30 Nov 2015, 2:59 pm
30 Nov 2015, 3:54 pm
kraftiekortie wrote:
Fortunately, Einstein, Newton, and Darwin weren't hamstrung by a perception of their own limitations.
I am somewhat hamstrung--that's why I got myself stuck in my rut (though when I retire, I'm going to travel the world!) I haven't done great things. I'm a life-long civil service clerk. I've been staying at home listening to old Yankee games recently.
Einstein was pretty Aspergian/autistic as a child, it seems. He seems to have grown up to be just a plain ole eccentric (albeit with some difficulty with the ladies).
I am somewhat hamstrung--that's why I got myself stuck in my rut (though when I retire, I'm going to travel the world!) I haven't done great things. I'm a life-long civil service clerk. I've been staying at home listening to old Yankee games recently.
Einstein was pretty Aspergian/autistic as a child, it seems. He seems to have grown up to be just a plain ole eccentric (albeit with some difficulty with the ladies).
In spite of my faith, I try to not preach it too much, because fanatics scare people and God tells us in the bible to lead by example not by shoving it down other people's throats (to paraphrase -- I'm not good at exact quotes)...but since we are talking about life and doing "great things," I guess I am starting to feel like I am doing great things more and more as I age. But not by other people's standards I'm sure. There is great difficulty with explaining one's faith and WHY some people will believe in God until the day they die...as God intended by telling us not to cast our pearls to swine. Yes, I have hurdles....great big fat ones, but that makes the accomplishments more powerful. I'm reminded of the recent Facebook meme going around that says something to the effect of: Some people are poor, all they have is money. Most people gauge accomplishments by the size of their homes these days, and they can't see that many of their good-time friends would desert them if they fell victim to bankruptcy. That is not success or wealth. But what I do have is 5 beautiful children that through the grace of God, I have helped to become beautiful, intelligent, kind people, and the world needs more of that. I've helped friends and some extended family feel more loved and gain hope. Even as I type, one of my friends that I have helped seems to have her ears burning, and is calling, lol. And that is how we can change our community and make it stronger. So, please don't discount your "immediate" potential. I think you have great ability. I frequently get thoughts and ideas that I don't even attribute as my own, but rather, as my spirit being moved by God. God tells us that if we ask Him for guidance, he will give us the answers. Perhaps not all the answers to the universe, but He gives us the answers we need at the time. As for Einstein becoming eccentric, yes, lol, but he also believed in God, and that is just how God works. Again, helping us to overcome those hurdles
30 Nov 2015, 7:23 pm
Tollorin
Veteran
Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada
30 Nov 2015, 9:37 pm
30 Nov 2015, 9:44 pm
the26thangel wrote:
I have a lil bit o company coming over, so I may be offline for a bit, but let me add just one more thing for now...there can be beauty in things u rarely imagine, but if u dream it, it can come true. I hope that this thread can overcome the obstacles of defensiveness, inadequacy, or low self-esteem, and help build our lil Aspergic community toward understanding and success. If you dream it, it can come true. Be positive not negative, and watch your talents flourish!
Thumbs up.
30 Nov 2015, 10:10 pm
08 Dec 2015, 11:26 pm
Sorry I dropped off the face of the wrong planet (hehe) for a bit.....but this terrorism thing seems to be on the front burner right now. Doing more news watching and considering everything everyone is saying about bigotry vs. muslim control, gun control issues, sleeper cells, etc. But I hope to check back in soon. I really liked the few people I chatted with. Stay safe and God Bless. I look forward to reading the posts I missed
14 Dec 2015, 6:04 am
naturalplastic wrote:
But gravity DOES bend light. And it does not just "scatter" light. And does indeed bend light "toward the ground"( ie towards the center of gravity of the massive body putting out the gravity- just like you fall "to the ground" on Earth.
Lets say that the Moon were a zillion times more massive than it is. As it moved through the night sky you would see the distant stars seemed to act funny as the moon passed by. The stars just above and below the moon would sorta leap away from the moon and back as the moon passed. Thats because the light from the distant stars would be bent as the light passed over the moon. And the rays would appear to hit your eye at a steeper angle - creating the illusion that the same star was suddenly more distant from the moon in the sky ( like little fire flies darting away from lunar disk then returning). Gravitational lensing.
We have a more massive object than the Moon to test Einstein's crazy theory about gravitational lensing- and that object is the Sun. Trouble is when you can see the Sun (ie in the day time) you cant see other stars. But around 1920 there was a solar eclipse than enabled scientists to test Einstein by observing stars close to the sun in the sky in the day time. And their measurements on the stars (which acted like the stars did in my above lunar parable -except microscopically) proved Einstein right.
When you squash enough matter into one point so you get more mass in a smaller space than either the moon, the earth, the sun, or even a neutron star, you get a black hole: an object with such extreme gravity that light itself more than bends- it gets crushed like every thing else into the black hole.
Lets say that the Moon were a zillion times more massive than it is. As it moved through the night sky you would see the distant stars seemed to act funny as the moon passed by. The stars just above and below the moon would sorta leap away from the moon and back as the moon passed. Thats because the light from the distant stars would be bent as the light passed over the moon. And the rays would appear to hit your eye at a steeper angle - creating the illusion that the same star was suddenly more distant from the moon in the sky ( like little fire flies darting away from lunar disk then returning). Gravitational lensing.
We have a more massive object than the Moon to test Einstein's crazy theory about gravitational lensing- and that object is the Sun. Trouble is when you can see the Sun (ie in the day time) you cant see other stars. But around 1920 there was a solar eclipse than enabled scientists to test Einstein by observing stars close to the sun in the sky in the day time. And their measurements on the stars (which acted like the stars did in my above lunar parable -except microscopically) proved Einstein right.
When you squash enough matter into one point so you get more mass in a smaller space than either the moon, the earth, the sun, or even a neutron star, you get a black hole: an object with such extreme gravity that light itself more than bends- it gets crushed like every thing else into the black hole.
I'm sorry. We will have to agree to disagree. You see, the problems in history that were rejected by some people were rejected even years after they were proven. Not all rejections of current situations were proven correct, but in this case, I am reminded of Sheldon on Big Bang when he had the huge electron conundrum. He finally realized that it was because he was viewing electrons as having mass instead of focusing on their existence as a wave (i.e. energy), that was holding him up. Wave particles simply do not act the same way other things do. As for the proof u speak of, if u can produce a link, I will be happy to read your source and see if it convinces me. As to date, I have not seen such proof. I've only "heard" these hypotheses in college or read the "relating" of said info. Seeing is believing I suppose. As for now, nada padre.
Not being rude but simply the fact as I see it, I could shoot holes in your zillion times magnified moon example, but I find it moot and leading to a concentrated effort to battle over an example. And revert back to....to date, I have seen not one single example of light bending to gravity, that can't be disproven easily
14 Dec 2015, 1:50 pm
the26thangel wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
But gravity DOES bend light. And it does not just "scatter" light. And does indeed bend light "toward the ground"( ie towards the center of gravity of the massive body putting out the gravity- just like you fall "to the ground" on Earth.
Lets say that the Moon were a zillion times more massive than it is. As it moved through the night sky you would see the distant stars seemed to act funny as the moon passed by. The stars just above and below the moon would sorta leap away from the moon and back as the moon passed. Thats because the light from the distant stars would be bent as the light passed over the moon. And the rays would appear to hit your eye at a steeper angle - creating the illusion that the same star was suddenly more distant from the moon in the sky ( like little fire flies darting away from lunar disk then returning). Gravitational lensing.
We have a more massive object than the Moon to test Einstein's crazy theory about gravitational lensing- and that object is the Sun. Trouble is when you can see the Sun (ie in the day time) you cant see other stars. But around 1920 there was a solar eclipse than enabled scientists to test Einstein by observing stars close to the sun in the sky in the day time. And their measurements on the stars (which acted like the stars did in my above lunar parable -except microscopically) proved Einstein right.
When you squash enough matter into one point so you get more mass in a smaller space than either the moon, the earth, the sun, or even a neutron star, you get a black hole: an object with such extreme gravity that light itself more than bends- it gets crushed like every thing else into the black hole.
Lets say that the Moon were a zillion times more massive than it is. As it moved through the night sky you would see the distant stars seemed to act funny as the moon passed by. The stars just above and below the moon would sorta leap away from the moon and back as the moon passed. Thats because the light from the distant stars would be bent as the light passed over the moon. And the rays would appear to hit your eye at a steeper angle - creating the illusion that the same star was suddenly more distant from the moon in the sky ( like little fire flies darting away from lunar disk then returning). Gravitational lensing.
We have a more massive object than the Moon to test Einstein's crazy theory about gravitational lensing- and that object is the Sun. Trouble is when you can see the Sun (ie in the day time) you cant see other stars. But around 1920 there was a solar eclipse than enabled scientists to test Einstein by observing stars close to the sun in the sky in the day time. And their measurements on the stars (which acted like the stars did in my above lunar parable -except microscopically) proved Einstein right.
When you squash enough matter into one point so you get more mass in a smaller space than either the moon, the earth, the sun, or even a neutron star, you get a black hole: an object with such extreme gravity that light itself more than bends- it gets crushed like every thing else into the black hole.
I'm sorry. We will have to agree to disagree. You see, the problems in history that were rejected by some people were rejected even years after they were proven. Not all rejections of current situations were proven correct, but in this case, I am reminded of Sheldon on Big Bang when he had the huge electron conundrum. He finally realized that it was because he was viewing electrons as having mass instead of focusing on their existence as a wave (i.e. energy), that was holding him up. Wave particles simply do not act the same way other things do. As for the proof u speak of, if u can produce a link, I will be happy to read your source and see if it convinces me. As to date, I have not seen such proof. I've only "heard" these hypotheses in college or read the "relating" of said info. Seeing is believing I suppose. As for now, nada padre.
Not being rude but simply the fact as I see it, I could shoot holes in your zillion times magnified moon example, but I find it moot and leading to a concentrated effort to battle over an example. And revert back to....to date, I have seen not one single example of light bending to gravity, that can't be disproven easily
I was talking about basic history. Einstein first became a superstar when they did the eclipse observation that proved his theory. Any biography of Einstein would have a chapter about it. And you acknowledge that gravity effects light. But dont explain why it would "scatter" light. The earth's gravity pulls you toward the center of the earth. So if you were a light photon you would also be pulled toward the center of the earth as you passed by the earth.
I am not good at doing links. Just google Arthur Eddington (the guy who did the eclipse expiramment in 1919, or google wiki articles about gravitational lensing.
14 Dec 2015, 8:37 pm
naturalplastic wrote:
I was talking about basic history. Einstein first became a superstar when they did the eclipse observation that proved his theory. Any biography of Einstein would have a chapter about it. And you acknowledge that gravity effects light. But dont explain why it would "scatter" light. The earth's gravity pulls you toward the center of the earth. So if you were a light photon you would also be pulled toward the center of the earth as you passed by the earth.
I am not good at doing links. Just google Arthur Eddington (the guy who did the eclipse expiramment in 1919, or google wiki articles about gravitational lensing.
1. Biographies are not scientific evidence of theories. They are stories of people that contain data about their lives and accomplishments.
2. I'm sorry, but where did you see me post that I "acknowledge that gravity affects light?" Contrarily, I have been posting that I do "not" feel gravity affects light
3. Scattering light is also not exactly correct. There is no effort for a star to "scatter" light. However, a simple state of its being round causes the light to be spread in all directions from the star itself seeing as how it is a spherical object that emits light from all sides in all directions...in a straight line.
4. You continue to compare the affect of gravity on objects with mass, against wave particles.
Thus, we are at an impasse.
14 Dec 2015, 8:55 pm
14 Dec 2015, 11:31 pm
15 Dec 2015, 12:28 am
Fnord wrote:
No impasse at all.
Feelings are irrelevant, and faith proves nothing.
Time dilation has been proven through repeated demonstrations. The equivalence of matter and energy has been proven through repeated demonstrations. The photo-electric effect has been proven through repeated demonstrations. Thermodynamics and orbital mechanics have been proven through repeated demonstrations.
Science rules.
Feelings are irrelevant, and faith proves nothing.
Time dilation has been proven through repeated demonstrations. The equivalence of matter and energy has been proven through repeated demonstrations. The photo-electric effect has been proven through repeated demonstrations. Thermodynamics and orbital mechanics have been proven through repeated demonstrations.
Science rules.
Again. Agree to disagree. Feelings are extremely relevant. Faith proves everything. But feel free to share any evidence of gravity affecting light, because I'm not above reading up. I'm always evolving as are most people, and I try to not stay so firm to my belief system that I can't grow even more. I just haven't seen evidence that compels me to change my mind. To the contrary I see much evidence that convinces me otherwise
15 Dec 2015, 12:30 am
naturalplastic wrote:
^That.
About quoting you- it was probably a failure of communication.
You wrote a lot of text so its hard to find the quote in which you sounded like you thought that gravity acts like a concave lense that spreads light out,( rather acting like an imperfect convex lense that bends light inward the way that it actually does).
But you probably said something about 'stars spread light out'. I thought you were talking about the same thing that Einstein was talking about- stars bending light emitted by OTHER stars farther away in our line of sight. Didnt realize that you wrongly thought that the subject was the stars own light. Obviously stars spread their own light outward. Like a bullet being fired straight up the trajectory is not going to bend (the bullet will go more or less straight up, and the fall straight down). But if you fire it horizontally the bullet's trajectory will bend toward the earth until it hits the ground. Likewise light passing over a massive object in space is going to bend towards the object slightly.
Unless theyre black holes stars dont "bend" the light that they are themselves emitting (though they do cause a certain amount of gravitational redshift in their own light). Massive bodies like stars bend the light going past them. If a star, and massive object blocking the star, are both perfectly in our line of site then we will see the star as a circle of light around the edge of the massive object. If the object moves away then the star is seen as a tiny point of light again.
About quoting you- it was probably a failure of communication.
You wrote a lot of text so its hard to find the quote in which you sounded like you thought that gravity acts like a concave lense that spreads light out,( rather acting like an imperfect convex lense that bends light inward the way that it actually does).
But you probably said something about 'stars spread light out'. I thought you were talking about the same thing that Einstein was talking about- stars bending light emitted by OTHER stars farther away in our line of sight. Didnt realize that you wrongly thought that the subject was the stars own light. Obviously stars spread their own light outward. Like a bullet being fired straight up the trajectory is not going to bend (the bullet will go more or less straight up, and the fall straight down). But if you fire it horizontally the bullet's trajectory will bend toward the earth until it hits the ground. Likewise light passing over a massive object in space is going to bend towards the object slightly.
Unless theyre black holes stars dont "bend" the light that they are themselves emitting (though they do cause a certain amount of gravitational redshift in their own light). Massive bodies like stars bend the light going past them. If a star, and massive object blocking the star, are both perfectly in our line of site then we will see the star as a circle of light around the edge of the massive object. If the object moves away then the star is seen as a tiny point of light again.
No worries, lol. Misinterpretation during communication happens to everyone.
