Physicists discover new way to visualize warped space and time

For those interested in 'warped space-time'...

"Physicists discover new way to visualize warped space and time"
www.physorg.com...

"We've found ways to visualize warped space-time like never before," says Kip Thorne, Feynman Professor of Theoretical Physics, Emeritus, at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech).

On one side of the black hole, the gravitational waves from the spiraling vortexes add together with the waves from the spiraling tendexes. On the other side, the vortex and tendex waves cancel each other out. The result is a burst of waves in one direction, causing the merged hole to recoil.

Strange how our genius's are able to figure out how to propel a black hole across the cosmos... but (supposedly) can't figure out how to levitate/propel a measly 100-ton flying saucer from a planet surface, and through space vacuum - without rockets.

And does that doughnut-shaped gravity vortex field look familiar... maybe like the field from a toroid-shaped plasma accelerator?

And if you take that spiral gravity field (shown in the article), center it in the doughnut gravity field, and stretch it's height and expanding diameter into a cone... I think you end up with something like that which the AlienScientist was describing for the TR-3B's anti-gravity engine. But, it might need an opposing spiral-cone field below the doughnut field.

Like this (from AlienScientist site):
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/281fea10de6d.gif[/atsimg]

Very nice!

What's even nicer...
Is that I "saw" or "visualized" the same thing about 5 years ago...
*snip*

These cats need to get out of the lab and into a forest a bit more! lol

and I agree,
They can "figure this out" but can't get a craft off the ground without explosives.

Cool post, thanks.

reply to post by Larryman


Very interesting, and even more than that weird.
I am very very very suspicious of something here, since I have seen this before and I don't know how. I think I may be insane, "officially" now.

Dare I make a thread about my experience and risk denial and ridicule? Hmmmm... no, I guess not so I'm contented I suppose to enjoy this nugget you have shown here.
thanks

reply to post by Ahmose


if all the cats went to the forest, there wouldn't be mushroom left!
buckyball and the minds eye. it seems the universe is not shy at providing information.
so who's gonna find the fifth dimension?
i would say as on topic as the previous.

to the op nice find. if the lhc are intent on growing a singularity, i do hope they have direction sensors nearby which would either complement the theory or deepen it even more.

f

reply to post by Larryman


Funny how information comes out in dribs and drabs. Kip Thorne, Michio Kaku and Eric Cornell knew this model back in 1992 through 1994. There were a series of experiments using adiabatic reactors, equipment developed under the NRC programs that can perform fusion at very close to absolute zero. Some of the information was published on KeelyNet, some was related in communication directly with Michio Kaku and Kip Thorne. Eric Cornell went on to build an adiabatic reactor in 1994/95 based on the model explained on KeelyNet and the net result was proof of BEC's. An adiabatic reactor uses a spinning/dynamic magnetic field which is shaped like a torus and produces a dynamic coupled magnetic I/O vortex at it's center. This information is 18 to 19 years old, it's funny that it's being promoted know as new. No offense intended towards the OP, unfortunately we aren't told all the history unless we are directly involved.

Cheers - Dave

reply to post by Larryman

I'm sorry but stories like this sort of bug me. I would like to add an opinion from a different perspective if I may.
Please don't get me wrong here, I like theoretical physics. I just think there should be a well defined line between theory and fact, what is imagined and what is observed. This article skews these lines far too much in my opinion.

The premiss in this article is pure speculation and good imagination. Don't forget that black holes are still theoretical. We have observed and recorded phenomena that appear to act like black holes in the center of our galaxy but one question remains. If nothing travels faster than light and nothing can escape the event horizon of a black hole, not even light, then where do these hypothetical gravity waves come from?

This question seems to contradict our understanding of gravity or the behavior of black holes, maybe even both. I think we need to resolve these problems first. All of this so called research is done by a computer with designed software. None of this was actually observed in real space nor is any of it real outside of this particular computer program.

From your link. www.physorg.com...

By combining theory with computer simulations,...

...they have discovered that black-hole collisions can produce vortex lines that form a doughnut-shaped pattern

This is awful presumptuous don't you think? What they should say is that this computer simulation has shown that black hole collisions, if they do actually happen, might produce vortex lines. I do like the doughnut-shaped pattern but I have to ask if this is just another part of the designed program or can this actually happen.

Do gravity waves exist?
So far as we can tell...No.
All efforts to detect gravity waves has turned up null, and we have looked. Laser interferometers have been around for well over 100 years and hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on "ambitious" projects like LIGO and LISA. We either do not know what they are...are looking in the wrong place, time or way...or they do not exist.

We know that gravity exists but does this force make waves? Do black holes exist and if so how does gravity escape to effect other celestial objects? What is the nature of gravity?

I think the fact that we remain ignorant to the answers of these questions goes along way in explaining why we do not have anti-gravity propulsion yet.

I often think we get too caught up looking at the universe from our own perspective.

Time and time again - experiments looking to unravel the mysteries of quantum mechanics tend to point toward a universe based around information as opposed to one based around perspective. A single photon will refract through a faceted object as though it has knowledge of the entire object, for example.

Ultimately - I think we need to stop trying to think of things in terms of 3d, or even 2d solid bodies - and instead look at the universe as though it is simply the flow and exchange of information.

Of course, I don't think one can use gravity for much in terms of propulsion. Gravity appears to be merely entropic in nature and in origin. Using it to try and propel one's self from one place to another would be like trying to use darkness to heat up the room.

Gravity, while the first discovered "fundamental force" - is certainly the most mysterious and maddening of all.

reply to post by Aim64C


your idea regarding an information based universe resonates quite well. regarding gravity, i spoke to my great uncle the sage at the weekend and he leans towards the particle with a speed in excess of at least 15 times the speed of light.
regards fakedirt

Originally posted by Devino

The premiss in this article is pure speculation and good imagination. Don't forget that black holes are still theoretical. We have observed and recorded phenomena that appear to act like black holes in the center of our galaxy but one question remains. If nothing travels faster than light and nothing can escape the event horizon of a black hole, not even light, then where do these hypothetical gravity waves come from?

The gravitational waves are fluctuations in the underlying background spacetime, not something operating inside of it.

This question seems to contradict our understanding of gravity or the behavior of black holes, maybe even both. I think we need to resolve these problems first. All of this so called research is done by a computer with designed software. None of this was actually observed in real space nor is any of it real outside of this particular computer program.

The computer programs reflect the predictions of General Relativity, which, other than direct observation of gravitational waves, has been validated in essentially all of its radical predictions.

Do gravity waves exist?
So far as we can tell...No.
All efforts to detect gravity waves has turned up null, and we have looked. Laser interferometers have been around for well over 100 years and hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent on "ambitious" projects like LIGO and LISA. We either do not know what they are...are looking in the wrong place, time or way...or they do not exist.

We know that gravity exists but does this force make waves? Do black holes exist and if so how does gravity escape to effect other celestial objects? What is the nature of gravity?

I think the fact that we remain ignorant to the answers of these questions goes along way in explaining why we do not have anti-gravity propulsion yet.

Orthodox theory predicts that gravitational waves (the term "gravity waves" actually means something else in science, a well known phenomenon of fluids in a gravitational field) are exceptionally difficult to create requiring motion of enormous masses. They are hence impossible to create experimentally in any reasonable size, and they would be extremely weak to observe on Earth. So it is possible that they have not been observed because we're not sure how big the background should be or what it looks like and/or the experiments aren't good enough.

The decay of pulsar rotation rates has been predicted from gravitational radiation, and the observed data match very closely to the observed data. These observations & analysis won the Nobel Prize in Physics.

reply to post by mbkennel

The gravitational waves are fluctuations in the underlying background spacetime, not something operating inside of it.

So where do you suppose this gravitational force comes from then if not the center of mass?

Orthodox theory predicts that gravitational waves are exceptionally difficult to create requiring motion of enormous masses

Yes, gravitational force is proportionate to the mass. It takes a great amount of mass, like from black holes, to create these waves (theoretically). So the question still remains, "how does this force escape the event horizon of a black hole"? I hope you're not suggesting that the theorized effect is also the cause.

Somehow there is communication between a black hole and surrounding mass (i.e. other black holes, stars, planets, light, etc...) by way of gravity. I fail to see how this is not a contradiction to our current accepted theory on black holes and the force of gravity.

The computer programs reflect the predictions of General Relativity, which, other than direct observation of gravitational waves, has been validated in essentially all of its radical predictions.

I disagree with any validation of relativity in this case as I see yet another problem with the theories here. The closer one gets to the center of a black hole the more time dilates. It is a product of gravitational force and with a singularity time would appear to almost stop from our perspective (outside the event horizon). As this happens we should see a spot in space that is nearly frozen. This can't be correct, however, because the theory has these black holes orbiting each other, this is an unsolved relativistic problem. When two objects orbit each other they communicate by way of gravity. So how does this happen and what happened to the time dilation? I really hope we don't need to invoke other dimensions to try and explain this.

(the term "gravity waves" actually means something else in science, a well known phenomenon of fluids in a gravitational field)

Thank you for this correction.

I would like to add that although there are alternative theories that might better explain these events I am not suggesting any here. My point was to simply show that there are serious problems with our currently accepted theories of these events.