you just proved my point at the same time showing your ignorance, dumbfuck. again, general relativity doesn't go beyond the BB. If you knew what the fuck you were quoting, you'd know that's what Hawking is referring to, but you're a fuckup drunk ruski.

I will not argue with some american trailer trash junkie, whose head was hurt by hurricanes and meth. So I'm out. The links are posted above, so everybody can open and read them.

I'm still laughing my fucking ass off at the absurdity of this post.

holy crap that's some dumbfuck shit right there.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

<--laughing at you drunk ruski.

you're the dumbfuck that doesn't even realize the BB theories emerge from the math of general relativity.

JTFC you're a drunk fuckup ruski.

get the fuck out.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

ruski fails to comprehend basic facts.

Hawking is stating that GR stops at the singularity.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

drunk fuckup ruski is too stupid to figure that out.

you are throwing gibberish, you haven't answered he question

so the basics of physics is framed in gravity, now you tell me why kinetic energy has no relation to gravity

ahahaha, dumbfuck ruski.

This New Study Suggests Time Did Actually Exist Before The Big Bang.

Physics Letters B
Volume 778, 10 March 2018, Pages 339-343

Through the big bang: Continuing Einstein's equations beyond a cosmological singularity


"The generic nature of singularities beyond which physics cannot be deterministically continued is a cornerstone of General Relativity (GR).

This is a non-trivial prediction of the relational description; the big bang/crunch is not the end of physics – it is instead a regular point of the relational evolution. Describing our solutions as spacetimes that satisfy Einstein's equations, we find that the relational dynamical system predicts two singular solutions of GR that are connected at the hypersurface of the singularity such that relational DOFs are continuous and the orientation of the spatial frame is inverted.

The Hawking–Penrose theorems [1] show that a large class of solutions of Einstein's equations are geodesically incomplete. In cosmological settings this leads to the big bang (or crunch) – the inevitable end of classical evolution of the Lorentzian spacetime geometry. To establish this result, it is important to disentangle singularities of spacetime geometry from singular evolution."

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...70269318300637

only a drunk piece of shit dimwitted ruski would think GR doesn't apply to the BB.

ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

I did answer your question and included a video to help you go deeper. it's only gibberish ti you because you don't dont feel like understanding it right niw and that's okay not a big deal. Revisit it another time :thumbsup

1. does gravity exist with out time, in null time?
I would think so, gravity warps space and that warping would still there.

2. are inertia and other forms of 'energy' related to gravity, like with out the forces of gravity in action these other energies would not exist?

They aren't related to gravity but gravity effects everything. Gravity is a weak force however compared to other forces such as the nuclear force. They would probably still exist without gravity.

if you stop time you stop the progress of existence...so the answer is: no...

Try not to think of Space and Time as 2 different things. Space and Time are ... Spacetime. Like the Wikiwiki says, "In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that fuses the three dimensions of space and the one dimension of time into a single four-dimensional continuum. Spacetime diagrams can be used to visualize relativistic effects such as why different observers perceive where and when events occur."

Gravity is a force that affects objects in spacetime. Dense objects like planets, stars and black holes bend spacetime around them. Space is distorted around the object just like time is. Gravity affects time (spacetime) but its not a part of time. You can't separate them because they aren't together to begin with.

Many people do not believe that gravity has any affect on time and for sure, it's a far-out concept to grasp. But in reality it does, and everyone in the modern world already feels its effects.

GPS satellites are essentially flying clocks that broadcast their ID and its local time. The onboard computer adjusts for the bending of spacetime that the earth has on that satellite and its position in space. Without it, the onboard clocks would be off, and GPS navigation would be miles off, making them useless.

The warping of spacetime of the earth is caused partially by its mass, but also by something else called frame dragging.

Airline pilots experience time more slowly when they fly. Of course it's a tiny fraction, but it can be measured. You can even say that they age more slowly, or that every time they fly, they arrive back on earth a few milliseconds in the future. Ack!

in metaphysics there is no time... think of your life like a bowl of water with everything happening all at once, with time we are able to navigate reality :2 cents:

thanks, I'm trying to sort out reality in my mind. I'm a spiritualist not a physicist. spiritual mechanics I can do, spiritual mechanics are not related to Newtonian physics in many way.

I'm well aware of space time and have been for 30-40 years, thanks :2 cents:

You somked all the weed didnt you?

I agree but I would say that stopping time stops our understanding of reality. I believe that the body runs on a Newtonian OS while the mind, while supported biologically, runs on a different but related OS. for instance the holy trinity and the golden triangle, in both areas of existence, biological and 'virtual', 3 is an important number, why? :winkwink:

not everybody has the same senses or understandings of reality. I offer no excuse or apology for this. :2 cents:

i am going with gravity will always exist, regardless of what stipulations you apply.. and that there will always be gravity.. even a lack of gravity suggests gravity does or can occur.. anyway coffee

I understand time and gravity and space time Mark. I think I learned that in 1968-70? as a spiritualist I see the world very different than you do, as an INTJ, 2% of the population, I see the world way different than you do. I'm asking stuff about relationships in physical reality because that's what INTJ's do, try and understand and categorize. so that what I'm working on. I have a thought experiment running. been running for about 6 days now... it's pretty interesting to me... I'm learning.

I use the same argument for god sometime, even disbelief suggest belief does occur :)

me too :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

and these... more believe than you disbelieve, you are voted off the island :1orglaugh

and this why base your life on a negative when it's so easy to base your life on a positive. life is hard and life is really hard when your stupid, seriously step up to bat with 2 strikes already? brilliant :2 cents:

Nothing exists without TIME. It is the only constant.
Time is the last thing we really have not measured. Or have not yet.

I know you say we have a clock or we use the speed of light.
But not so...
those are mechanical means to measure other things in reality.
It is like describing the taste of a hot dog. You construct similarities to weight against.
Points of reference.
Time is the only truth in the universe. And can not be changed. For we know not how to measure it yet.

Gravity is a physical response to a physical action. But there are no actions without time.
For as long as electrons stay glued to a nucleus, there will be gravity, and time.

quantum mechanics disagrees. time is external to the event according to the math.

I agree that time is the fabric though which we experience reality and that spiritual time though different is entwined in Newtonian time. maybe like 2 strands of DNA

so does this detract or enhance the concept that time is the fabric though which Newtonian reality take place? time being external to events which by the way is how the subconscious handles time. events in the subconscious experience no time. scientologist label these as engrams? we all talk about the same stuff with different words... there are only some many thoughts or social ideology's around. seems like a lot going on put it's just a piecemeal world right? serious statement from top to bottom. I just don't care any more if you guys know what I think. you can step up and engage or go for the cheap shots you usually do... don't give one cold fuck broham $.02

Ummmm... Mark is an INTJ, and I am as well. You're just a high INTJ

what is Newtonian reality?

Your cited explanation is exactly what I stated. Perhaps you do not understand it.
We measure time mechanically to give you some sort of reference but does not represent it.
Your mechanical measurement is external to it's true form that we can not measure.

Einstein only used the speed of light as a reference because no matter where you go in the universe, it is the same. Not that it has anything to do with each other.
Not all light travels at the same speed. Infra-red is slower than ultra violet. But it is the same no matter where you are. But it is only a mechanical reference. How far in how much mechanical time.
You have not done anything to measure time itself. It is not physical. It is without dimension.

The speed of all wavelengths of light is the same in the vacuum of space.

On Earth oxygen makes different wavelengths of light travel at different speeds.

incorrect. the simple fact is time is a problem in quantum mechanics. in the exact opposite way it's a problem in GR. physicists are struggling to combine GR and quantum mechanics and time is the big issue explaining the two together. that time issue impacts why we can't thoroughly explain gravity with either GR or QM.

this is a pretty straight forward article that's somewhat easy to read re: time not being measurable in quantum mechanics and the issues with explanations of time, gravity, and space in both theories.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startsw.../#4af907f658ea

No sorry, Time is not constant. Time is relative. Time for an object or person flows faster or slower than another person or object depending on how fast its going, or how much gravity is influencing it. This isn't just a theory, it has been proven again and again. The flow of time is different for satellites flying around the earth, and its very different for atoms flying through the LHC. Time is relative.


No buddy, sorry. Gravity is a force. There's a good primer on Gravity here: https://cosmosmagazine.com/physics/e...hat-is-gravity

gee, you are you confused by everything I said.
I made no conjecture to the definition of gravity.. read it again.

Time is the same for you no matter where you are.

ONLY Your 'perception' of time is relative to where you are. Your perception and reality do not always match.
So, those satellites you describe in orbit, run at the same time no matter where they are. Orbiting Earth, the Sun or Vega.

I believe your reference is...
If you wish (by example) to synchronize commands to act at once, you would have to calculate where they are, and the direction of movement (from where you are) so they would get the command at the same time. For the radio signal travels slightly lower than the speed of light (generally calculated at 300,000,000meters ps).

The Doppler effect applies so the transmitting radio signal has to be adjusted higher or lower depending on if the satellite is move towards us or away from us. And if we are receiving or transmitting.. It is all relative to where you are and where they are and the direction and speed they move at referenced from where we are.

But this still is a mechanical reference measurement that is effective to do the job. And only because you know the speed of a radio wave and the distance and direction and speed of the target. I use this frequently when I transmit to satellites. Or receive slow scan TV from the ISS.

But it does not actually measure time itself. All of the calculations are relevant to each other. Time is the same everywhere. If it was not, we would have a problem doing this.
But because time 'is' the same everywhere, we have to adjust the transmitting time and frequency of our radio signal signal to match the distance and movement of those satellites. Something we do not have to do with geostationary satellites and they are moving at the same rate as the rotation of the earth .

I receive weather imagery everyday from them and while it is seconds to travel to my receiver, I do not have to adjust the frequency of the radio signal. There is a relevance of it and me traveling at the same speed and direction. But I must adjust for the polar orbiting weather sat's. Lower frequency as they as they move away from me and higher as they move towards me.
Well documented Doppler effect.

A great example is as simple as looking into the night sky at the stars. Most of which to not exist right now. You are seeing them as they were, perhaps at a time even before earth existed. LOL, Apparently, the speed of light is much slower than time itself or you would be seeing them as they are, not as they were.
You might one day travel faster than the speed of light but you will never travel faster than time.

But it is the same time there as it is here. And those stars not likely to look like that now.
The Only thing that is different is your perception of it.
Einsteins explanation of time travel was only from your perception. Nowhere was he actually stating that you could physically travel through time, although, admittedly, it kinda sounds that way on the surface after the translation. It's all a matter of perception in description of relevance. Many of seemingly smart folks still can't get a grasp on that.
Think of light with the Doppler effect imposed on it. That was his description.

Gravity is a force derived from and relevant to mass. Nothing directly relevant to time.
But you could use the two to calculate other things. But you are still going to use some mechanical reference to describe time .

***

Here is a thought question for you all. It may help you think about this better.

If a explosion happened somewhere in the universe that could hurl/move projectiles faster than the speed of light and they were all headed for earth,
when would you know it here on earth ?
Did it happen before your ability to know it happened ?
was there any time travel involved ?

To see it for what it is, you must look at it from at least 3 perspectives. Each is a perception. None are the same.

I used that question, phrased slightly different, to quite my 8th grade science teacher. But he was not impressed. But a great guy because he would provoke this kind of thought.

Do not confuse the effects or measurement of speed , distance or mass with time.
You can make time whatever mechanical reference you apply to it 'for calculations' but you have not actually measured it.

While true, and also not ? Let's just talk geometry.

Draw a oscillating line of short wavelength over a distance.
Then
Draw a oscillating line of the 'same intensity' with a higher frequency over the same distance.

Measure the total length of your lines. They are not the same.
Now imagine in geometry that this is a 3d depiction (as it is in the real world) and that the distance is circular as it is and that distance can be multiplied by pi.
How you use this information is dependent on what you are calculating.

If they make the same endpoint at the same time, one will have traveled farther than the other across the 'same span' of distance and time.
Obviously, one is traveling faster than the other if the lines total distance in oscillation are not the same.

The point is, just because one is traveling slower than the other does not mean it can't achieve the same distance span in the same time.

It is only relevant for what you are measuring.

I tend to think of reality as 2 separate areas, Newtonian and 'virtual reality of the spirit world.' I don't think Newtonian physics really applies to thought.

a question for you... are gravity and time indivisible? no gravity no time?