• ViperActual@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Matter bends spacetime. Spacetime tells matter how to move.

    Using this logic, you can imagine that above a certain threshold, this can become a feedback loop. These locations are black holes, where enough matter located in a small enough volume of spacetime can create enough distortion to further force more matter into the same volume of spacetime.

  • JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    They call it the “fabric of reality” because that’s a good metaphor to describe how gravity works. (Or at least I assume that’s where it came from, I could very well be wrong.)

    When you stretch a fabric thin, and place something heavy in it, it’s going to sink and stretch the fabric down with it. Then, if you place a smaller object next to the larger one, it’s going to roll around the larger one, gradually moving closer as it goes down the slope created by the larger object.

    That might be hard to visualize, so here’s a neat video I found.

    Edit: guys I think you’re reading too much into this I wasn’t trying to provide a foolproof explanation of how gravity works I was just trying to relate an interesting metaphor to a piece of linguistics.

    And I wasn’t even right, a quick google search says the term predates our understanding of the universe. Its probably a coincidence.

    • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      One could be picky and say you’re explaining gravity with gravity. But for the sake of simplicity that’s OK.
      I’ve once read an article where someone complained about that and tried to explain it with the actual cause, curvature of space time, like using a model car with glue attached to the wheels. But that was not really intuitive and simple to understand.

      • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        I think of it as a 2d cross section of the experiment (it’s happening in every direction possible tangent to the ball), which necessarily breaks into a third dimension. In our 3-spatial-dimension reality that’s the best we can do.

        • Successful_Try543@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          Yes, but the smaller object is dragged into the valley formed by a heavier object due to gravity (of the earth), not due to following the curvature of the blanket.

          • rebelsimile@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            Sure but it is still a cross-section of what it is — something with a mass of that bowling ball being gravitationally attracted to something the mass of Earth. The blanket is a demonstration of what spacetime is doing (how it’s being warped) by the gravitational attraction. It so happens that you can also sort of demonstrate how another object can be influenced by the bowling ball’s gravity as it’s being gravitationally attracted by something else (like how a small object would be attracted to the moon which is still being attracted to Earth). Given that nothing can really ever be gravitationally unbound, I think it’s a fine demonstration. I wonder if you’re expecting it would demonstrate something it isn’t demonstrating (like how an object in isolation would influence some other object in isolation).

  • VoterFrog@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    15 days ago

    One mind-altering fact that I love is that there’s no “acceleration due to gravity,” once you’re in free fall, until you hit the ground. Hop in a space ship with no windows and fly off straight in some direction. Turn off the engines and watch an accelerometer. It’ll never read anything until you run into something.

    You could fly past a planet, a massive star, even a black hole. Your path through space could be full of curves and loops but you’ll never feel it. It’s popular to think of those things as like crazy high G turns but they’re not. You’re just flying in a straight line through space time.

    On the flip side, say someone knocks you out and puts you on that ship. You wake up and instead of being weightless, you can walk around the ship like normal on earth. Are you on earth or is the ship in space accelerating at a constant rate? Again, there’s no way to tell. They are, physically, the same.

    • INeedMana@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      It’s popular to think of those things as like crazy high G turns but they’re not. You’re just flying in a straight line through space time.

      Soooo… Interstellar was wrong with all the shaking of the camera?

      Are you on earth or is the ship in space accelerating at a constant rate? Again, there’s no way to tell. They are, physically, the same.

      In case of accelerating ship, I wonder what would happen in local frame once you hit/get really close to c. You’d get decelerated out of nowhere? Just as if you hit something?

      • VoterFrog@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        Soooo… Interstellar was wrong with all the shaking of the camera?

        All for the cinematography :) I will say that there’s a small caveat in really extreme situations like close to a black hole. Spacetime gets so warped there that your head and your feet take very divergent paths through spacetime, enough to stretch you out and even break you apart at the atomic level. You’d definitely notice that…

        In case of accelerating ship, I wonder what would happen in local frame once you hit/get really close to c. You’d get decelerated out of nowhere? Just as if you hit something?

        Oh boy, special relativity is another fun one. So here’s the thing: there’s no “universal speed” that you’re moving so you’re never any closer to c no longer how long you accelerate for. To accelerate is to change your reference frame and there are no special reference frames.

        Which is to say that any physical test you could run inside your ship will give you the same result, always. Accelerate for 13 billion years at any rate and check the the how fast light moves within your ship, the answer is always c.

        This is where the name relativity comes in. You have to think in terms of relative speed. Your speed relative to earth will indeed advance closer and closer to c but never reach it. There’s a bunch of really wild and crazy implications behind this.

        Like that acceleration doesn’t change the relative speeds of things uniformly. Keep accelerating at 1 meter per second per second and every second Earth’s relative speed changes by less than 1m/s. And look up relativity of simultaneity, another consequence of special relativity. It’s fascinating stuff.

        • INeedMana@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          This is where the name relativity comes in. You have to think in terms of relative speed. Your speed relative to earth will indeed advance closer and closer to c but never reach it. There’s a bunch of really wild and crazy implications behind this.

          ah, right. In a ship travelling with c, for someone outside the ship, I turn on the lights and observe the light to travel with c. For that external observer the light from my lamp travels at the same speed as my ship

          My mind was already bent! ;)

  • tacosplease@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    15 days ago

    I once came across information that said natural forces never pull. They only push. If that’s true then magnetism and gravity are even more confusing than I had initially estimated.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 days ago

        What’s really freaky is one of the theories we can’t see other life, is to our perspective (due to expansion of the universe) their rate of expansion is faster than the speed of light, and we won’t know till they’re pretty much at our doorstep.

        There might be a bunch of them all over, jumping around the universe and claiming everything they see like old school European countries.

        If that happens the best result is they make us a “colony” but honestly a civilization that scale doesn’t need resources or anything. The most likely explanation for that behavior would be just to eliminate any future competition if we advance unchecked.

        Rather than colonize, they might just want to wipe out our planet, which would be practically effortless for a civilization that advanced. If something crashed into Earth at those speeds, the planet itself would be gone, no way for us to survive or even stop it.

        The only defense is to spread out from Earth, which makes the hypothetical advanced space race afraid of our expansion kind of right

        Any civilization in a universe like that needs to constantly expand just to ensure it’s survival. Because the only reason we’d be preserved was if they cared about the novelty of life.

        If they’ve spent millions of years expanding their space, alien life probably isn’t that novel to them anymore. So really, our only bet is we’re entertaining, like a zoo.