Einstein's theory of general relativity passes one of its toughest tests yet

originally posted by: ZeroFurrbone
a reply to: penroc3

I do like that one. That we are in fact eternal beings. The entire universe is one eternal cycle. Everything we do we have done it before because once the universe ends it starts exactly the same because the ending and the beggining is the same.

And this is why there are some people who can see the future.... well, the past xD

What if Psychics are just remembering what happened last loop.

P.S. To put it in a perspective if you are given a choice and you make it yourself, if everything was exactly the same you will make the exact same choice and thus there is absolutely no free will no matter what you chose because in the same exact scenario with the same exact mindset and knowledge you will always , always do the same.

or maybe that's the trick, the illusion of free will

if it is true that we are exist in all time at once(more than likely in a way) than we might only get to pick the small things like names or if I'm going to get a coffee or not.

we are likely on a set of cosmic tracks that have to play out for certain things in the future to happen.

even if it starts with one electron out of place, the butterfly effect could mean that it that errant electron was sent across a Pershing ll IRBM(nuke) firing system in the first cold war to detonate in nato Germany.

we would be living in a very different world


or if the table legs didn't protect hitler when they tried to blow him up in operation Valkyrie



i think we all have a path and even may possible path but they all overtime condense to one outcome, the heat death of the universe and maybe the restart of everything again.


here is a super good independent movie that everyone interested in this top should treat them self too, its fr4ee.






bang on for this topic no explanation needed, its about extradimensional creatures outside of time observing us. they said for them time is but a single instant and all knowledge and experience is had by the others in a way we as 3ed/4th D creatures dont get.

like how a tesseract is the shadow of a 4D cube, we cant imagine it other than via math and degraded 'shadow projections' ala Sagan's 'Flat Land'



just like the flat landers we can not even concive what the 5 let alone higher spatial dimensions would even exist like, if it is compatible with human life.

originally posted by: neoholographic
I think it's interesting that Einstein's work keeps standing when tested because of the block universe. Here's the article:

You did it again! I searched the article you cited for the word "block" and it's not there! The article says nothing about the block universe, yet you try to imply it does. You make such false implications frequently, pretending articles you cite support certain ideas which they do not.

General relativity has withstood perhaps its toughest challenge to date.

Very intersting and if Relativity keeps passing these tests then Einstein was most likely right about the block universe. What's the block universe?

General relativity will likely need a little tweaking to refine predictions of things like black holes, but most physicists would agree that experimental results are very consistent with general relativity.

However, not all those physicists who say experiments are consistent with general relativity will agree with all the implications implied by the "block universe" interpretation, particularly regarding the future. So there's not as much debate over general relativity as there is debate over block universe:

A Debate Over the Physics of Time

Many physicists have made peace with the idea of a block universe, arguing that the task of the physicist is to describe how the universe appears from the point of view of individual observers...

Others vehemently disagree, arguing that the task of physics is to explain not just how time appears to pass, but why. For them, the universe is not static. The passage of time is physical. “I’m sick and tired of this block universe,” said Avshalom Elitzur, a physicist and philosopher formerly of Bar-Ilan University. “I don’t think that next Thursday has the same footing as this Thursday. The future does not exist. It does not! Ontologically, it’s not there.”

...about 60 physicists, along with a handful of philosophers and researchers from other branches of science, gathered at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Waterloo, Canada, to debate this question at the Time in Cosmology conference. The conference was co-organized by the physicist Lee Smolin, an outspoken critic of the block-universe idea (among other topics). His position is spelled out for a lay audience in Time Reborn

Some physicists who don't have problems with general relativity have problems with the block universe ideas about the future.

An objection voiced many times during the conference was that the block universe seems to imply, in some important way, that the future already exists, yet statements about, say, next Thursday’s weather are neither true nor false. For some, this seems like an insurmountable problem with the block-universe view.

There are already some ideas out there (some discussed in the above link) about how this "insurmountable problem with the block-universe view" might be resolved, but it might take some time to form a consensus on this; possibly years, decades, or even a century.

a reply to: Arbitrageur

First off, you're making the same Johnny come lately arguments you make in every thread then you're shown to be making an asinine argument then you vanish.

First, you said:

You did it again! I searched the article you cited for the word "block" and it's not there! The article says nothing about the block universe, yet you try to imply it does.

Where did I imply this? I said this:

I think it's interesting that Einstein's work keeps standing when tested because of the block universe.

And:

Very intersting and if Relativity keeps passing these tests then Einstein was most likely right about the block universe.

You're the only one on this thread that doesn't understand what qualifying statements are. Everyone until you have managed to debate this issue intelligently and without hyperbole.

I said IF Relativity keeps passing these tests then MOST LIKELY Einstein was right about the block universe. You're the only one that didn't grasp this simple and obvious truth. Everyone else commented in the thread and debated the issue. You're debating as though I said:

All Scientist agree with the block universe.

So you post these quotes about scientist who may not agree with the block universe but that has nothing to do with this thread. I never said all scientist agree.

There's nothing you posted that refutes anything I have said.

Very intersting and if Relativity keeps passing these tests then Einstein was most likely right about the block universe.

Everyone who has posted on this thread has debated the issue intelligently and without any silly strwmen arguments. I can post Scientist that support the block universe. Here's Physicist Brian Greene explaining the block universe.



So, there's no need for strawman arguments, just debate the thread with common sense like everyone who has posted so far except you.

Time seems to go more slowly when you are with relatives.

a reply to: wdkirk

Good point!