What IS space?

[sergey500]

231: Wow, I got to say, Infy, that is a long way to "Prove me wrong, i dare you!". But the same is with me, I will not switch poisitons that easily, I need some hard evidance. And the quest for the truth, the ultimate truth...that quest my take me all my life, but I will find it.

 

233: So spacetime is not energy, CC? Is that what your saying? If not then i do not see how you proved him wrong. He said space is almost always with energy, i don't see how your proved him wrong, infy might be right, but then again so might you...I dunno. And as for your comments on poof, i already gave my opinion on what he said...or more like what he did not say.

 

Infy, lol, i did know what vacuum fluctuations meant, but i just knew it a virtual particles.

 

Anyways, back to what i have gathered. Last time i left off, i was talking about finding something that holds the energy in the universe and this material, if it is one, must not provide friciton. I was randomly chosen Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

 

When I looked into dark energy I read what i was expecting to read, it was negative enegy. At this point i figured this idea might work. Opposites attract, so maybe dark energy can diffuse with normal energy and combine, somewhat like atoms, to and in a perfect harmony this energy (equaling Zero, ZPE, (i will read more on this, there are parts that still confuse mem, like the formulas and the part does refer to motion only?)). It seems to me like this can be it. At zero energy, a perfect harmony, it all that is needed to keep the energy up. No solid matter is necessery because all matter is, is energy with a shell and properties like mass. This of course accounts for another problem scientist already answered with this, is the missing mass. Now only problem i see, is that i invision it to be perfect ration of dark energy to positive energy, but scientist speculate that the universe is made up of 70% of dark energy...i invioned 50:50 ratio. Well at least now i know the term for my old idea, where there could be some particle made up of itself that doesn't provide friciton, this could've been somethng in dark matter.

 

To make things simple and for those of you too lazy to read, i now hypothsis that the answer to what holds the energy is.........dark energy! Prove me wrong, go ahead (so i can find another answer or confirm this one strongly).

 

Well that was an usually long post of my opinions....

 

While you are all argueing how stupid my ideas are, i am going to go look into the Lambda-CDM model, seems interesting..........

[goku]

I wish everything was that simple.

some times the simplest answer is the correct one :naughty:

[sergey500]

some times the simplest answer is the correct one :naughty:

Yep. And i for one prefer the simple answers. The simpler the better.

[Turtle]

231: And the quest for the truth, the ultimate truth...that quest my take me all my life, but I will find it. :naughty:

 

 

Infy, lol, i did know what vacuum fluctuations meant,:xx: but i just knew it a virtual particles.

 

Anyways, back to what i have gathered. Last time i left off, i was talking about finding something that holds the energy in the universe and this material, if it is one, must not provide friciton. I was randomly :Glasses: chosen Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

 

When I looked into :D dark energy I read what i was expecting :) to read, it was negative enegy. At this point i figured this idea might work:Waldo: . Opposites attract, so maybe dark energy can diffuse with normal energy and combine, somewhat like atoms, to and in a perfect harmony this energy (equaling Zero, ZPE, (i will read more on this, there are parts that still confuse mem, like :) the formulas and the part does refer to motion only?)). It seems to me like this can be it. At zero energy, a perfect harmony, it all that is needed to keep the energy up. No solid matter is necessery because all matter is, is energy ;) with a shell:Waldo: and properties like mass. This of course accounts for another problem:Waldo: scientist already answered with this, is the missing mass. Now only problem i :xx: see,:D is that i :Waldo: invision it:Waldo: :Waldo: to be perfect ration of dark energy to positive energy, but scientist speculate that the universe is made up of 70% of dark energy...i invioned 50:50 ratio. Well at least now i know the term for my old idea,:Waldo: where there could be some particle made up of itself that doesn't provide friciton, this could've been somethng in dark matter.

 

To make things simple and for those of you:Waldo: too lazy to read, i :Waldo: now hypothsis that the answer to what holds the energy is.........dark energy! Prove me wrong, go ahead (so i can find another answer or confirm this one strongly). :Waldo:

 

Well that was an usually long post of my opinions....

 

While you are all argueing how stupid my ideas are, i am going to go look into the Lambda-CDM model, seems interesting..........

 

 

Good for you Sergey; Waldo is the truth; find Waldo. Before you can find Waldo, you must DEFINE Waldo. If you have not yet, go immediately & secure a good dictionary & keep it RIGHT beside you whenever you read ANYTHING. If you encounter a word you don't know, look it up to see what everyones seems to agree on what it means. Then also look up any words you read that you think you know what they mean & compare it what with others think(s) the word means. Much of your misunderstanding Sergy seems rooted in the disagreement in meaning of words. You are however asking good, simple, questions.

Please do you Sergey, virtual online phantom guy, get a dictionary. to USE.:Waldo:

[sergey500]

. . .

Thanks, but I was in real hurry when I typed that, then again, I am always in hurry when I am trying to debate something. Waldo? Creative, very creative. But on the other hand would like to contribute to this post by helping me? You have done very well before, so I ask, may we please stay on topic. Your opinion, like everyone else's, is important, so I would like to hear it. Such as when gave my recent opinion on dark energy, would you agree or disagree?

 

Fine, I will use a dictionary from now on and reread my posts before posting them. But, what did you mean by "virtual online phantom guy"?

[Turtle]

. . .

Thanks, but I was in real hurry when I typed that, then again, I am always in hurry when I am trying to debate something. Waldo? Creative, very creative. But on the other hand would like to contribute to this post by helping me? You have done very well before, so I ask, may we please stay on topic. Your opinion, like everyone else's, is important, so I would like to hear it. Such as when gave my recent opinion on dark energy, would you agree or disagree?

 

Fine, I will use a dictionary from now on and reread my posts before posting them. But, what did you mean by "virtual online phantom guy"?

 

I don't remember where I may have used 'virtual phantom guy'; slips my mind at the moment.

Nevertheless, back on topic. The Lagrange points came up here & I have taken Rascal Puff's response to my question on the topic from another thread. Here it is:

 

Re: Walking Stick & The Turtle discuss Total Field Theory - 12-04-2005, 03:49 PM

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turtle

In other words Langranian points/areas by not accounting for the expansion of space as a variable, rule it out as a possibility. In your [refering to Puff] ever expanding 6 way unified field exposition as I understand it so far, one would expect to find stable body systems solutions in multiples of three bodies.

I do have to ask why they qualify the third body as 'negligible mass'? Nice to communicate from you as always at right angles.

Turtle

 

 

"Anyone may - has the unarguable power to - agree or disagree with anyone else, at any time, anywhere, about anything, for any reason or lack of reason." - K.B.Robertson

 

Allow that Tormod and InfamouSteadfast are in a tug of war with a strong length of jump rope tautly twanging between them; each man having a firm grip with his heels dug in. Allow that neither man wins the power struggle because both are evenly matched and skilled.

 

Q. Does this mean that there is no force acting between the two men?

A. The conclusion of neutralization equalling 0 force is one of mathematics and non-metric geometry, not functional, metric space.

 

The 'Point 0' is when & where each of whatever or however many forces functionally neutralize one another. We may even correctly say that such interfaces have more forces than regular spaces due to the presiding - granted, mutually and/or collectively neutralizing intersection of the issued - however many - forces.

Moreover, a 'Point', does not exist; not even in one dimension, or two, or three or four, five or six. It is a location in space; the only 'nothing' it has to do with is, it has nothing to do with Mr. Cc's - or anyone else's - argument.

 

As any attentive Reader may note of the more recent posts, both sergey 500 and particulary Cc, are thumbing their noses at everyone, particularly targeting this record and InfmyStfst (so far) - prodding, challenging, proclaiming a very well established anthology of world class theories as being hypothetical. Yes. TRP is stood aside, marking the fathoms of line let out to test the unfathomed depths, while the line handlers continue to shout out pinkly smoking nautical (deep space?) terms, such as, 'Mark L1!", "Mark L-2" etceteras, so far up to L-5....

Langrange isn't misunderstanding any of this. It's Cc's spell binding exotica.

Far 'beyond', while second guessing and completely misunderstanding Einstein. Cc is not merely 'ignorant' - we're all ignorant of most everything there is to learn.

 

___Somewhere earlier on in this thread I restated what I understood from reading all of Gravity is The Fourth Dimension by Kent B. Robertson in regard to your original question, "What IS Space". So now I restate it again, after having read Robertson's work another 3 times as well as your reaction to it.

 

Q: What is 'space'.

#185 ----On the contrary; the most important responses to your original question are on page 18. That you do not see it is clear. I happen to think I understand what Puff has described, & said as much in the post at top of page 18. I understood him to say space is no less or more than interactions of expanding electromagnetic fields. Interference patterns in other words that don't manifest as matter.

For a personal visual display of interference of waves, throw a pebble in a pond, then right after throw in a boulder, then right after throw in a handful of gravel. Now sit quietly & examine the patterns of the interacting waves.

Repeat. Hope this helps Sergy

Best Sincere Regards & Happy Winter Holidays,

Turtle

[infamous]

Even though I've found good reason to agree with the scientific rational for the positions you have taken on the question of gravity's true nature, I must again ask you to please try and limit the scope and length of your posts. Much of the last post can be found on other threads and frankly this information is becoming quite redundant and truly not necessary as a proper response to sergey500. I sincerely hope you will not judge this as a personal attack Puff, you have much to offer this forum. .........................................Infy

[sergey500]

Turtle:

WOW, I must be really dumb or understandingly challenged, because I missed the whole point of that quote. I already knew all of that, but I miss the relevance to this question. But that next quote, I did indeed read it before, for some reason the analogy still eludes me, but I did grasp something there "I understood him to say space is no less or more than interactions of expanding electromagnetic fields." and as he said Waves in a pond. So, as I try to find another analogy to this to every day world, it seems to me that sentence basically means is that space is result of interacting electromagnetic fields...wait, I just restated that...how pointless of me to do that. If this is indeed true and I postpone my recent idea to see if this will work, it would mean I would need to do more research on electromagnetic fields, because questions of it's nature is popping out in my head, and answers is what I seek.

 

I remember quote I once read, "For each scientific question, an answer might form, but in result ten more questions will developed in its place". Kind of what is happening now isn’t it? I got my answer of what is space, energy, next question, what is holding it with out friction, my idea: Dark Energy, new idea: Electromagnetic Fields. *Sigh* I guess that means more reading and researching for me.

 

Happy Holiday Greeting from me, sergey500.

 

Oh and do you always change your avatar? Every time I see you here, you have a different avatar, always something geometrical.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

That Rascal Puff

Well...to be frank, that is a lot to read and I really don't want to, but assuming my answer is somewhere in there, I will.

 

*reading...*

 

First paragraph comment, I'd assume that was just a long way to say thanks for creating such long post that makes everyone share and combine the most fascinating and remarkable opinions. Um...you’re welcome? I just want an answer, and nothing more (and a little extra knowledge that comes along).

 

Although unrelated, I just remembered why I seem to ignore most opinions. Although I do think them through a part of me remained the same since being a child. When i was younger, I liked a Confucius’s phrase, "he who knows nothing, doubts nothing." and when I was young I doubted everything. And now...still do, but I now give a chance and think it through, follow that train of thought and find out for myself. Ignore that little ramble.

 

Anyway, the next three paragraphs seem kind of out of place. I am quite sure they have nothing to do with my question. But what the heck, while I am at it, I might as well give my opinion. Since the FBI can use programs such as; "Omnivore" and the more advanced "Carnivore", "Calea", "dragonnet", "GSA-bah", "inmarsat", "interface", "held orders", "interrim solutions", "mangement control projects", "phiple troenix" and much much more, most of them are classified. They are used to monitor our internet activities, phone activities, anything public or semi-priviate. I understand the whole securtiy and prevention of terrorist moves, but i still believe this is an invasion of privacy and i dont like it.

 

...Uh...Where was I? Oh yeah, back on topic.

"It was formerly believed that if all material things disappeared out of the universe, time and space would be left. According to the relativity theory, however, time and space disappear together with the things."

- Einstein, EINSTEIN, THE LIFE & TIMES, Ronald W. Clark, p. 469

So what indeed would be left? Nothing?

 

"... I do not believe it is justifiable to ask, 'What would physics look like without gravitation." - Einstein, IDEAS & OPINIONS, p.p. 352 - 3

And yet we do not fully understand what gravity is.

 

"'Empty space' is not the absence of 4-D matter, but rather, a physical 5 & 6 dimensional (electromagnetic) extension of it." - p. 60 GRAVITY IS THE 4th DIMENSION, by Kent B. Robertson, Copyright August 1988

Yeah, i am sure each following dimension has something true to combine with the last. So 5th dimension would have the properties of 4th, without 4th at all, regardless of what it is, there wouldn't be five and after. Well that my opinion anyway.

 

"I do find gravity an attractive force at times." - K.B.Robertson. Ibid

but it helps us to get attracted to other things, reality for one.

 

The funniest thing I noticed in your bold paragraphed quote is math in science. They are like brother and sister, yet they are so different. They need each other, but they can give different results. For example, some things in math are impossible, meanwhile in science nothing is ever impossible (Like that thread about Impossibilities, I’ll go check it out to see if anyone replied again...). So why would we depends so much on using the two together? I guess opposites really do attract.

 

But what is YOUR opinion about the fourth dimension? What do you think it is? And how does it work?

 

But your other opinion gave me a flash back when I was asked question that I couldn't answer immediately, and thinking I had to visualize over 10 scenarios, all logic seemed to collapse. "Would a point be a line, in a 4-D space?"

 

and yes, I am entertained, after all that is the reason came here. I came, I saw, I replied.

 

Those other quotes I did not paste, either confused me or I just had no comments at all.

 

Ok then, but what about my Dark Energy idea? Would it work or not? As for electromagnetic fields, I will get back to that later.

 

Thanks to all for coming here and trying to drill your opinions into my hard head.

 

Happy Holidays to all,

Sergey500

 

P.S. I really don't like long posts, but long posts, need long replies. Happy readings to anyone who cares.

[sergey500]

Quite extended puff...This will take awhile to read.

So why is it that this will be your last post here?

 

What do you mean by "flipping off", I don't fully understand. I was just finding it ironic how we put so many theories on gravity and use gravity to explain so many things yet we hardly know what gravity is, well asides for the force that keeps us down. But its funny, as you have mentioned all those things, we use them explain our world...yet we can't explain them, how ironic.

 

And yes, the pursuit of knowledge is my ultimate life goal. As impossible as it is, my goal in life, my main point of living, is to know everything about everything...well as much as mentally possible to the 100% of brain power, not the 12% that we all use. But, dreams are there because they don't come true, only something to pursue, this is what I will pursue, ultimate knowledge. Also, if I have question, and there is no answer, to basis on research or previous ideas, I just create my own answer...somewhat like now, but i do have the power of research and previous idea, I.E. yours!

 

"Is much more a mystery than a resolution"...AKA "The truth, is stranger than fiction"

 

-*laughing too hard* must've been one helluva of party, to have 30 billion years of hangover.

 

So basically you’re saying, I can't use the Dark Energy, because it not even fully understood? Well as I mentioned earlier, neither is gravity, but we still use to answer many questions of life. The point of asking question about something is understand how it works, not why it works...unless you’re really want to know both.

 

Oh yeah, the renewed version on Science channel, yeah I was planning to watch it but i just never get to do it, other lazy activities pop up. I'll watch eventually, heard its good.

 

As for "Would a point be a line in 4-d space?" Yeah, I came to same conclusion. Whenever it would move it would be creating a line. So my idea wasn't so ridiculous, yay.

 

Does the universe need another answer for which you have provided no question ('frictionless electromagnetism? You may mean 'negative inertia', but you haven't clarified that at all. If there's 'friction' within, or otherwise needed by electromagnetism, perhaps your WD-40 Dark Energy idea is the silken feline's pajamas.

What about your Dark Energy idea? The one that W-D 40's the unlubricated electromagnetically spatial universe? Now there's a potential answer that you're in apparent need of finding a question for, sir.

(QUAKER STATE 40 Weight?)

By your convenient leave, sir. Please do let me know when you return, to be out standing in your contour plowed & furrowed fields.

 

I have no idea what happened, it just seemed that my brained died when i was reading that, thus.... didn't understand at all. What are you asking for? W-D- 40? what...? Sorry for such stupid question, but i will reread that when my brain seems to be back, I think i am just too tired today.

 

I don’t know if I want to get to that answer, it seems i am searching for it, but it seems like I am purposely avoiding it. I am not. I am looking for loopholes and other ideas, when I have enough idea; I take them all and find the one that makes the most sense. As for the unified theory, the theory of everything, i would love to write that theory...you know what? Maybe in the not so distant future i might. You never know.

 

Anyways, I am going back to research and reading, it seems ideas and opinions are dieing out. Again, thanks for trying your best to drill it into my head, have a great holiday.

 

...you know what? I think that will be my next big project. The unfied theory. So far I tried to explain and did successfully (worthy enough to brag about) questions like; "Do we exist?", "Why do we exist", still trying on this, still researching loopholes in my time travel idea, and next I shall invent the unified theory, but since I am not the only one, I will be just joining the race.

[Kirk Gregory Czuhai]

To paraphrase Einstein, Space is the thing that keeps everything from happening in the same place... :)

 

Cheers,

Buffy

well..., just remember its a small world and this space thing

just shows how BAD our science really is!

we should firstly disguish between the math concept of a spaces or

spaces be they finite dimensional or otherwise and what we are feebly attempting to construct; a description of the actual universes space time

in terms of languages such a mathematics.

we should as we discuss such "model" remember that they are not

the actual space-time but rather are useful somehow as a predictive tool as to what we would expect for different events in the space-time.

 

we seem to be restricting ourself to the vacuum state of space-time and if we think of a massless homogeneous spacetime there is no need to

neither consider a large or small section with preferece since there would be

no curvature to the spacetime, i.e. it would be flat and we would assume that somehow it would be 3 dimensional Euclidean. But actually we can not

do THAT as in this spacetime we are discussing so far there exists nothing

to measure? well this is not completely true and indeed for non-relatistic (speeds<<c), small quantities of energy, and macroscopic objects this space-time fits the bill along with its whatever time, t, component considered independent component included with the other three spacetime components height, width and depth. Indeed one lives quite a normal live practically always just minding spacetime in these simple four matters.

 

but then again, measurements have led us to utilize our physics assuming spacetime is locally Lorentian and then at galactic distaces incorporating the concept of G=4*PI*T , where its geometric features are directly related to the stress energy tensor (containing the distribution of mass-energy) in the Universe ala Einstein's General theory of relativity which still seems to

be beating the other theories proposed so-far but not at all apparently having the last say as such things as an universe accelerating in its expansion and figuring out what over 95% of the Universe's mass and energy even are composed of await it seems forever the egg heads to figure out.

 

Even classically there are other properties of spacetime that can be measured. Starting with the defined value of c , the speed of light in a

vaccum, the measuremnt of either the permeability or permitivity of the vacuum (which determine the electromagnetic properties of the vacuum) can be found with the other derived with the value of c using Maxwell's equations.

 

Indeed all the FUNDAMENTAL CONSTANTS can be measured and except for c, all INDEED HAVE TO BE MEASURED, as there exists no physics that predicts their value other than the anthroscopic reason you are here in the first place to measure them either being made in God's Image or a product of your ancestor the pond sludge as you prefer.

 

as you get spaced out remember if you remember to spring forward, and fall back, do not take too many steps backward as you move forward, jump up and down for this brilliant caring physics if PHUN as you now are wondering were the space will come filling up with evermore gibberish as you lean to the left or right,

 

DO YOU REALLY WANT TO SCRIBBLE EQUATIONS FOR 40 years?

 

i am very bored.

:hihi:

[Qfwfq]

Quite extended puff...This will take awhile to read.

And the same post is also quite extended, just like too many others despite repeated warning.

 

I've just deleted the last post by Puff, quite offensive after there had already been trouble.

 

Thread closed for the moment.