Is "space-time" compressed by gravity?

by ServantOfAllah Posted 2012/09/24 23:53:08

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	I don't know.	15 votes	44%
	Yes, because..	14 votes	41%
	No, because..	5 votes	15%

More polls by ServantOfAllah

RICK 2012/09/27 23:30:15

Yes, because..

+2
time slows as come closer to mass.If I remember correctly Einstein explained it as mass pushing down on the fabric of space.This causes a depression which causes things to slow down,including time.Anyone else a little more versed on this subject feel free to expound on this .

reply
Contarded Chickenhawk Con S... 2012/09/27 15:04:48

I don't know.

+2

reply
Terrance Earle 2012/09/27 03:19:01

Yes, because..

+2
Gravity bends light. It was already proven when two people took two mechanized clocks to two different points of gravity on earth that the clocks were significantly off by a slight time difference.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/27 03:44:36

+1
significantly off by a slight difference. interesting.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/27 04:15:19 (edited)

Yeah the words contradict themselves. But I meant that in a literal sense. The clocks were identically manufactured and were twins. There's also a time difference caused by moving or accelerating. All part of Einstein's theory of relativity. Like for example if we traveled at the speed of light to another galaxy which felt like it took two years to get there. 60 Years would have already passed on earth. Something like that.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/27 04:21:52

so an atom in a clock changes frequency under acceleration. what does that prove?

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/27 04:30:07 (edited)

^_^ You are just trying to confuse the logistics of the experiments. The reason an atomic clock is so accurate is because it can measure time within the influence of an atom. A mechanical clock will have a more profound influence from gravity. But even an Atomic clock is off by mil-seconds too. Well the mass of an atomic clock is important.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/27 10:58:16

What are you trying to say?

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/27 13:43:05

Just read the thing from that site physics forum. That's all you need to know.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/27 14:17:26

Just say what you want to say. I don't have time to read everything on the internet.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/27 21:11:51

Noob.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/28 10:33:39

"Let someone else tell you.", is not a good argument.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/29 02:16:22

You make no god damn sense. If you write an article for others to add input then question it consistently, you're trying to aggravate people. I'm writing this message to inform you that I'm beyond that. So get a life. I already explained it and sent a link that describes why time is compressed by gravity. Good day!

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/29 12:06:53

You fail. Next time, use your own argument instead of wasting my time.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/30 03:49:31

I'm not arguing.

Holding on to anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. ~Buddha

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/30 11:30:26

I'm not angry. I just wanted you to tell me what you were trying to say.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/30 11:51:17

+1
I told you that gravity has an influence on time. There have been studies done already with identical clocks that prove it. Even atomic.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/30 12:15:43

and do you feel certain it's not just the affect of acceleration on the clock, as opposed to actual time dilation?

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/30 18:39:21 (edited)

+1
Nope. Acceleration alone is nothing without mass. Mass is what creates gravity and the curvature in space time. However acceleration can be used to create gravity. As a form of centripetal force. But you still need Mass for that to work. Like the O'Neill Cylinder. Pretty much a concept but still valid. Alone gravity is a force, acceleration without mass is no force at all.

reply
Servant... to Terranc... 2012/09/30 18:55:00

Everything has mass or its energy would be zero. Isn't a particle wave supposed to increase in frequency as it goes faster?

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/30 19:43:33

Acceleration is a multiplier of force. I'll let you answer that question for yourself.

reply
Terranc... to Servant... 2012/09/27 04:34:27

http://www.physicsforums.com/...

reply
Michael... to Servant... 2012/12/24 12:57:39

+1
perhaps they were saying it was significant that there was a slight time difference,

reply
Dave Sawyer ♥ Child of God ♥ 2012/09/26 23:47:12

I don't know.

+1
If gravity works the way they say it does, Yes.

Is the frequency of light different as it leaves the Sun different than when it arrives at Earth?

reply
lurx: the soda jerk 2012/09/26 21:25:00

Yes, because..

+1

reply
Nick Name 2012/09/26 21:24:11 (edited)

I don't know.

+2
The question seems to imply something -

If space is the physical world and time is just a measure of regular change - does that make gravity something other than space and time?
All of these things are not 'separate parts'.

And remember, there is only one infinity.

Suggest reading this:

$2.99 ebook on Amazon. Hardcore action Sci-Fi. Toward the end of the book the very nature of reality itself becomes a factor in the story.

reply
Darnel 2012/09/26 20:57:27

Yes, because..

+2
it was proven years ago as an aside to the mild dialation of time in regards to speed.

reply
Michael McFascist 2012/09/26 06:53:14 (edited)

Yes, because..

+3
mass curves space time, so yes, clocks do click slower the closer you get to a massive object. Is that what your question was?

reply
Squeaken458 2012/09/26 05:31:24

I don't know.

+3
All I know is if it wasn't for Einstein discovering the thoery of relativity, We wouldn't have relatives.

reply
Servant... to Squeake... 2012/09/26 12:53:54

+1
That's true!

reply
Nick Name to Squeake... 2012/09/26 21:25:38

+1
Thank god I'm not the only one that thinks that.

reply
All Ame... to Squeake... 2012/09/26 23:18:27

+1
Thank Einstein for family reunions!

reply
☆WILLIAM☆ 2012/09/25 20:59:17 (edited)

I don't know.

+1
But I do know that the fourth dimension is a dimension of consciousness. It can be argued that consciousness, or supreme thought, isnt required for the first three dimensions to exist, but not the forth and above. For "past" "present" and "future" to exist requires the presence of mind to make those measurements.

The universe itself exists through the presence of mind. Everything in the universe exists through acknowledgement. We are minds within a mind. Each one of us is an experience that the universe itself experiences; and remembers.

reply
Bastion 2012/09/25 17:50:45

No, because..

+1
Gravity is expanded by space-time.

reply
iamthemob ~ the 444th Guru ~ 2012/09/25 16:26:13

I don't know.

+2
Considering that we're not really sure what space-time REALLY is, nor what gravity REALLY is...I think we have to admit that we're unclear.

reply
twocrows 2012/09/25 15:38:48

I don't know.

+1
depends on your perspective - I think.

reply
mk, Smartass Oracle 2012/09/25 10:56:46

I don't know.

+1
But I think it may be

reply
Night71 2012/09/25 05:33:52
☆WILLIAM☆ to Night71 2012/09/25 09:06:44

+2
dont, dont, for the love of God, dont do it.

reply
Night71 to ☆WILLIAM☆ 2012/09/25 09:17:55