Hadron Collider = End of Earth?

[OngBonga]

I only found out today Mark. My mate saw him in Rhyl.


Albert Einstein didn't tell us that gravity warps spacetime, he told us gravity is warped spacetime. And he did explain why. He told us that the presence of energy distorts spacetime around it, creating valleys, which we interpret as straight lines in space curving around a central mass. We think we're going around the sun, but we're not, we're falling into the distorted spacetime its presence causes. Our orbit is an illusion. Time is going much, much slower on the surface of the sun, compared to here on Earth. So does that make the sun younger than the Earth? How does this make sense? Obviously the sun is older than the Earth. So the sun must be travelling through less spacetime to balance this lost time. If time is x4 slower at the surface of the sun compared to the surface of Earth, we need to travel through x4 as much spacetime as the sun to remain in its proximity. That's why we orbit the sun, because spacetime is distorted. We're not going around it, we're falling towards it, while it falls away from us at an equal rate. The rotating spiral of warped spacetime it leaves in its trail creates our orbit. We leave a rotating spiral of warped spacetime in our wake, which the Moon duly follows.

I'm just talking stoned shit. But it all makes sense to me. The only thing I haven't figured out yet is why the expansion of the universe is accelerating. Seems too easy to point at dark matter, I think that's a cop out, like we'll just make up some shit to explain what's happening. I haven't got tea because this mystery force is stopping me from actually making myself one. We'll call in antitea.

[eugmac]

By tea do you mean dinner, or the brown stuff you make out of leaves?

[MadMojoMonkey]

Albert Einstein didn't tell us that gravity warps spacetime, he told us gravity is warped spacetime. And he did explain why. He told us that the presence of energy distorts spacetime around it, creating valleys, which we interpret as straight lines in space curving around a central mass.

By whatever name, the rose smells as sweet. Whether you call it "gravity" or "warped spacetime" the fact remains that there has not been any observation which directly links a particle's energy to its observed rest masses (gravitational or inertial).
It's like: a quark weighs 1 something, and a proton is 3 quarks, so why does a proton weigh 1800 somethings? The mass can be measured and described quite adequately, but the cause of the mass is still a mystery to the most brilliant physicists in the world.
Demonstrate that your theory is correct, Ongie, and you will certainly win a Nobel Prize in Physics.

We think we're going around the sun, but we're not, we're falling into the distorted spacetime its presence causes.

Yes.

Our orbit is an illusion.

Wait, what?

Time is going much, much slower on the surface of the sun, compared to here on Earth. So does that make the sun younger than the Earth?

There is no absolute time-frame. It's all relative. Causality is not a given in relativistic situations. Events do not happen in the same order in all reference frames. It's mind boggling, for sure. In any reference frame you or I will ever be in, the sun is ~4 billion years old, and the Earth is ~3.5 billion years old.

How does this make sense? Obviously the sun is older than the Earth. So the sun must be travelling through less spacetime to balance this lost time. If time is x4 slower at the surface of the sun compared to the surface of Earth, we need to travel through x4 as much spacetime as the sun to remain in its proximity.

Be very careful when you go from "I don't know" to "It must be" in 1 step. There is so much ... hogwash ... (no offense, bro) ... in this part that I don't know where to begin, or even if you were joking or not.

That's why we orbit the sun, because spacetime is distorted. We're not going around it, we're falling towards it, while it falls away from us at an equal rate.

Yes. Wait. No.
All massive objects (stuff made of atoms, for example) exert a force on each other, which is attractive. The Earth and sun both fall towards each other. They are both falling exactly towards each other's horizon, no matter how long they fall, it's still the horizon. This is how the moon and all other satellites maintain an orbit... by falling to the horizon. This is how ALL orbits are maintained.

The rotating spiral of warped spacetime it leaves in its trail creates our orbit. We leave a rotating spiral of warped spacetime in our wake, which the Moon duly follows.

No, the gravity of the Earth is not intense enough to do something that dramatic. The precession of Mercury is an example, though. These ripples you mention are effects of "frame dragging" and tend to throw something like a planet out of an orbit, not hold it in.

I'm just talking stoned shit. But it all makes sense to me. The only thing I haven't figured out yet is why the expansion of the universe is accelerating. Seems too easy to point at dark matter, I think that's a cop out, like we'll just make up some shit to explain what's happening. I haven't got tea because this mystery force is stopping me from actually making myself one. We'll call in antitea.

Well, I'm just doing my part as a person with a physics degree to elucidate the dark corners of misconception with a little knowledge of human achievement.
"Dark Matter" is totally a different thing from "Dark Energy". They are both absolute cop-outs.

[OngBonga]

...the fact remains that there has not been any observation which directly links a particle's energy to its observed rest masses (gravitational or inertial).

Erm... you have a physics degree, and you're telling me that the energy of a particle is not related to its mass?

All massive objects (stuff made of atoms, for example) exert a force on each other, which is attractive.

And gravity is not a force.

Did you not listen to anything Einstein said?

The Earth and sun both fall towards each other.

They would if the Earth and sun were the only two objects in the universe.

The sun is falling away from Earth because the sun is falling towards the centre of the galaxy. But the centre of the galaxy is falling away from the sun, because that is falling towards an even more dominant gravity field etc.

So no, the sun isn't falling into our horizon, because there's much more dominant objects affecting the sun. We merely cause the sun to wobble on it axis very slightly.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Erm... you have a physics degree, and you're telling me that the energy of a particle is not related to its mass?

It's hard to be technical and brief at the same time. Add in that I have no idea what your background knowledge is and I'm stuck picking and re-picking my words over and over.
I'm saying that we can measure all kinds of things about particles and one of them is mass. Clearly, I acknowledge that mass and energy are capable of being transformed into each other.
What I'm saying is that the cause of mass is not understood. There are competing theories, the most widely accepted of which is the Higgs theory. None of the theories has been confirmed.

And gravity is not a force.
Did you not listen to anything Einstein said?

The conversation started with Newton's theory of gravitation, which describes the force exerted by 2 massive bodies on each other.
I have read Einstein's Relativity, but did not take a course specifically on the subject. In the book he talks about forces quite extensively.

They would if the Earth and sun were the only two objects in the universe.

I was not attempting to describe the entire universe, just a 2 body system.

The sun is falling away from Earth because the sun is falling towards the centre of the galaxy. But the centre of the galaxy is falling away from the sun, because that is falling towards an even more dominant gravity field etc.

It seems to me that saying the sun is falling away from the Earth is only accurate during the half of the year when the Earth is in a certain part of its orbit. Then the other half, the sun is falling toward the Earth, but the Earth is falling away... it's just a matter of reference frame. It confuses the fundamental notion that massive things fall toward each other.

So no, the sun isn't falling into our horizon, because there's much more dominant objects affecting the sun. We merely cause the sun to wobble on it axis very slightly.

Agreed. Over 98% of all the mass in the solar system is the sun. The wobble caused by Earth slight indeed.

[OngBonga]

What I'm saying is that the cause of mass is not understood.

No, what you're saying is you do not understand what the cause of mass is, and you're happy to just accept that.

I'm not.

Einstein told us what mass is... it's energy. The cause... geodesics in spacetime. You try and move energy off its geodesic, and it resists. That, my friend, is weight. Mass, it's merely the quantity of energy.

At least that's what I think. My background is internet, weed and talking shit with my mates. I'm not held back be textbooks telling me how to think.

I have read Einstein's Relativity, but did not take a course specifically on the subject. In the book he talks about forces quite extensively.

He insists gravity is not a force, rather, it's the the consequence of warped spacetime. The Moon travels in a straight line, not a curved line. It is space that's curved, not the Moon's path. Gravity is an illusion. When we see the Moon go around the Earth, what we're seeing is a straight line in warped spacetime, so the straight line in warped space creates a great circle (geodesic) around a central mass. It's like if you walk around the equator. You're going in a straight line, but on a curved surface, so you end up at the same point you started. So the Moon is going about its business as usual, it goes in a straight line perpendicular to the Earth. But it curves towards Earth, not because the Earth is pulling the Moon, but because the Earth is distorting spacetime. When you sit down on a chair, anything that was on it (let's say a box of ciggies) is drawn towards your arse because you distorted the seat. You didn't actually interfere with the sub atomic structure of the ciggies, or anything like that, there was no "action at a distance", no communication between arse and ciggies. The ciggies fell towards the arse because the seat became distorted. Not the arse, not the ciggies, the seat. Arse distoted the seat. But of course, the ciggies also distorted the seat. But did the arse fall towards the ciggies? Very, very slightly.Compared to the distortion the arse causes, the ciggies's distortion in negligible. Sure, the arse falls towards the ciggies very slowly, but the ciggies fall to the arse much quicker.

The sun's wobble that the Earth causes, in this time it takes the sun to rotate on it axis slightly (that's the wobble), the Earth has travelled o whole orbit around the sun. That's the difference in space and time. Earth has traveled much, much further than the sun in the same time, so that's why time is distorted on the sun relative to Earth. Because our space is distorted relative to the sun.

I like the term "Allah particle".

[MadMojoMonkey]

No, what you're saying is you do not understand what the cause of mass is, and you're happy to just accept that.

Seems like this statement was designed to hurt my feelings, Ongie. I never said that. I believe voluntary ignorance is the only great folly of humankind, and that all other follies are derivative of this. Rest assured that my ignorance is unintentional.

I clearly do not understand the cause of mass, but I am quite interested in understanding. It seems that CERN has given me something to think about, though. Today, the CERN press release that says there is evidence for the Higgs @ 99.999% certainty.

CERN celebrates as Higgs signal reaches significance | Ars Technica

[d0zer]

My background is internet, weed and talking shit with my mates. I'm not held back be textbooks telling me how to think.

[MadMojoMonkey]

[Einstein] insists gravity is not a force, rather, it's the the consequence of warped spacetime. The Moon travels in a straight line, not a curved line. It is space that's curved, not the Moon's path. Gravity is an illusion.

I pretty much agree with this whole post (although the ciggies part is a bit weird). I now understand what you mean in saying that gravity is an illusion.

Although, I prefer, "There is no such thing as gravity; it's just that everything sucks."

After a quick re-skim of Einstein's "Relativity":
Over and over in this book, Einstein seems to avoid the word force (I concede) and favors talking about accelerations.

What I don't get is if the Higgs Boson has the mass of an Iodine atom, how does it impart mass to less massive things like protons and electrons?

[OngBonga]

It seems to me that saying the sun is falling away from the Earth is only accurate during the half of the year when the Earth is in a certain part of its orbit.

No, I don't get this at all. We are always falling towards the sun. And yeah, the sun is always falling towards us, if you consider an axial wobble to be falling, which technically it is. It's a consistent motion.