Circles and the origin of the universe, can you prove that this is not true

In fact, the problem you are discussing has a lot to do with "geodesics".

Geodesic is the shortest (or maximum) distance between two points.

For example, if you take a plane from Beijing to Shanghai, the flight path of the plane is actually an arc, and this arc is the geodesic line on the earth.

The mass of the object does not absorb light, but the mass of the object can affect the curvature of the space around it.

In general relativity, we are talking about four-dimensional space, and we are always in three-dimensional space, so we always think that the trajectory we see is a straight line, but in fact, many rays of light are bent and propagated in four-dimensional space.

In the end, I think you're right about making the minimum distance shorter, just like if you point two dots on a piece of paper, and then fold the paper so that the two dots coincide, i.e. the space bends to change the length of the geodesic.

1. Is the universe expanding? Does the basis for your argument exist?

2. Is the speed of light constant? It seems to say that light is distorted in the face of great mass. The visible speed of light is also variable.

3. It is recommended that you study the theory of relativity, which will greatly change the view of the universe.

4. Your research method is to simplify and structure everything, which helps to understand in the simplest way, but one of the fatal flaws of your method is that it is difficult to avoid the index**. Probabilistic algorithms are a good solution, and you can use probability instead of your simple 1+1 pattern.

5. If the speed of light does not change, it can also be determined that the distance changes, in fact, any change is about the same, and the most important thing is to look at the relative. So studying the universe even has to take into account the change of your position, my gosh, I'm already dizzy thinking about this.

Let me correct you, irrational numbers are not irrational, they are real, so the area of the circle is also determined.

I think the landlord may be on the wrong foot.

But I'm sorry I can't answer your question.

These are just a coincidence Human thoughts are like this Every creature has its own mind So no matter whether human beings are wrong again and again, human beings will always believe that he is right, which is why human beings cannot be highly developed, and the Internet prophet will answer for you.

Light or particle activity is by no means linear.

This is the truth. You may be working on the black hole theory.

It makes sense to say and reason.

I learned physics and forgot a lot, so I joined in the fun

Welcome the landlord to the universe to chat!!

18,000 years ago, the cave people used a pointed stone tool to drill holes, one side of which was impenetrable, and then the other side. The tip of the stone tool is the center of the circle, and half of its width is the radius, so that a hole in the circle can be drilled with the same radius and the center of the circle. By the time of the pottery age, many pottery pieces were round.

Round pottery is made by placing clay on a turntable.

6,000 years ago, the Banpo people were already able to build round roofs. The ancients also found that the round wood was more labor-saving to roll on. Later, when they were carrying heavy loads, they would roll a few pieces of logs under the heavy loads, which would be much less strenuous than carrying them.

About 6,000 years ago, the Mesopotamians made the world's first wheel, the round wooden wheel. About 4,000 years ago, people fixed round wooden wheels to wooden frames, which became the first cars.

can make a circle and really understand the nature of the circle, but more than 2,000 years ago, it was Mozi in China who gave the concept of the circle: "One middle and the same length." This means that the circle has a center, and the length from the center to the circumference of the circle is equal.

This definition predates the definition of the circle by the Greek mathematician Euclid 100 years ago.

Earth from a microscopic point of view.

Definitely not a sphere, you have to figure that out! The surface of the earth is pitted and pitted, but on a macroscopic basis it is similar to a ball, why not other shapes We will put this issue aside first, and there are a few questions to explain to you.

First of all if you use CAD

Or take a photo and zoom in on a circle to the maximum number of pixels allowed by the program, and you will find that the pixels that make up the circle are actually rectangles. If you don't believe it, you try it first. I'm going to say this to show you that vision is sometimes inaccurate.

Then let's talk about why the Earth looks like a ball in space!

The first thing to know is how the earth was formed.

There is a gravitational force in all things, and this gravitational force makes objects attract each other and then come together, and the earth is the convergence of many celestial bodies to form the big thing that it is now. Then let's move on to plane geometry: triangles, squares, circles, hehe.

You notice that I'm giving all the examples, they're all flat shapes, this one.

I'll keep it, non-regular flat graphics you can prove for yourself.

Suppose a plane point is attractive to the surrounding points, so how do they combine if these two points are attracted to each other and then combined? I'll draw a picture for you.

But so. Be accountable to the end.

I'm sure to make it clear to you, you probably can't see this diagram clearly, I mean, ah, turn the particles into rectangles, and see how the rectangles with mass combine the extreme points.

Combined into a long strip you see maybe not?

You know, there are trillions of these concepts on Earth"Rectangle with mass"You say that if the earth becomes a long strip, will it be unstable?

If so, what would it be?

Scientifically, though, I can tell you.

The spherical shape is the most stable shape in nature, just as the square can be pressed into a parallelogram The square is unstable and the circle will not be deformed no matter how you press it (it does not involve material mechanics ** is a figure in theory, please note not to take the analogy in life, because the nature is different, the result is not the same).

Is the universe round or square? What secrets does it contain?

It's a circle. The universe, like the planets, should be round, and there are likely to be multiple universes outside the universe.

I think it should be square. The stars and nebulae in the universe are all round, and the universe should be different.

I disagree, because we don't know the boundary of the universe at the moment, so we can't determine whether it's round or square.

I think the universe is round, and the universe is a large circular body of space, and there are a lot of planets and gases in it.