Proove theory of relativity?
435368
I think u could visit this website for the general relativity:\n\nhttp://archive.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/GenRelativity.html
214436
try these links\nthts a really good question but its explainations is quite lengthy. so maybe if u go through all these links, u might get wat u really are looking for\n\nwww.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/txt/al.html\n\nwww.bartleby.com/173/\n\nwww-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/ ~history/HistTopics/General_relativity.html \n\nen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity\n\nwww2.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Cyberia/NumRel/GenRelativity.html\n\ngood luck and have fun!
1063023
Don't you think that relativity dictates that those two things are the same?\nEdited my old answer after thinking-\nmy answer is:\nIt doesn't make a difference if I say I'm going 65 miles/hr or if I say everything else is and I'm going 0.  For all intents, purposes, and consequences, it's the same.  It's the same in this case, frame of reference is crucial in measurement, and so essentially, there is no difference in macro scale physics.\nGeneral theory of relativity wise, I'm still not sure about.  It seems like there might be serious consequences for this idea due to the speed of light/space relationship.  It also seems like I'm not really qualified to do those calculations, and the people who are could very well have already thought of this.  They are rather bright.\nSo my rating for viability of the idea is: (drum roll)\n23%
636120
I had participated in a presentation competition in my college. We made a Powerpoint presentation on Einstein and his theories of relativity. We made it very simple. Go to my site (see link)\n\nhttp://www.geocities.com/sudeepjaiswal_2001/ppt.html\n\nOr directly download my presentation\n\nhttp://www.geocities.com/sudeepjaiswal_2001/ppt.zip\n\nHope it helps.
909749
space time is theory, it is not an individually absolute\nconcept, it depends on relative motion between\ndifferent objects and distinct observers......\nDifferent observers will have different answers\nfrom their point of reference.....\nWe all exist in space time, yet space & time as a\nwhole are different from the parts which we try\nto understand with our perceptions which can and\ndo show illusions of our mind-set ...\nYou can find this idea of space & time in Einstein's\nSpecial Relativity Theory ........\n\nentanglement falls under Quantum Physics and deals\nwith the phenomenon of spatially distant particles having\ncorrelated properties .......
569244
The key concept of relativity is 'inertial reference frame'.  For the person in the space ship traveling at the speed of light (how they got going that fast, I don't know), they will watch the hands move on their clock in a normal manner.\n\nNow, imagine that you were outside the space ship as it goes whizzing past you at a relative velocity of C and imagine that you could look into the spaceship and see the clock.  As far as you can tell, the clock has stopped.  Even if you had some sort of imaginary telescope that allowed you to watch the clock over a long period of time as it moves past you, it would appear to you as if time was not passing on the space ship.\n\nSince it would take infinite energy to accelerate the space ship up to the speed of light, it is better to think of this in terms of limits or 'as you approach' the speed of light.
745347
The theory of relativity is being used in Fermi lab, U.S. to "create" either energy or new matter from energy.  Newton's laws only define motion, but they do not explain why some of the mysteries of the solar sytem or the universe occur.  With Einstein's theory, however, these mysteries become clearer.  We understand more why they occur this way and can predict how much energy is being "created" by calculating for how much matter is "lost."  Fermi lab is working to create anti-matter, combine it with matter to create energy, and utilizing the energy into more matter -- it's one of their big projects.  I'm sure they're testing for more than that, but it's the overview of what they are doing.
1165464
Well, actually, your theory is very similar to that of the Theory of Relativity, or something. If you slowed down time by moving faster, the objects would literally gain weight. (Fat people, plz do not go on space missions...) And once you were travelling at the speed of light, you would have infinite weight. (But of course, your MASS would still be the same. So fat people should let out a big breath.) I'm not sure exactly which theory this is...
518583
Let’s start with what Einstein actually said… His Special Theory of Relativity started with two postulates: 1) that the laws of physics are observed to be the same in any non-accelerated reference frame and 2) that the speed of light (c) is observed to be the same for all observers.\n\nThe first assumption isn’t too worrisome, but the second seems trickier. It’s certainly not intuitively obvious, but it makes sense from both a theoretical and an observational perspective. Observational because the Michelson-Morley experiment (and others) detected no change in the velocity of light when measured from a moving frame of reference; theoretical because Maxwell’s Equations yield a specific value for the velocity of light.\n\nWhen Einstein considered Maxwell’s Equations, he realized that they don’t allow for a “standing wave” solution, which is what a light wave would look like if you were travelling at the speed of light. So he already sensed there would be a problem with travelling at very high speeds. Indeed, when you re-work the addition of velocities, it comes out to be not simple addition, but a fraction that never gets larger than c. Basically, what happens is that the measurement of time and distance changes, so a physical object (e.g., a spaceship) can never achieve lightspeed.\n\nHere’s where the infinite thing comes in.  Because the laws of physics must remain the same (remember the first postulate), then the changes in length and time at high velocities also start to affect the measurements of momentum and of energy—and since E=mc^2, mass and energy are equivalent, so mass itself has to change.  The rate of change has a term in the denominator that’s the square root of (1-(v/c)^2), so if the velocity (v) approaches the speed of light (c), then the denominator approaches zero; but if the denominator of a fraction approaches zero, then the total fraction approaches infinity.  Thus, you start to talk about problematic things such as infinite mass and energy and size.\n\nBut remember that nothing can actually travel at the velocity of light, so although this fraction should get very big, it shouldn’t actually become infinite.\n\n\nRyan Wyatt\nRose Center for Earth & Space\nNew York, New York
729757
hyperbolic plane, you can check what the different models for hyperbolic geometry are.\n\nanotherone, would be Riemannian geometry, which is the basis for relativity theory.\n`
630475
Theory of Relativity- Light is the one speed that does remain constant.
901353
It would have been helpful if you had cited where Einstein said this.\n\nBut here's the deal...all motion is relative (which is why the theory is called the theory of "relativity")...relative to something or somethings.  Even things that seem to be perfectly still, like the tree in your front yard, are moving relative to something...relative to the sun, for example.  In other words, there is no such thing as an absolute motion relative to absolute zero velocity.\n\nWith all these motions (velocities) we have accelerations (v = at; a = v/t) that are, like their velocities, not absolute.  They, too, are relative.  So, as F = ma or F = mv^2/r = (m(v/t)^2)/r, the associated forces are relative.\n\nAs a consequence, there are forces acting on everything, even when none is readily apparent.  That tree, for example, has weight, which is one force.  But it also has a kinetic force (centripetal) due to its spin around the Earth and its revolution around the sun while on the Earth.  Then there's the motion of the solar system around the center of the galaxy, the motion of the galaxy through the universe, and the expansion of the universe itself.\n\nSo a single measured force is really the vector sum of all those other forces created by all those other motions.  So the notion that there is but a single force at work is "fictitious."  The good news is that the single force usually works in our observable world because we can ignore the effects of all those other forces.  But, alas, that is not the case in the relativistic world of near light speeds.  That is probably why Einstein would indicate what you claim he did.
1179434
Relativityis the only way we currently have of trying to extend our ideas beyind the local to the rest of the universe.\n\nThis is because the intuitive assumptions that we can simply extend our frame of reference here on earth to fill the rest of the universe (like extending the lines on a map off the page into infinity) is simply wrong.\n\nThe fact that the speed of light is the same everywhere in the universe, regardless of how you are moving, means that there is a difference between the reference frames of observers moving relative to one another. You can fill the universe with the reference frame of either observer, but they are different and neither is preferred. This is special relativity.\n\nThe fact that gravity is indistinguishable from acceleration, and that the force of gravity is in opposite directions on either side of the centre of mass of a gravitating mass means that you cannot construct a single reference frame that fills all of the universe in a simple way. This is general relativity.
303443
Simple Relativity\n\nAlbert Einstein's 1905 paper "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" introduced the special theory of relativity. Special relativity considers that observers in inertial reference frames, which are in uniform motion relative to one another, cannot perform any experiment to determine which one of them is "stationary". This is known as the principle of relativity. While this principle was not new to Albert Einstein's work, he found that including electromagnetism in this principle required a new formalism with many surprising consequences. In particular, it required the speed of light in a vacuum to be the same for all these observers, regardless of their motion or the motion of the source of the light.\n\nOne of the strengths of special relativity is that it can be derived from only two premises (although Albert Einstein did not derive it this way):\n\nThe speed of light in a vacuum is constant (specifically, 299,792,458 meters per second). \nThe laws of physics are the same in any inertial frame of reference. This means that the laws of physics observed by a hypothetical observer traveling with a relativistic particle must be the same as those observed by an observer who is stationary in the laboratory. \n\nGeneral relativity\n\nGeneral relativity was developed by Einstein in the years 1911 - 1915. General relativity is a geometrical theory which postulates that the presence of mass and energy "curves" spacetime, and this curvature affects the path of free particles (and even the path of light). It uses the mathematics of differential geometry and tensors in order to describe gravitation without the use of the force of gravity. This theory considers all observers to be equivalent, not only those moving with uniform speed.
872305
No.  The theory of relativity states that an object moving at a high enough velocity will appear to shrink along the direction of motion and increase mass from the point of view of a non moving observer, so much so that, if a physical object would be to travel at the speed of light, its dimension will be zero and its mass infinite.
29195
There are actually two theories of relativity: special relativity and general relativity. \n\nIn a nutshell, relativity was Einstein's way of saying that nature always appears to have the same laws, no matter where or what you are. And it does this without having to have some sort of base reference place in the universe, or a base time. If you are on a plane going real fast, the speed of light always seems to be the speed of light. Special relativity accounts for this by things like time dilation (time moves at a different rate for you on the plane than for me on the ground.) Your size is different. Your weight is different. But to you it always seems the same.\n\nAnyway, it is a complex subject, and the easiest way to understand special relativity, the first of the two theories is this:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_relativity_for_beginners
52144
Here are the postulates:\n\n(1) The laws of physics are the same as viewed from the perspective of any observer moving at a constant speed.\n(2) The value of the speed of light (denoted "c") is the same in every reference frame.\n\nThe first condition isn't very strange: You'd expect physics to be the same if you were on a very smoothly moving train as you would if you were standing on the Earth.\n\nThe second condition is very strange: Suppose you have two people moving with respect to each other.  One of them is moving at 1/2 the speed of light and the other is moving at 1/4th the speed of light.  Now, a beam of light is passing by them.  They'll both measure the speed of that beam RELATIVE TO THEIR VELOCITY to be c.  \n\nNote that this is a big contrast between what we'd normally expect.  Suppose you were moving at 7 miles per hour and I threw a ball past you at 10 miles per hour.  You'd see the ball moving away from you (another way of saying "moving relative to you" at 3 miles/hour because 10 mph - 7 mph = 3 mph).\n\nIn our light example we just saw that both observers measure the velocity of light relative to their own velocity to be the same.  It'd be like if your friend was moving at 5 miles per hour and you were moving at 3 miles per hour and you both claimed the ball was moving away from you at the same rate.\n\nAt any rate, what this is meaning is that neither time nor space is an absolute quantity.  If you were to observe a rocketship moving near the speed of light (as measured with respect to you), you would observe:\n\n(a) That the rocket appears to contract (shrink) in it's direction of motion, and\n(b) Events aboard the spaceship would appear to occur more slowly.\n\nHowever, they would measure the same things happening to you and the events along the spaceship to be proceeding normally.\n\nThat is only a very brief introduction.  If you'd like a better, but still accessable to a non-scientist, account of this I suggest you consider reading http://casa.colorado.edu/~ajsh/sr/sr.shtml .