The Briefing Room
General Category => Science, Technology and Knowledge => Topic started by: mrclose on July 04, 2013, 04:55:26 am
-
If I were to set a grenade on a table, in the middle of an empty room and somehow, safely set it off .. the shards would blow outward.
Correct?
Maybe some but definitely not all of those shards would be launched in a spinning mode.
(likely none due to forward momentum)
We now come to the Big Bang.
Scientist, (a little smarter than I) have speculated that All matter, all of our stars, planets and moons were created in the Big Bang explosion that is similar to my grenade example.
Question: How is that everything in our known universe is in an orbital, spinning path?
My grenade couldn't do it, How could a so called Big Bang make it happen? :shrug:
Yes, I know about the 'dust' coming together to form stars and planets but dust would just be smaller shards! :chairbang:
(Any of you need a pen and paper for figuring?) :whistle:
-
Nope. The guy with the pencil and paper worked it out a century ago.
One of the odd effects of the General theory of relativity is a thing called frame dragging. Any rotating mass, no matter how small, pulls space/time along with it, creating (for want of a better phrase) regions of high and low pressure in the fabric of space. Get caught in the bow wave and you get pushed out of the way - possibly carrying on your merry way or possibly picking up some of the spin and slightly reducing the spin of the original mass. Get caught in the drag and you get pulled in and start spinning yourself. The bigger the mass, the greater the effect.
-
One doesn't even have to dig too far into Mr. Einstein's little opus to wonder whether the analogy is even valid in the first place - perhaps the hand grenade doesn't manage to achieve what the Big Bang achieved precisely because it's a hand grenade and not an entire universe.
-
Nope. The guy with the pencil and paper worked it out a century ago.
One of the odd effects of the General theory of relativity is a thing called frame dragging.
Actually, the theory of GR was designed to accommodate that which is observed.
Namely, that the earth is in motion despite the absence of evidence therefore...
-
Actually, the theory of GR was designed to accommodate that which is observed.
Namely, that the earth is in motion despite the absence of evidence therefore...
Not sure that makes sense: based on observations, GR was devised to explain the motion of the Earth, despite lack of any evidence the Earth moved? So what observations were being used, and if the theory was invented to create motion where none was observed, that begs an explanation for why such creation was felt necessary.
-
Not sure that makes sense: based on observations, GR was devised to explain the motion of the Earth, despite lack of any evidence the Earth moved?
That's right.
So what observations were being used, and if the theory was invented to create motion where none was observed, that begs an explanation for why such creation was felt necessary.
There are no observations that demonstrate the assumed motion of the earth.
-
There are no observations that demonstrate the assumed motion of the earth.
Huh? The Earth doesn't move?
-
One doesn't even have to dig too far into Mr. Einstein's little opus to wonder whether the analogy is even valid in the first place - perhaps the hand grenade doesn't manage to achieve what the Big Bang achieved precisely because it's a hand grenade and not an entire universe.
What if there is life so infinitesimally small that the atoms, protons, electrons etc. etc. of the grenade are actually their universe?
(Their planets, suns etc. etc)
And what if our universe is actually made up of atoms, electrons etc. etc. of an even larger grenade hummm? :beer: