Space-time Is What Exactly?

Author: ebuc

Posts

Total: 50
Topic's author
#1
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Here is the issue with a something called a ' Space ' or  ' Space-time ', that can be bent/warped., --as stated in following video---  that, Ive been addressing for years with logical, common sense critical thinking.

Only and **occupied space** medium aka material/substance/physical reality etc,  can be bent/warped. Ex 2.4 piece of untreated lumber on ground overnight will bent/twist/warp due ground moisture.

So when I hear this person in following vid --in first segment about planet Mercury's strange anomaly solved by Einstien and caused Einstein to have heart palpitations--- is that space-time should be seen as ive presented many times as:

Outer, Meta-physical,  Gravity { non-quantized } occupied space and geometrically represented by positive curvature (  )

Physical reality { observed/quantised time } occupied space and symbolized by sine-wave /\/\/ or as ^v^v^

Inner, Meta-physical Dark Energy { non-quantized } occupied space and geometrically represented by negative curvature )(

None have yet to ever offer logical, common sense critical thinking that validates or invalidates this concept.

#2
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ebuc
Topic's author
#3
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
3RU, if you know, please give Time stamp for where --if any--  he addresses the issue of the thread topic " What exactly is Space-time is Exactly"?

Im very clear, that first and foremost 'space-time' has to be an occupied space medium if its going to be bent/warped etc as the is presented by the person in the utube I posted.   No one addresses the issues of ' the fabric of space-time ', as I have done specifically/exactly.
#4
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ebuc
fabric of spacetime is discussed
Topic's author
#5
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
Halfway through --some skimming-- and only words stand out to me is his ' ether ' and ' wave conujnucitons '. 

So yes, I have not watched most of it to find the words space-time and even more so, fabric of space-time as I addressed in first post referencing Harry  Cliffs use of it.

If you read or heard what the fabric of space-time is exactly/specifically, in you linked vid 3RU, please share.


#6
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@ebuc
Topic's author
#7
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
3RU, I saw all of that. No words of fabric of spacetime.  16 vortices is not same as fabric of space-time.
I dont think you have anything significant in regards to what I askiing you. PLeaes share if you find anything in that vid or elsewhere, as to my query presented to you as related to post #1

Thx fro your efforts. No banana for you yet.

Note: and in the last vid you sent, again it shows two tori, however,  at most the vid jjust says there are these two electro-magnetic fields and north and south. Yeah so what?   Earth has only one mangetic field.  Any info regard the tori specifically is not much and/or insignifcant with more explanation.  I forget from 1st vid that had this stuff also. 
#8
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
Space-time is a corruption of what we generally regard as space and time.

Space and time generally refer to a place and duration where material events are afforded the chance to occur.

Space-time is a theoretical proposition.

Or so we think.
#9
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@ebuc
A lot of people try to construe physical theories literally, and consequently claim spacetime is an independently existing structure that bears its own properties (commonly called a fabric). But this is just another instance of confusing the tools of science with the substance of science.

Spacetime has no objective reality, it is only an intellectual concept, it has no ontological status independent of human existence, it is an abstract mathematical construct. Einstein actually got the concept from Minkowski, but we only know about it because of what Einstein did with it.

First, let’s recognize that the mathematics of scientific theory are only theoretical abstractions, scientific knowledge is theoretical knowledge. In relativity theory spacetime is a mathematical structure used to describe and extrapolate from observed phenomena, space and time are simply coordinate systems of the geometric structure in which things and events occur within the theory. The mathematical equations are not meant to be ontological statements, they are simply a tool for describing how the variables are related to one another within the theory. The problem of ontologically literalizing the spacetime component of Relativity Theory into something that has independent existence is that it conflicts with the theory it comes from.

The most novel feature of the General Theory is its general covariance, which means we are free to use arbitrary spacetime coordinate systems. In the theory spacetime is a four-dimensional coordinate system that represents a manifold of events, the problem of ontologically literalizing the spacetime component of the General Theory into a substantivalist substance that has independent existence is that it conflicts with the theory it comes from, if there are no metric or matter fields, there is no manifold of events. According to Einstein’s theory of General relativity, if there is no matter and energy, there is no time and space.

When the press asked Einstein what was most important about the general theory he said:

"People before me believed that if all the matter in the universe were removed, only space and time would exist. My theory proves that space and time would disappear along with matter."


Topic's author
#10
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Zed, see post 1.  How does your words differrent the scenario I put forth defining space and time, or a space-time?

Im looking for specifics regarding what fabric of space-time is.

Generally fabric = an occupied space medium aka cloth, silk, nylon, etc.
Topic's author
#11
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Sidewalker
A lot of people try to construe physical theories literally, and consequently claim spacetime is an independently existing structure that bears its own properties (commonly called a fabric).
A fabric, wood, steel are occupied space and can be warped/twisted/etc.

The vid in #1 by Harry Cliff is very clear, matter { sun } warps space-time. We've seen this kind of statement for 100 years now. 

I'm fairly clear in #1 and others refuse to address my comments directly as to the specifics of what the space { occupied space } and time [ physical reality } are.
SW, PLease read again and address specifics to validate or invalidate with logical, common sense critical thinking, so I dont have to copy and past significant parts of #1 over and over and over again.

1} Outer, Meta-physical,  Gravity { non-quantized } occupied space and geometrically represented by positive curvature (  )

2} Physical reality { observed/quantised time } occupied space and symbolized by sine-wave /\/\/ or as ^v^v^

3} Inner, Meta-physical Dark Energy { non-quantized } occupied space and geometrically represented by negative curvature )(

Again three three primary kinds of occupied space --and putting aside the truly non-occupied outside of Finite occupied space Universe---  none have yet to ever offer logical, common sense critical thinking that validates or invalidates this concept.


#12
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Sidewalker
Spacetime has no objective reality
please explain gravitational lensing
#13
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
Spacetime has no objective reality
please explain gravitational lensing
Please explain Einstein's Hole Argument.
#14
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
Knew you would like that.


Could be a very elastic super-fabric not yet discovered,

So thin one might be fooled into thinking that it was one dimensional.

Would it go tick tock?
Topic's author
#15
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@3RU7AL
please explain gravitational lensing

Same as the sun/matter warping of fabric of space-time in the vid by Harry Cliff., however, the fabric space-time is not exactly defined.


....space(> time<)(> time< )space....

....space(^v^v^)(^v^v^)space.....

...Gravity(> * <)<-- Dark Energy -->(> * <)<Gravity

Gravity  -----><----- Gravity aka mass-attractive/contractive

Dark Energy <----->Dark Energy aka repulsive/expansion { cosmological constant Einstein }

EMRadidation ^v^v^v^v^vEMRadiation expansive with attractive aspects of di-polar charge and dipolar magnetics




Topic's author
#16
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Could be a very elastic super-fabric not yet discovered,

Could be though no evidence of such yet. Correct?

Mass attractive/contractive Gravity is part of the answer for Gravitational lensing, and the ' warping of the Fabric of Space-time '.

However, Dark Energy as the diametric other side of the graviton ergo graviton-darkEon has to be considered. Yes? See Roy Kerr's rotational black holes define a torus of any particles surrounding the rotating black holes.  All black holes are  rotating.

Here is the 2-D lattice { field } of space and time  and the first 13 nodes define the gravtion-darkEon, along with their 91 lines-of-relationship

....1...............5p...........7p..............11p......13p......................17p.......Gr
-
0.............................6.............................12.....................................18...Phy R
.............3p...........................9......................................15.....................Phy R
-
........2p......4.....................8.....10.........................14.........16...................Dark E

This above each line curves around  so as we have four concentric circles (   (   (  O  )  )    ) and via a birds eye view or bisection of this minimal Quantum Torus of Universe ...space(> * <)(> * <)space.....with the diametic invaginations from outer G and inner DE, to create the Phy. Reality ^v^v^v sine-wave association.

No tricks { slight of hand } here. No complex maths. 

Geodesic curvatures  between outer and inner nodes, ---not shown-- complete this minimal Quantum Torus as a 3-D Matrix with the two inside lines of our quantized physical reality being our observed{ quantised } time.

18 nodal events = 153 lines-of-relationship and the 91 lines-of-realtionship = minimal quantum pulse { not a torus } of Universe the graviton-darkEon.

Many years ago, someone asked me, ' what is the significance of the prime-p numbers?  I dunno that there is a significance, however, what I can see is that each line ergo circle, has a prime number, except the top peak of the internal sine-wave 0.....6....12.....18 and I mention always there exist 1 combinations quark and anti-quark of Universe.

0...4....12.....18 also is minimal set for being of a systemic integrity nature

0....1...2P is minimal triangulated set of structural integrity, and here we have one prime number    and again, no top peak of sine-wave association is involved.

This says to me, that, a lack of prime number  top peak of the internal sine-wave may be of significance. I dunno

#17
Sidewalker
Sidewalker's avatar
Debates: 8
Posts: 2,669
3
2
5
Sidewalker's avatar
Sidewalker
3
2
5
-->
@3RU7AL
Spacetime has no objective reality
please explain gravitational lensing
Gravitational lensing has absolutely nothing to do with it.

Gravitational lensing is a matter of the relationship between photons and mass,it's about how photons are affected by mass.  Gravity is not a function of spacetime, it is a function of mass. Theinteraction between photons and mass are represented by changes in themathematics of the coordinate system used, but the coordinate system used isarbitrary. 

Time and space are measurements, they measure things but arenot themselves things, space measures the distance between things, timemeasures change. They are useful mental tools, but they are abstractrepresentations of reality, not statements about reality itself.  Spacetime is a variable in the formulas of the GeneralTheory of Relativity which allows the theory to make predictions. They areexperiential realities, conceptual in nature, they exist in the mind, if thereis no one to experience it, there is no time or space, there are only things withspatial properties and processes with temporal durations.  
Topic's author
#18
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Sidewalker
Time and space are measurements, they measure things but are not themselves things, space measures the distance between things, timemeasures change. They are useful mental tools, but they are abstract representations of reality, not statements about reality itself.

Semi-false.

1} Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts ---are not and occupied space or non-occupied space---  of space, concepts of time, God, Toyotas, Space, Footballs, Numbers, Pi, Equaation etc ex math ergo geometrical triangulation to get a fix on something is done via occupied space physical somethings { observed time },
..note: Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts has no spin, no charge, no mass, no weight, taste, color, axis, precession, etc as in the case of occupied space phenomena

2} ex occupied space --Fermionic matter and bosonic forces--  ex EMRadiation, { radio, radar, micro-waves, } etc is a bosonic force mediated between electrons,  some of which are used { ex GPS satelites } to triangulate also using visble light ergo humans get a fix of three smoke signals, or shadow of the tetrahedron on Mars, aids in determining its height{ ome mile high } and using bilateral eyes to also key manifest a 3D view. Two eyes and distant object is a triangulation experience.

...2a} occupied space three primaries ---or so I speculate, based on knowledge base---, and Ive been very clear, that, teh mass-attractive, Gravity force ergo ultra-micro, non-quantixed, bosonic force,  medias between all matter of Universe and that is what Gravitional lensing is about.  Sidewalker is in error in various places.

Dark Energy is speculate is also occupied space --diametric opposite of Gravity--- that, is a primary Space like Gravity.

Occupied space does not exist without Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts  ergo patterns, i.e the two are complementary to each other, eternally to each other and both are eternally existent.

Any other belief in those regards is ignorance of logical, common sense critical thinking conclusions.

None have yet, or ever will offer any logical common sense critical thinking any of the my comments as presented in this thread. Unless my quick typing mis-spoke.  It takes many words to some times refine the clear definning of what is meant, and what is closet to absolute truth.

Space is  Gravity, Dark Energy and the occupied space observed/quantized time is physical reality ergo matter warps Gravitation Space and Dark Energy Space


#19
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@ebuc
I am no expert, but I think academic journals from, idk, google scholars, is more credible evidence than youtube videos and you should switch to those and link them here if you want to expand your thoughts. 
Topic's author
#20
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@Intelligence_06
I am no expert, but I think academic journals from, idk, google scholars, is more credible evidence than youtube videos and you should switch to those and link them here if you want to expand your thoughts.
1} Albert  E makes a comment--see in my profile comments--- about his education being the biggest impediment to his learning ---learning from the experts is insuiated i believe--

2} Again, no one has offer any logical common sense critical thinking that invalidates my givens as presented  in post #1.

3} sidewalkers comments infer that Gravity, space-time and any warping/bending/twisting thereof if just abstract concepts of mathematical thoughts, not occupied space,

4} Mass-attraction occurs and if it is not occupied space bosonic force of Gravity, then please explain better than Harry Cliff has done, and I trust his knowledge base as well or better than Sidewalkers, on the issues Harry disscussess,

5} Occupied space , as in'  space-time ' = non-quantized, occupied space Gravity (  )  --complemented by Meta-space maths { complex maths included } ergo geometric locations aka triangulations i.e. to get a fix or caculate a trajectory etc on a location and target ---

...5a} Occupied space time, as in time in ' space-time ' = our observed { quantized } physical reality --complemented by abstract Meta-space time and again used to get exact location in geometric space---,

...5b} Occupied space, as in ' space-time ' =   non-quantized, occupied space Dark Energy )( --complemented by Meta-space maths again, to this one is mostly about acceleration of the expansion or, seeming expansion of occupied space Universe.

I'm no expert either,  however based on at least 100 years of knoeledge regarding Gravity aka mass-attraction we have heard thousands of time from reputable scientist that the sun and galaxies etc warp a ' something ' labeled ' space-time ', ergo photons follow this warped space-time curvature.

So continue to ask you and others what exactly/specifically is this ' space-time ', is that, can be warped/twisted/bent etc?
 
I believe it is kind of incorrect ---if not nutty--- to say, that, space-time is just and abstract,Meta-space concept of mind/intellect, and not occupied space something, that is bent/curved/warped and the occupied space photons around galaxies and suns etc are not following abstract Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts, rather and occupied space called Gravity, if not in some specical-case  set of circumstances,

regarding the expansion of Universe, then we incur occupied space Dark Energy.  Or do you Intelligence thing Dark Energy is also not an occupied space, and rather just an abstract, Meta-space mind/intellect/concept?  Well do you Intelligence?

I think Dark Energy is occupied space, and may possibly be causing us in --physical reality---  to think the Universe is seemingly expanding., and Ive posted before my poor askew based diagram of how and why that scenario may be incurring.

PLease share when you have logical common sense critical thinking that adds to, or detracts from my scenarios as presented.
#21
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
Space: the unoccupied areas of the universe containing no solid matter. There is of course the argument that there are stray atoms everywhere. But for simplification I will rule out a single atom as solid matter, which it is.
Time : The distance between to occupied areas of space in the universe. Time and distance are different but are related it takes time to travel a distance.  

I know, to simple and succinct. But with that said, a 6 year old can understand it. And it isn't anymore complicated than that.  You can make it seem more complicated, but it really isn't.
#22
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@sadolite
The Universe has not existed forever. It was born. Around 13.82 billion years ago, matter, energy, space – and time – erupted into being in a fireball called the Big Bang. It expanded and, from the cooling debris, there congealed galaxies – islands of stars of which our Milky Way is one among about two trillion.
#23
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@FLRW
OK then. Doesn't really answer the question the OP is asking though.    "Space-time Is What Exactly?"
#24
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,594
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@sadolite
In physics, spacetime is a mathematical model that fuses the three dimensions of space and the one dimension of time into a single four-dimensional continuum. Spacetime diagrams are useful in visualizing and understanding relativistic effects such as how different observers perceive where and when events occur.
#25
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@FLRW
So is my succinct simple response  to the OP's question  correct?

Space: the unoccupied areas of the universe containing no solid matter. There is of course the argument that there are stray atoms everywhere. But for simplification I will rule out a single atom as solid matter, which it is.
Time : The distance between to occupied areas of space in the universe. Time and distance are different but are related it takes time to travel a distance.  

I know, to simple and succinct. But with that said, a 6 year old can understand it. And it isn't anymore complicated than that.  You can make it seem more complicated, but it really isn't.

Topic's author
#26
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
Space: the unoccupied areas of the universe containing no solid matter.
Like the others a false comment. I think your clueles about subject of  ' warped space-time '.

Filled with occupied space bosonic forces and some tau-neutrinos { matter }.

 
Time : The distance between to occupied areas of space in the universe. Time and distance are different but are related it takes time to travel a distance.

That Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts of mathematical time. Old news 

Observed time is our quantized physical reality.  Simple


There may exist many six year olds with less ego than most adults who understand Universe better than you Sad.  I dunno.
Thats irrelevant to the topic of this thread. Your batting zero. 3 strikes and your out.

Topic's author
#27
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@FLRW
The Universe has not existed forever. It was born. Around 13.82 billion years ago, matter, energy, space – and time – erupted into being in a fireball called the Big Bang. It expanded and, from the cooling debris, there congealed galaxies – islands of stars of which our Milky Way is one among about two trillion.

False FLRW. Occupied space cannot be created nor destroyed. PLease learn the 1st of law of thernomdynamics before your next post.

And you do not answer the question of regarding specifics of ' warped space-time ". 

1} SideW thinks is a warped abstract concept, an not occupied space. He is incorrect, those ego does not allow in some truths,

2} Zed is correct that it is and exotic force and that exotic force is Gravity and Dark Energy.  And the time part is physical reality.  All three of those have there abstract Meta-space complement.   So far none here seem to grasp what the word complement means in regard to Space and Meta-space complement to Space.

3} SAd, still looking for a six year to explain . ' warped space-time ' to him.

None here have offerre my logical common sense critical thinking to address my question. 3RU at least gave a correct aside about Gravitational lensing aka ' warped space-time '.

Abstract, Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego are not occupied space nor truly non-occupied space.  A six year old might get it as they may have less pre-conceived conditioning in those regards and be open to cosmic truth in those regards.

...space(> * <)(> * <)space.... in place of ignorance, ego often rasise its head, as it thinks it must have an oppinion.  That is good, insofar as, it may spur others to re-think.  Many here do need to do some rethinking in a logical, common sense critical thinking pathway of approach to a few cosmic ideas Ive put forward in this thread and others
#28
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
-->
@ebuc
You don't answer the OP's question and also fail to demonstrate how I am wrong.

Ego? 

If this isn't a display of ego off the charts I don't know what is

....space(> time<)(> time< )space....

....space(^v^v^)(^v^v^)space.....

...Gravity(> * <)<-- Dark Energy -->(> * <)<Gravity

Gravity  -----><----- Gravity aka mass-attractive/contractive

Dark Energy <----->Dark Energy aka repulsive/expansion { cosmological constant Einstein }

EMRadidation ^v^v^v^v^vEMRadiation expansive with attractive aspects of di-polar charge and dipolar magnetics

#29
sadolite
sadolite's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,166
3
2
4
sadolite's avatar
sadolite
3
2
4
What purpose does a void with nothing in it serve?

What purpose does time serve in a void that contains nothing?

What purpose does matter serve if it has no where to exist?

Time space and matter are all dependent upon each other to bring purpose to one another.
Topic's author
#30
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,919
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@sadolite
You have no logical common sense critical thinking to offer and I think your trolling cause my frustration in two threads now.

Get your mental state together of leave me alone, please