soon -even if it is just new ways of making time machines in scifi stories.
Your entire post ought to be in past tense there, Smasher.
Yeah, this doesn't really change much, just now we have some data to show he was right about that bit.
Cool stuff. So we going to travel through time or something?
Off topic a bit, but I've always wondered about this. They say the speed of light never changes. Yet we are told that a black hole is a star with a gravitational field so strong light can't escape. If light can be slowed down to the point of stopping by gravity, then how can it be invariable? Either the speed of light is effected by gravity or black holes aren't what we're told they are.
I think when they say it's "invariable", that only refers to light traveling in it's natural, unhindered state. It CAN be slowed down, and even stopped. Recent experiments have proven this.
thats why the event horizon of a black hole is called what it is. its basically the boundary where established rules of physics breakdown, hence unpredictable.
keep in mind tho that a black hole is still theoretical. weve yet to establish a way to directly detect one.
Separate names with a comma.