Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lagslayer]

I can now imagine objective and descan going up to a black hole and trying to look as pretty as possible to see it naked.

Then, when you look under it's event horizon...

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I REGRET NOTHING!

[wierd]

Kids...


Honestly though...  When I imagine black holes, and what they are like, I just imagine infinite space on the other side.  Nothing comes out, because the distance to traverse is infinite. Energy and mass falling in, just make more spacetime inside the horizon. 

It's a naive view, I am sure--  But that is honestly what I imagine with them.   Inside, space and time become infinite and infinitesimal quantities respectively.  To the person that survives falling inside, the universe ages to heat death (or the evaporation of the black hole, whichever happens first) of the universe faster than you can blink, because for them, time is basically standing still compared to the outside.  Black holes are very mysterious and fascinating things. 

[hops]

Minor nitpick here, but it's kind of obvious that the blackhole would evaporate first before the heat death of the universe, otherwise the black hole would still be outputting Hawking radiation and thus the universe would be "alive"

Or so that's how I understand it. A heat death would be when everything in the universe stand still, because there is no energy left to cause change.

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

Would that also mean that all mater would have to be spread out or destroyed?

[Reelya]

Time dilation seems to be asymptotic at the event horizon - that is, it is infinite according to relativity theory. This has some interesting implications, for example you see everything further away from the black hole speed up immensely, which includes everything else that is destined to hit the black hole. Take that to the logical extreme and it means everything that fell in before you or after you hits the event horizon at the same subjective moment that you do.

That's the problem with those models that say you fall through the event horizon without noticing anything in particular, they fail to account for all the other matter that's doing the same thing you are.

[Criptfeind]

That sounds like it would be really crowded.

[That Wolf]

I understand the heat death.
Is it perhaps possible for heat energy to convert into another type of energy.
Like a heat eating spacewhale?

Does time exsist? I understand it and can see a watches hand moving but is time an actual force?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sorry people.
I lived on a farm until I was 12 and then left highschool at 15.
Im not terribly book smart. I feel like I cant comunicate properly, like I cant translate my thinking into readable words. It can drive me crazy.

[Lagslayer]

I understand the heat death.
Is it perhaps possible for heat energy to convert into another type of energy.
Like a heat eating spacewhale?

Does time exsist? I understand it and can see a watches hand moving but is time an actual force?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Sorry people.
I lived on a farm until I was 12 and then left highschool at 15.
Im not terribly book smart. I feel like I cant comunicate properly, like I cant translate my thinking into readable words. It can drive me crazy.

I'm thinking no, and all the supposed time dilation would just be various forces combining to slow the movement of the particles. If suddenly gravity was 5X normal, how fast do you think you would be able to move? The concept of manipulating or traveling through time presents a physical paradox, no matter how I look at it. Well, unless you add something like new dimensions or some other magic BS with no solid evidence.


But that's just me. I'm not even sure if that's the prevailing theory among physicists, or if it's just the result of uneducated hype or having to simplify it for the less informed masses. Yay for not being able to trust anyone.

[hops]

It depends on whether or not you count spacetime as a tangible object.

The prevailing notion seems to be that time is a dimension, and particles are moving through time at (usually) consistent speed.

But then there's also fucky things like how gravity is apparently the distortion of time which create the illusion of attraction.

So no, gravity doesn't affect a particle directly, it affects time itself.

[Putnam]

Time most definitely exists.

[Reelya]

I'm thinking no, and all the supposed time dilation would just be various forces combining to slow the movement of the particles. If suddenly gravity was 5X normal, how fast do you think you would be able to move? The concept of manipulating or traveling through time presents a physical paradox, no matter how I look at it. Well, unless you add something like new dimensions or some other magic BS with no solid evidence.


But that's just me. I'm not even sure if that's the prevailing theory among physicists, or if it's just the result of uneducated hype or having to simplify it for the less informed masses. Yay for not being able to trust anyone.

High gravity distorts spacetime. This isn't just "forces combining to slow the movement of the particles". The equation that states this are the same equations which state that spacetime is distorted when you move at the speed of light. It's the same effect, same cause basically.

General Relativity states that time and space themselves are distorted by gravity, or super fast travel, it's not just slow particles. Plus, light is distorted by gravitational lensing too, which work by the same spacetime distortion as black holes. Light particles, by definition, and general relativity, never travel slower than the speed of light, no matter what your frame of reference, so they should be immune to "slow particles theory".

We kinda know this because of particle colliders too. Fleeting particles last longer when they're travelling really close to lightspeed, so the sub atomic processes themselves are actually slower because of time dilation too, it's not just motion.

Another proof is to think about redshift of light from someone near a black hole. If time was the same at the black hole as the observer, then you should see light from the black hole as delayed, but still the same color. Like if trucks were coming from 1000 miles away but 1 per hour, they'd still arrive at a rate 1 per hour to the destination, but with delayed arrival per truck because of the long trip. In fact, light emitted from objects near a black hole is heavily redshifted, showing that the rate of emission of light is slower there, it's not just taking longer to get to you. In fact, since it's light, it is by definition taking the same time to get to you regardless of the blackhole, and the redshift shows that it's being generated more slowly.

If the particles of your body actually got slower, this would in fact have consequences such as increasing the viscosity of your blood, which would kill you. This is not something scientists would have missed if the black hole equations suggested this. Sub-zero temperatures are actually caused by particles moving more slowly. There is very little similarity to time dilation here.

[Lagslayer]

Time most definitely exists.

This seems to refute the concept of time as being a tangible thing. All it does is describe cause and effect, states that everything happens because of the collective properties of everything in the universe, and that what appears to be on a larger scale may not necessarily be reflected on a smaller scale.

[Eagleon]

Time most definitely exists.

I don't really understand how any of that excludes the possibility that the way we understand time, cause, effect, and all of physics is due to anthropic bias. In fact, I think there's a good reason for it if time is pointing the opposite way of what we actually understand - if we have no memory of our deaths, if our lives are a process that reverses memory into birth, we'd have no idea that it could have come first because it's just as inaccessible as our future. Of course, I'm probably an idiot for even considering it =P

[Sergarr]

Time most definitely exists.

I don't really understand how any of that excludes the possibility that the way we understand time, cause, effect, and all of physics is due to anthropic bias. In fact, I think there's a good reason for it if time is pointing the opposite way of what we actually understand - if we have no memory of our deaths, if our lives are a process that reverses memory into birth, we'd have no idea that it could have come first because it's just as inaccessible as our future. Of course, I'm probably an idiot for even considering it =P

Second law of thermodynamics says hi.

[Putnam]

Yeah, physics looks different going forwards than backwards in time. Occam's razor is ludicrously important in science.