the theory of relativity?

[rahul]

i have searched a lot on net about the general theorey of relativity on net..........................i am able to find a lot about it..,but the content on the web is either too complicated or too simple.........................

so can any 1 give me a clear idea of the theorey which changed the present man's view about everything.......by addind up time as the third dimension.........................

[rahul]

http://gunnm.org/~soda/images/einstein.jpg


http://www.cuk.ch/Renan/images/E=mc2-1.jpg

??

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2005, 03:45 AM
so can any 1 give me a clear idea of the theorey which changed the present man's view about everything.......by addind up time as the third dimension.........................
I am sure someone here can but I am not familiar enough with it to explian.

I will point out though that time is the forth dimention.

[rahul]

ok

let that some1 see this thread

:)

[FriedFrog]

E=mc2 is a version of Einstein's famous Relativity equation. Specifically, it means that Energy is equal to Mass times the speed of light squared. In essence, it states that there is an equivalence between mass and energy. This simple statement has many profound implications... such as no object with mass can ever go faster than the speed of light!

So:

Energy = Mass x lightspeed²

Source taken from:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astr...s/970326a4.html (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970326a4.html)

You might have already read/seen this, but I think it is a good middle ground explanation.

[h&s]

I will point out though that time is the forth dimention.
Haven't scientists recently rejected that?

[ComradeChris]

Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2005, 06:23 PM
Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.
Unless you are trying to understand the physics of a black hole and from there form theories about interactions with other astrological bodies; it helps.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by NoMan,[email protected] 7 2005, 03:40 PM

E=mc2 is a version of Einstein's famous Relativity equation. Specifically, it means that Energy is equal to Mass times the speed of light squared. In essence, it states that there is an equivalence between mass and energy. This simple statement has many profound implications... such as no object with mass can ever go faster than the speed of light!

So:

Energy = Mass x lightspeed²

Source taken from:

http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astr...s/970326a4.html (http://imagine.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/ask_astro/answers/970326a4.html)

You might have already read/seen this, but I think it is a good middle ground explanation.
This is an example of Special Relativity.

General Relativity shows that matter causes space to curve; in addition it also theorises that this curvature in space will distort the flow of time.




Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.

Special Relativity is hardly "useless". I suggest you actually research it.

[FriedFrog]

[QUOTE]General Relativity shows that matter causes space to curve; in addition it also theorises that this curvature in space will distort the flow of time.[QUOTE]

Is there an equation that shows this? Like the whole E=mc2 thing?

Any chance you could go into a bit more detail about this 'General Relativty'? Im quite interested in this topic...

Nothing too heavy, though.

Thanks

[Discarded Wobbly Pop]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2005, 03:45 AM
i have searched a lot on net about the general theorey of relativity on net..........................i am able to find a lot about it..,but the content on the web is either too complicated or too simple.........................

so can any 1 give me a clear idea of the theorey which changed the present man's view about everything.......by addind up time as the third dimension.........................
From one ignoramus to another, the best I can tell you is that it created a way or a base for us to be able to predict phnomena in space. :unsure:

[rahul]

thats good

the theorey is a bit confusing................

do you know that ..........according to this theorey .,if we travel with a velocity(speed),greater than that of light i.e, >300000000 m\s , then the time keeps reunning back,..................that is it takes us to previous days,..........which is not true!

[Elect Marx]

Originally posted by [email protected] 8 2005, 03:11 AM
do you know that ..........according to this theorey .,if we travel with a velocity(speed),greater than that of light i.e, >300000000 m\s , then the time keeps reunning back,..................that is it takes us to previous days,..........which is not true!
I have never heard anything like that in relation to the theory. What is your source?

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 7 2005, 06:09 PM

Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.

Special Relativity is hardly "useless". I suggest you actually research it.
I'm sorry, there are two branches of the theory of reletivity is there not? I thought it was obvious (except to you; because you relish in insulting me) that I was referring to the speed vs. time model. :rolleyes: Honestly, you're correct, the one YOU claim I was discussing, I have practically no knowledge on. How'd you figure that; because of all the times I've spoken about it?

[rahul]

you can even calculate it by subsituting velocity of particle as twice the velocity of light .....i forgot in which equation bbut i will soon post itt......

you can even try it in e=mc2

[Vinny Rafarino]

Is there an equation that shows this? Like the whole E=mc2 thing?

Any chance you could go into a bit more detail about this 'General Relativty'? Im quite interested in this topic...



I suggest typing General Relativity into google.





Honestly, you're correct, the one YOU claim I was discussing, I have practically no knowledge on

I did not "claim" anything. You made an asinine remark about the "speed of light"; a topic that is covered by Special Relativity.

And yes, you know absolutely nothing about it. What a real shocker there.

[rahul]

the equation which we will need to subsitute values is................

e=hn (e=energy; h=planks constant; n=frequency)______ (1)

e=mc2___________(2)

from (1) & (2)

hn=mc2

here you can take velocity as © >300000000 m\s (n=1\t)

then ithink you can find out "t"

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by Comrade [email protected] 9 2005, 08:47 PM

Honestly, you're correct, the one YOU claim I was discussing, I have practically no knowledge on

I did not "claim" anything. You made an asinine remark about the "speed of light"; a topic that is covered by Special Relativity.

And yes, you know absolutely nothing about it. What a real shocker there.
I'm sorry, but YOU made the assumption that I was making reference to something I was not. Case closed!

Ha! What do you know I made partial reference to General Reletivity here:
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=31998. :lol: I don't know exactly what it is but I made reference with it somehow. So I don't know nothing about it. I love proving you wrong.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by ComradeChris+Jan 10 2005, 03:15 PM--> (ComradeChris @ Jan 10 2005, 03:15 PM)
Comrade [email protected] 9 2005, 08:47 PM

Honestly, you're correct, the one YOU claim I was discussing, I have practically no knowledge on

I did not "claim" anything. You made an asinine remark about the "speed of light"; a topic that is covered by Special Relativity.

And yes, you know absolutely nothing about it. What a real shocker there.
I'm sorry, but YOU made the assumption that I was making reference to something I was not. Case closed!

Ha! What do you know I made partial reference to General Reletivity here:
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=31998. :lol: I don't know exactly what it is but I made reference with it somehow. So I don't know nothing about it. I love proving you wrong. [/b]
Good grief you're daft.

If you scroll up a few posts you will see that I posted on this comment from you:


Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.

This has absolutely nothing to do with General Relativity; it is an absurd comment regarding Special Relativity.

Now listen kid, unless you are completely incapable of rational thought you will stop digging your hole any further.

[Invader Zim]

"When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it seems like two hours that's relativity."

Albert Einstein.

I know nothing about relativity, absolutly jack shit.

[ComradeChris]

Originally posted by Comrade RAF+Jan 10 2005, 12:47 PM--> (Comrade RAF @ Jan 10 2005, 12:47 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 03:15 PM

Comrade [email protected] 9 2005, 08:47 PM

Honestly, you're correct, the one YOU claim I was discussing, I have practically no knowledge on

I did not "claim" anything. You made an asinine remark about the "speed of light"; a topic that is covered by Special Relativity.

And yes, you know absolutely nothing about it. What a real shocker there.
I'm sorry, but YOU made the assumption that I was making reference to something I was not. Case closed!

Ha! What do you know I made partial reference to General Reletivity here:
http://www.revolutionaryleft.com/index.php?showtopic=31998. :lol: I don't know exactly what it is but I made reference with it somehow. So I don't know nothing about it. I love proving you wrong.
Good grief you're daft.

If you scroll up a few posts you will see that I posted on this comment from you:


Honestly, I say until you can go light speed, the theory of reletivity is useless. We travel at very minute speeds; so minute it's insufficient to prove that the speed you travel has anything to do with the time you experience.

This has absolutely nothing to do with General Relativity; it is an absurd comment regarding Special Relativity.

Now listen kid, unless you are completely incapable of rational thought you will stop digging your hole any further. [/b]
There are two branches of the Theory of Relativity. I got confused as to which is which. Each encompass so much. You said I knew nothing about it. Obviously I indirectly know something about it, I'm making reference to it. Lighten up! I always try to think rationally. I'm sorry that I confused the terms, your majesty :rolleyes: .