Favorite members of the psychedelics forum?

haha i was gonna move out to northstar for this winter but im gonna stay here so i can save up for a rtw adventure. thats gonna be quite some fun though. i know i have a trip out to colorado at some point cant wait!

 

Right, but that still isnt proven, it's just a theory. The same can be said about God. To a mytic is beautiful and simple, but technically is very complicated and subtle.
Trust me you dont need to submit visualizations and explanations of general relativity, I understand it enough to gather spacetime as a concept. But the fact remains that this is only a theory, we can not prove how gravity works.

 

Matter most certainly gains mass, mass it what composes matter, they are one in the same, however not the same thing. Two names for two different stages of energy. The entire point of the LHC is to prove that the Higgs boson exists, the elmentary particle which they hope will prove the theory as to how matter gains mass.
It's like a collective force, they explain it as a rock star stepping into a room and the fans flock to them, thus creating the illusion of creation.

And for your last question, Neither, Im talking about ancient Hinduism approach to the nature of reality becing composed of a sting (God) which runs through everything in Nature, think of a neckalce, we are the beads and God is the string. String theory is close to what I am getting at though.

 

I agree that science has only managed to describe mechanisms and not answer why. but.. why would there need to be a why? Just because we humans, who have 'whys' for almost everything we do or say or make or choose, feel the need to establish a 'why', doesnt mean that the universe outside of us has any 'why' behind it or at least any why that we could ever comprehend.

Seems to be no 'why', except in conscious/human actions

 

There is a reason and cause for everything, the Why doesnt have to be directly related to our reasoning in particular.

 

Math can help us explain a lot, but ultimately it's full of paradoxes and contradictions.

Nothing against math, but I believe that is because existence itself is a contradiction. As humans we can only reach so far.

 

But it is proven. Sir Arthur Eddington "conducted an eclipse expedition in 1919 that provided one of the earliest confirmations of relativity, and became known for his popular expositions and interpretations of the theory."

Raed about it, or Google Eddington. He went on an expedition to Africa in 1919 where he observed the light coming from a well-known positioned star behind the sun relative to us, bend around the sun, exactly like relativity predicted. This confirmation is the reason Einstein became world famous overnight and me and you are talking about him today.

 

Kil0 that is not proof, that only proved that light is deflected when bent by a gravitational field. Yes, that's proof that gravity exists and that light will bend around massive objects in space. That does not explain what gravity is other than being one of the fundamental 4 forces of Nature.
The fact is that we dont know what gravity actually is, and general relativity defining gravity as a result of the bending of the spacetime fabric is still just a theory. One I agree with, yes, but it is not proven to work as an absolute.
Honestly though what we are discussing is basic history, like what the Science channel talks about after midnight. This should be common knowledge to anyone who has the slightest passing interest to physics. Not that I am very learned in the subject to understand it completley, but I this is all pretty basic

 

gravity IS the natural geometry of spacetime within the universe. Light bends around massive objects because of the gravitational field, which acts as a force but is more of a pseudoforce because it is nothing more than the geometry of space when massive objects are present. No massive object, no geometric gravitational field, space is Euclidean.

It is not an absolute because we do not yet have the complete theory. Until we have a theory of quantum gravity, we will not be able to fully understand black holes, singularities, maybe even dark matter etc..

 

kil0, the only fact we can speak as to what Gravity is, is that its the force which attracts bodies of mass beyond the atomic plane. Saying that it is the natural geometry of spacetime is quite vague as geomtry is concerned with form and we only know of gravity by the effect it has on mass, though I for the most part agree with you, is still a theory that has yet to be proven. That's all Im saying.

 

WRD
ill def hit you up one day buddy

 

It is a naturally predetermined geometry of the spacetime fabric itself. Speaking abstractly, even world must have a geometry. I think you're asking "what is gravity?" more philosophically, otherwise this discussion would have ended. I dont think I read this online so I cant get you a link, and Im trying to remember what book or documentary it was where they emphasize this fact, that gravity is more like the natural geometry of spacetime than the Newtonian picture where it is a mystical force instantly grabbing two bodies over any distance, they can be in opposite sides of the universe.

That was the definition for nearly two and a half centuries, but i 1915, the view of gravity was changed. It's not a surprise that the former stuck, but I always thought general relativity was very self-explanatory if that's the word, it is very obvious to a certain extent. Einstein's thoughts were very graphical so they needed little explanation, his ideas were like pictures with descriptions. I personally always found it very apparent that Einstein was correct, if atleast in theory. The space around us has to have shape in which matter flows, and this is seen as gravity in the macroscopic world. Besides the fact that the equations are so accurate that all scientists needed to put a man on the moon was , the scientist in order to understand the phenomenon has to look into and through the equation and use their mind to try to visualize the relation, how it works, all the little details which give you the satisfaction of understanding. Like if gravity is a car, you see it move (in action), but to understand how it works, you need to know the engine and the piston rocking, all the gears rotating, and you see logically why it works. Ideally, I do the same with gravity, and having the benefit of having most of the details worked out before I was even born gave me a significant advantage.

The reason for this, and gravity's piston and gears are nothing but curves, the natural curvature of space due to mass being present, makes it almost obvious of why gravity is such a different force. The best way to describe it like a pseudoforce. It is so different from the other forces, that that is the mission for our generation and hopefully not the next, to understand why gravity is so different and what part it plays compared to the other forces. Gravity is such a weak force, that even the entire Earth's mass attracting me toward it, I can jump in other words repel its effects with minimal effort. Compare that to the strengths of the other 3 forces and it's evident that it's a naturally different force, their strengths are indicators.

So to me, once I learned general relativity, all the pieces fell in place and gravity's mystery was unraveled. Atleast over large distances, gravity was understood completely, and now we had to understand why it played such a negligable part in the microscopic world. The Standard Model easily unified the other 3 forces by rewinding the clock of time to the early universe, and it was shown that the 3 forces were actually 1 at one time. But where did gravity fit in this picture? That was the problem, it being so radically different, it split the knowledge we've obtained in half, literally. Science had given us two different views of the universe, and they were very different. To understand the macro world, we used general relativity. To understand the micro world, we used quantum mechanics. But to see the whole picture, we needed the unified field theory, to unify all the forces, but not even Einstein could do this because of what I just said. That's where quantum gravity comes in. When we have a theory of quantum gravity that tells us what part gravity plays in the quantum/microscopic world, the unified field theory will practically fall out of it like a gift. But trying to unify these forces is the grand finale, the million dollar pot, the Holy Grail of physics.

 

No, Im asking what is gravity in physical expression, Im not interested in philosophy.
Take this, from Wikipedia (forgive me :tongue regarding gravtions :
"they would not be bound to branes and could move freely between them. If we live on a brane (as hypothesized by some theorists) this "leakage" of gravitons from the brane into higher-dimensional space could explain why gravity is such a weak force, and gravitons from other branes adjacent to our own could provide a potential explanation for dark matter"
Gravitons are only hypotehtically observed, accounted for only by the intereaction between electromagnetism and the cause (photons), the strong force and the cause (gluons) and weak force and the cause (bosons).
Well they are thinking that it is the Gravitons which are responsible for the bending of spacetime by being the carrier for gravity, but again, this has yet to be proven (though personally, I of course accept the theory).
So no, we do not have an understanding of what Gravity is, because in order for certain behaviour patterns to be accounted for, they had to come up with yet another theory, this was Superstring theory, that which Hinduism has spoken of for thousands of years. This is why I brought up cosmic reeds in my initial post on the topic.
But dont forget, very soon this unified field theory will be put to the test, and if it's right, bravo, but if it's wrong, that means next to everything you and I are talking about, is wrong as well. So I wouldnt hold my breath hoping that it will just pop out naturally. I have faith yet that God has much more tricks up Her sleeve

 

Okay, yes. Gravitons are theorized to be massless, letting them float from membrane to membrane effortlessly.

Yes, this is what I said in my long ass post, right at the end. We fully understand gravity at the macroscopic level, but out theory of gravity is incomplete because we dont know how gravity works at the quantum level. Once we have a the theory of quantum gravity, we could formulate UFT rather easily.

Yes, Superstring theory is saying similar concepts to what Hinduism has been saying for thousands of years, it is an amazing fact. To me, it's rather apparent that the universe is nothing but vibrating energy, string theory elaborates on that and makes strings responsible for different particles through different frequencies of vibration.

I certainly hope so, wouldnt the universe get boring once we master it? Although you still have mathematics, and trying to find theorems from "The Book."

 

:cheers2:

 

yeyah i love talking about this type of shit :cheers2:

 

since my joining of this site i can not think of any one that has been more help to me or showed me as much as pedaltopedal has

 

me too, he's cool.

 

black eyes and spun whiskey all around

 

Irish bars also happen to be the most amazing bars in the world