Albert and General Relativity?

[Pommie]

This year is 100 years since Einstein published the Theory of General Relativity. However, I can't find the exact date. Anyone any idea? Just want to raise a glass in his honour.

Mike.

 

[jpanhalt]

This is apparently one of his seminal papers: https://myweb.rz.uni-augsburg.de/~eckern/adp/history/einstein-papers/1916_49_769-822.pdf
The received date is at the end:

Unfortunately, his theory was presented over the course of several years (https://www.einstein.caltech.edu/), so to pin it down to a specific date would require knowing exactly which of his papers is accepted as being the "first."

John

 

[JoeJester]

Unfortunately, his theory was presented over the course of several years (https://www.einstein.caltech.edu/), so to pin it down to a specific date would require knowing exactly which of his papers is accepted as being the "first."

Celebrate them all. Einstein, as celebrated as he was, would be honored.

 

[ronsimpson]

Just want to raise a glass in his honour.

100 years on one planet might be 17.4 years on another. It depends on where you stand. So drinking to Einstein any time is a good idea. (in moderation)

 

[large_ghostman]

isnt it something like for every 2000' above sea level = time faster by 20ns over 4 days?

Was a utterly brilliant documentary on it the other week

 

[ronsimpson]

isnt it something like for every 2000' above sea level = time faster by 20ns over 4 days?

I am at 5280 feet. I feel 50nS ahead of you.

 

[KeepItSimpleStupid]

We're also coming up on the 30th anniversary of the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster on January 28th It's not something to celebrate. I just learned that Sally Ride really was the astronaut that brought the fault to light. Her involvement wasn't revealed to anyone until after her death. That was a "secret" between two people. The other person made all of the noise. I think it came down to is that she wasn't qualified to make the determination that the O-ring seal was at fault.

 

[jpanhalt]

isnt it something like for every 2000' above sea level = time faster by 20ns over 4 days?

Was a utterly brilliant documentary on it the other week

The atomic clock at at NIST in Boulder, Colorado can tell what floor of a building it is one. Here's a reference: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/science...really-does-pass-quicker-higher-altitude.html Using the value of 90 ns /foot elevation over a lifetime (approx 27,000 days), I back calculated to about 24 ns/4 days at 2000' (i.e. 3x10^-12 s/day for each foot of elevation). It appears your recollection is right on.

John

 

[large_ghostman]

I am at 5280 feet. I feel 50nS ahead of you.

Means you ages quicker than I do! When I am older I am going to live on the boat lol. Thanks for that john, I wasnt sure if I had remembered all the facts and figures they gave!
Utterly fascinating stuff. Some of it is hard to get your head around, like time being relative to gravity

 

[ronsimpson]

My maximum speed is such that I don not worry about time warp.
1nS here and there has little effect.
Yesterday I sat down on the couch and lost 1 hour. That is a problem.

 

[Pommie]

As the discussion has turned to time I thought I'd share my observation.
As I want to maximize my time here I'm going to make a few changes when I reach 60. It seems that 90% of people over 60 die in their bed. So, to prevent this, when I reach 60 I'm going to sleep on the couch.

Mike.

 

[MaxHeadRoom78]

There was a very good documentary on Nova just recently, I believe it is out on utube now.

Max.

 

[large_ghostman]

using special relativity (as far as we can) and the concept of big bang.

Before the creation (big bang) of the universe there would of been nothing, at least as we know it. So if there wasnt anything what went bang?

From what I can find the general opinion of the singularity seems the most common, but where did that come from?
Its just a view but I am more inline with a universe that was eaten alive by black holes! we know they exist and we know there is no escape of anything from them, so if you had a universe full of black holes that had almost swallowed up the entire universe, what would happen if a smaller one was so full it became unstable?

Personally I think if special relativity is correct and applicable to this scenario then the big bang would likely of been a full black hole, still trying to swallow matter which would of tore it apart.

I cant remember the name for the theory this is based on but I am more inclined to believe this version rather than some of the others.
At school in ethical studies I debated if God and science were compatible, I won the round stating that God and science are completely compatible for the following reason.

Both religion and science agree on the universe being being created, religion calls this god and science calls it the singularity, neither actually knows what it was or consisted of, therefore I conclude both are the same but different terminology is used. It was slightly longer argument than that but makes my point

 

[large_ghostman]

My maximum speed is such that I don not worry about time warp.
1nS here and there has little effect.
Yesterday I sat down on the couch and lost 1 hour. That is a problem.

The bigger problem however is your hour is slightly longer than my hour so you still aged quicker in that hour . How come we have the expression look after the pennies and the pounds take care of themselves? And yet we think a second is a small unit of time?
If a penny is the smallest denomination of currency then surely we should look after every nano second etal.

Also speed must be flawed, we measure it as ~9.8m/s in free fall? but if you measure to the nano second then an object falling from 35,000' will fall slightly further (but slower) per meter, than an object dropped at 10,000'. So acceleration calculations should but dont take height into account (at least we dont adjust for it).

 

[large_ghostman]