The absurdity of space-time curvature and geodesics

[marvas]

You said that you don't think radars work in space:

Time dilation is also caused by refraction. Shapiro time delay explained.

'The Shapiro time delay effect, or gravitational time delay effect, is one of the four classic Solar System tests of general relativity. Radar signals passing near a massive object take slightly longer to travel to a target and longer to return than they would if the mass of the object were not...

forums.livescience.com

And you didnt understand what massive object mean, even though I gave examples of massive objects in that exact post.

Who lacks the intellect ?

Refraction causes all EM waves to slow down near massive objects and change their wavelength you dumbass, how is that meaningless ?? Its the effing key that shows that Einstein, Rebka, Shapiro and co were complete morons who did not understand basic refraction physics, and attributed the effects of refraction to gravitation. Refraction explains all so called 'gravitational effects' predicted by general relativity with ease. Only a complete idiot does not understand this, even though I have mathematically proved it and its obvious that refraction causes light bending, redshift/blueshift and time delay, as it affects the speed and wavelength of the EM wave as it enters (or exits) the atmosphere of a massive object, regardless if its a light wave or a radio wave. But you ignorant clowns dont understand basic refraction physics and pretend to understand super advanced bullshit relativistic and quantum physics that not even Einstein himself understood. Because he was just another ignorant clown, who's theory was 'experimentally proven' by other ignorant clowns.

 

[TheBox]

Who lacks the intellect ?

Refraction causes all EM waves to slow down

In physics, refraction is the redirection of a wave as it passes from one medium to another.

See my earlier post when I said ''Refraction is misdirection '' .

Carrier signals transmitted from Earth cannot be electromagnetic for two reasons

1. The elementary charge would be grounded by the Earth forcing the wave to compress and collapse .

2. The wave would be affected by the north and south magnetic poles

But either way , refraction does not slow the wave down , the angular redirection creates more journey distance .

Light slows down passing through a medium because of gravity-B but you won't understand this because you can't even understand refraction .

 

[TheBox]

by other ignorant clowns.

Here is a diagram of refracted incident ray , note both lines are equal length but the refracted ray doesn't reach the ground . Hence the refracted ray takes more time to reach the ground because it is a greater length . The speed of the wave remains the same . delta(y,)=(y,x,)=>(y,)

 

[marvas]

In physics, refraction is the redirection of a wave as it passes from one medium to another.

See my earlier post when I said ''Refraction is misdirection '' .

In the next sentence it says 'The redirection can be caused by the wave's change in speed or by a change in the medium.'

The full definition is this:
'Refraction, in physics, the change in direction of a wave passing from one medium to another caused by its change in speed.' (Britannica)

But either way , refraction does not slow the wave down , the angular redirection creates more journey distance.

LOL on the same wikipedia page you gave it clearly says it slows the light !! Or did you just read the first sentence ???? This just shows how incredibly superficial and ignorant you are.

​

Slowing of light​

As described above, the speed of light is slower in a medium other than vacuum. This slowing applies to any medium such as air, water, or glass, and is responsible for phenomena such as refraction. When light leaves the medium and returns to a vacuum, and ignoring any effects of gravity, its speed returns to the usual speed of light in vacuum, c.

It slows the wave down because the speed of the wave depends on the index of refraction n=c/v. So v=c/n, and if n>1 then v<c. So when an EM wave is refracted from space into the atmosphere of a massive object it will slow down ! And it will be delayed, which is what that idiot Shapiro concluded to be a 'gravitational time delay'. When its obviously a refractional time delay.

Light slows down passing through a medium because of gravity-B but you won't understand this because you can't even understand refraction .

Snell's law is not related to gravity B wtf are you talking about. You are completely delusional and confuse your fantasies and personal theories with science.

 

[TheBox]

Snell's law is not related to gravity B wtf are you talking about not even on wikipedia there isnt any reference to this. You are completely delusional and confuse your fantasies and personal theories with science.

Well robot , real scientists don't rely on wikipedia for information , especially when it is mainly garbage .

Gravity-B is what stops spatial bodies all being in the same place at the same time . You really need to go back to school . You aren't qualified to make scientific comments .

 

[marvas]

You just quoted wikipedia lol. And you completely ignored that on the same page you quoted, in the next sentence it was clearly mentioned that the redirection is caused by a change in the speed of the wave. Thats because you probably only read the first sentence. This just shows how incredibly superficial and ignorant you are. Oh, and there is an entire chapter about slowing of light on that page:

Slowing of light

As described above, the speed of light is slower in a medium other than vacuum. This slowing applies to any medium such as air, water, or glass, and is responsible for phenomena such as refraction. When light leaves the medium and returns to a vacuum, and ignoring any effects of gravity, its speed returns to the usual speed of light in vacuum, c.

And then it gives the explanation for this slowing, which has to do with the electro-magnetic nature of light. So you quote a page which completely contradicts you, and which confirms everything I said.

 

[TheBox]

You just quoted wikipedia lol. And you completely ignored that on the same page you quoted, in the next sentence it was clearly mentioned that light is slowed down by the medium. Thats because you probaly only read the first sentence. This just shows how incredibly superficial and ignorant you are. There is an entire chapter about it on that pag

I guess you really need to discuss this of my work : The impetus of light

I have informed you already of gravity-B

Would you like me to write an article so you can plagiarism my work ?

 

[marvas]

No you can keep it for yourself. I proved my point and you didnt prove anything other than superficiality and ignorance on this topic. Which is to be expected from Einstupidein's followers.

 

[TheBox]

No you can keep it for yourself. I proved my point and you didnt prove anything other than superficiality and ignorance on this topic.

If you want to repeat wikipedia , go be a teacher . If you want to be scientist , advance science and stop talking about old stuff .
As I said you are not qualified because you haven't passed my advanced physics lessons . You'll have to sign up

You are ignorant of new science , don't know how you have the tenacity to try and belittle me when I am more advanced than yourself .

 

[TheBox]

No you can keep it for yourself. I proved my point and you didnt prove anything other than superficiality and ignorance on this topic. Which is to be expected from Einstupidein's followers.

The impetus of light and gravity-B re-writes physics , every thing we know has to be looked over .

The speed of light is a product of gravity-B , this changes things in a big way .

 

[Hartmann352]

In general relativity, the presence of matter (or energy density) can curve spacetime, and the path of a light ray will be deflected as a result. This process is called gravitational lensing and in many cases can be described in analogy to the deflection of light by (e.g. glass) lenses in optics. Many useful results for cosmology have come out of using this property of matter and light.

For many of the cases of interest one does not need to fully solve the general relativistic equations of motion for the coupled spacetime and matter, because the bending of spacetime by matter is small. (Quantitatively the matter bending space is moving slowly relative to c, the speed of light and the "gravitational potential" Phi induced by the matter obeys |Phi|/c2 << 1 .)

A sketch of the paradigm of a lensed system is below ( source):

In a system where lensing occurs there is a

• source: where the light comes from, can be a quasar, the cosmic microwave background, a galaxy, etc.
• lens(es): which deflect(s) the light by an amount related to its quantity of mass/energy, can be anything with mass/energy
• observer: who sees a different amount of light than otherwise because the lens has bent spacetime and thus the travel paths of the light
• image or images: what the observer sees

The light is not only visible light, but more generally any radiation.

As a consequence of lensing, light rays that would have otherwise not reached the observer are bent from their paths and towards the observer. (Light can also be bent away from an observer but that is not the case of interest.) There are different regimes: strong lensing,weak lensing, and microlensing. The distinction between these regimes depends on the positions of the source, lens and observer, and the mass and shape of the lens (which controls how much light is deflected and where).

Strong Lensing:

The most extreme bending of light is when the lens is very massive and the source is close enough to it: in this case light can take different paths to the observer and more than one image of the source will appear.

A multiple image is shown at right (source). The first example of a double image was found in 1979, of a quasar. The number of lenses discovered has been used to estimate the volume of space back to the sources. This volume depends strongly on cosmological parameters, in particular the cosmological constant (a classic reference is here).

If the source varies with time, the multiple images will vary with time as well. However, the light doesn't travel the same distance to each image, due to the bending of space. So there will be time delays for the changes in the images. These time delays can be used to calculate the hubble constant H0. A few systems with these time delays have been found and are under study. Much of the subtlety in this work lies with constructing the model of the mass distribution forming the lens (see this review for technical detail).

In some special cases the alignment of the source and the lens will be such that light will be deflected to the observer in an "Einstein ring." Some examples and references can be found here on Wikipedia. More often than a ring, the source may get stretched out and curved, and form a tangential or radial arc. A lot of mass is needed to cause an arc to appear, so that properties of arcs (numbers, size, geometry) can often be used to study massive objects like clusters. One can also, given a set of images, try to reconstruct the lens mass distribution (for an example of reconstructing a cluster as a lens see this technical paper).

Weak Lensing:

In many cases the lens is not strong enough to form multiple images or arcs. However, the source can still be distorted: both stretched (shear) and magnified (convergence). If all sources were well known in size and shape, one could just use the shear and convergence to deduce the properties of the lens. However, usually one does not know the intrinsic properties of the sources, but has information about the average properties. The statistics of the sources can then be used to get information about the lens. For instance, galaxies in general aren't perfectly spherical, but if one has a collection of galaxies one doesn't expect them all to be lined up. Thus, if this set of galaxies is lensed, on average, or statistically, there will be some overall shear and/or convergence imposed on the distribution, which will give information about the intervening lens(es).

There is a distribution of galaxies far enough away that can be treated as sources, and thus clusters nearby can be "weighed" (i.e. have their mass measured) using their lensing. Superclusters have been considered as well. In addition, theories of cosmology predict the distribution of large scale structure, the distribution of matter in the universe. The statistical properties of the large scale structure (e.g. the probability of finding a galaxy at one place when there is another a certain distance away) can also be measured by weak lensing, because the matter will produce shear and convergence in distant sources (which can be galaxies, or the cosmic microwave background, for example). Weak lensing is a useful complement to measures of the distribution of luminous mass such as galaxy surveys. Lensing measures all the mass, in particular the dark matter as well as the luminous matter.

Microlensing:

In some cases the lensing is of an image that is so small or faint that one doesn't see the multiple images-- the additional light bent towards the observer just means that the source appears brighter. (The surface brightness remains unchanged but as more images of the object appear the object appears bigger and hence brighter.) This lensing can have effects in many measurements, as sources which would have otherwise been too dim become visible. This can be helpful, as when one wants to view objects that would otherwise be too far away. It can also be a problem, for example when one is trying to measure all objects brighter than a certain amount in a certain region and lensing introduces objects by magnifying objects enough to bring them into the sample.

There are ongoing searches to use lensing to find a type of dark matter called MACHOs (massive compact halo objects). Although MACHOs, as dark matter, cannot be seen themselves, if they pass in front of a source (e.g. a star nearby), they can cause the star to become brighter for a while, e.g. days or weeks. This effect has been observed, but determinations of the dark matter are not yet conclusive. Observations are underway by many groups.

See: https://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~jcohn/lens.html

According to Einstein’s general theory of relativity, time and space are fused together in a quantity known as spacetime. Within this theory, massive objects cause spacetime to curve, and gravity is simply the curvature of spacetime. As light travels through spacetime, the theory predicts that the path taken by the light will also be curved by an object’s mass. Gravitational lensing is a dramatic and observable example of Einstein’s theory in action. Extremely massive celestial bodies such as galaxy clusters cause spacetime to be significantly curved. In other words, they act as gravitational lenses. When light from a more distant light source passes by a gravitational lens, the path of the light is curved, and a distorted image of the distant object — maybe a ring or halo of light around the gravitational lens — can be observed.
Hartmann352

 

[TheBox]

In general relativity, the presence of matter (or energy density) can curve spacetime, and the path of a light ray will be deflected as a result. This process is called gravitational lensing and in many cases can be described in analogy to the deflection of light by (e.g. glass) lenses in optics. Many useful results for cosmology have come out of using this property of matter and light.

For many of the cases of interest one does not need to fully solve the general relativistic equations of motion for the coupled spacetime and matter, because the bending of spacetime by matter is small. (Quantitatively the matter bending space is moving slowly relative to c, the speed of light and the "gravitational potential" Phi induced by the matter obeys |Phi|/c2 << 1 .)

A sketch of the paradigm of a lensed system is below ( source):

In a system where lensing occurs there is a

• source: where the light comes from, can be a quasar, the cosmic microwave background, a galaxy, etc.
• lens(es): which deflect(s) the light by an amount related to its quantity of mass/energy, can be anything with mass/energy
• observer: who sees a different amount of light than otherwise because the lens has bent spacetime and thus the travel paths of the light
• image or images: what the observer sees

The light is not only visible light, but more generally any radiation.

As a consequence of lensing, light rays that would have otherwise not reached the observer are bent from their paths and towards the observer. (Light can also be bent away from an observer but that is not the case of interest.) There are different regimes: strong lensing,weak lensing, and microlensing. The distinction between these regimes depends on the positions of the source, lens and observer, and the mass and shape of the lens (which controls how much light is deflected and where).

Strong Lensing:

The most extreme bending of light is when the lens is very massive and the source is close enough to it: in this case light can take different paths to the observer and more than one image of the source will appear.

A multiple image is shown at right (source). The first example of a double image was found in 1979, of a quasar. The number of lenses discovered has been used to estimate the volume of space back to the sources. This volume depends strongly on cosmological parameters, in particular the cosmological constant (a classic reference is here).

If the source varies with time, the multiple images will vary with time as well. However, the light doesn't travel the same distance to each image, due to the bending of space. So there will be time delays for the changes in the images. These time delays can be used to calculate the hubble constant H0. A few systems with these time delays have been found and are under study. Much of the subtlety in this work lies with constructing the model of the mass distribution forming the lens (see this review for technical detail).

In some special cases the alignment of the source and the lens will be such that light will be deflected to the observer in an "Einstein ring." Some examples and references can be found here on Wikipedia. More often than a ring, the source may get stretched out and curved, and form a tangential or radial arc. A lot of mass is needed to cause an arc to appear, so that properties of arcs (numbers, size, geometry) can often be used to study massive objects like clusters. One can also, given a set of images, try to reconstruct the lens mass distribution (for an example of reconstructing a cluster as a lens see this technical paper).

Weak Lensing:

In many cases the lens is not strong enough to form multiple images or arcs. However, the source can still be distorted: both stretched (shear) and magnified (convergence). If all sources were well known in size and shape, one could just use the shear and convergence to deduce the properties of the lens. However, usually one does not know the intrinsic properties of the sources, but has information about the average properties. The statistics of the sources can then be used to get information about the lens. For instance, galaxies in general aren't perfectly spherical, but if one has a collection of galaxies one doesn't expect them all to be lined up. Thus, if this set of galaxies is lensed, on average, or statistically, there will be some overall shear and/or convergence imposed on the distribution, which will give information about the intervening lens(es).

There is a distribution of galaxies far enough away that can be treated as sources, and thus clusters nearby can be "weighed" (i.e. have their mass measured) using their lensing. Superclusters have been considered as well. In addition, theories of cosmology predict the distribution of large scale structure, the distribution of matter in the universe. The statistical properties of the large scale structure (e.g. the probability of finding a galaxy at one place when there is another a certain distance away) can also be measured by weak lensing, because the matter will produce shear and convergence in distant sources (which can be galaxies, or the cosmic microwave background, for example). Weak lensing is a useful complement to measures of the distribution of luminous mass such as galaxy surveys. Lensing measures all the mass, in particular the dark matter as well as the luminous matter.

Microlensing:

In some cases the lensing is of an image that is so small or faint that one doesn't see the multiple images-- the additional light bent towards the observer just means that the source appears brighter. (The surface brightness remains unchanged but as more images of the object appear the object appears bigger and hence brighter.) This lensing can have effects in many measurements, as sources which would have otherwise been too dim become visible. This can be helpful, as when one wants to view objects that would otherwise be too far away. It can also be a problem, for example when one is trying to measure all objects brighter than a certain amount in a certain region and lensing introduces objects by magnifying objects enough to bring them into the sample.

There are ongoing searches to use lensing to find a type of dark matter called MACHOs (massive compact halo objects). Although MACHOs, as dark matter, cannot be seen themselves, if they pass in front of a source (e.g. a star nearby), they can cause the star to become brighter for a while, e.g. days or weeks. This effect has been observed, but determinations of the dark matter are not yet conclusive. Observations are underway by many groups.

See: https://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~jcohn/lens.html

According to Einstein’s general theory of relativity, time and space are fused together in a quantity known as spacetime. Within this theory, massive objects cause spacetime to curve, and gravity is simply the curvature of spacetime. As light travels through spacetime, the theory predicts that the path taken by the light will also be curved by an object’s mass. Gravitational lensing is a dramatic and observable example of Einstein’s theory in action. Extremely massive celestial bodies such as galaxy clusters cause spacetime to be significantly curved. In other words, they act as gravitational lenses. When light from a more distant light source passes by a gravitational lens, the path of the light is curved, and a distorted image of the distant object — maybe a ring or halo of light around the gravitational lens — can be observed.
Hartmann352

Also incorrect , the conserved light of space isn't affected that way .

 

[marvas]

There is no such thing as gravitational lensing, just as there is no such thing as gravitational redshift.
Both phenomena of light bending and shifting to red are caused by refraction, due to the gases which are present in the atmosphere of stars and galaxies, and I have personally proved that gravitational redshift was confused with refractional redshift, because the gravitational redshift experiment required a bag of helium in order to produce any redshift- which was a refractional redshift and not a gravitational one. You just keep on ignoring my demonstration which is extremelly simple and logical and keep on copy-posting the same relative bullshit over and over again- as if ad nauseam repeating the same non-sense somehow makes it true.

There is no experiment that has shown that space-time can actually curve, and the claim that the bending of light is caused by space curving has never been proved, only illogically proved by confusing refraction effects with gravitation effects and thus 'confirming' a theory which is easily and demonstrably false. Because almost all its predictions can be easily explained by refraction physics- which Einstein and his relative fanboys (Pound Rebka, Shapiro) completely ignored.

Which is funny because they use 'the deflection of light by (e.g. glass) lenses in optics' as an analogy to gravy lensing. Ignoring that it is caused by REFRACTION, and has absolutely nothing to do with gravity or the bending of space time. In fact, in optics this gravitational lensing simply does not exist. Because its a complete pseudo science, which simply has no place in real optical physics.

 

[TheBox]

There is no experiment that has shown that space-time can actually curve,

Space-time is math , math can describe a curve . Quite clearly you don't know what you are talking about . I think you see space-time like some material rather than a mathematical model .