You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.
The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.
Re: curved relativity
| John Smith | 23 Jun 2007 16:06 |
> >i still dont understand curved space as postulated by relativity
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> mathematical description of the geometry) depends on the distribution of
> mass and energy.
you cant see that you are saying nothing regarding
the question
a triangle on a sphere does not curve the space
|
| OG | 23 Jun 2007 11:51 |
>i still dont understand curved space as postulated by relativity
>
> what happens there with our space, becomes contracted,
> compressed, extended, dilated or nothing happens with it?
It's all to do with the geometry of the 'space' (actually 'space-time', but
that's another matter)
In 'flat' spacetime, the angles in a triangle adds up to 180 degrees
When referring to spacetime as 'curved', what this means is that the
geometry is no longer flat, so the sum of the angles between three straight
lines is no longer 180 degrees.
General Relativity tells us that the geometry (or the metric, which is the
mathematical description of the geometry) depends on the distribution of
mass and energy.
|
| fishy | 23 Jun 2007 11:16 |
i still dont understand curved space as postulated by relativity
what happens there with our space, becomes contracted,
compressed, extended, dilated or nothing happens with it?
|
Quick links:
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage