Implications
The implications of this might be huge in Astrophysics. Consider that
this presentation started off with a non-accelerating observer
possibly aging one hour of his life, as he watched the ACCELERATING
one appear to age 12 years. Such an example represents a perceived
time rate about 100,000 times faster than he was personally
experiencing.
This would ONLY occur under the conditions of General
Relativity, where there was acceleration involved.
We saw that
in the most extreme (last) of the calculation examples given,
where the Traveler lived 774.3 days while the Earth observer
would have only aged around ten minutes.
That is a factor of
more than 80,000 as a time factor.
You might also notice that the
situation presented there was not even a very extreme one.
situation discussed below of material which is falling into an
immensely strong gravity well, the acceleration would constantly
increase, and the Time Compression factor would continue to rise
at immensely quick rates.
Pulsars and other very rapidly perceived phenomena
It is not absolutely
clear whether the GR effects apply when the Relativistic acceleration
is a (radial) central acceleration. But if they do, that means the
same effects would occur when WE on Earth observe rapidly (Relativistic)
rotating objects in space. Say we look at a (rapidly rotating) pulsar,
or a quasar or an accretion disk. WE see that it seems to be rotating
one hundred times per second. And so Physicists devise all kinds of
peculiar ideas and speculations regarding how to explain this
ultra-rapid rotation. However, if this &TC& effect applies
for circular motion and central Relativistic acceleration, it seems
credible that the reality is that the object may be ACTUALLY be rotating
only 1/100,000 as fast as it appears to us! A rotation of once per
thousand seconds is still really fast, but it then does not require all
the exotic logic currently being applied to try to explain lightning
fast rotation!
Black Holes, Accretion Disks, etc
The reasoning presented here MIGHT even show that such a concept as
a black hole might not even be very possible!
The general assumption
is that an object which would fall into a black hole would accelerate
due to the pull of gravity, and have ever increasing acceleration.
Fine, that means that GR would apply.
Consider now the perception
Shortly above, we discussed how a non-accelerating observer
might see an accelerating space traveler appear to age 12 years during
a single hour of observing.
Now consider that the acceleration
associated with a black hole would ever increase.
An hour of observing
might quickly include a THOUSAND YEARS, or a MILLION YEARS or a
BILLION YEARS of actual time experienced by the object that was
being accelerated.
The point being made here is that IF there are
actual black holes, the forever accelerating situation that we assume
MIGHT mean that the object has been ACTUALLY falling in for millions
or billions of years, not yet to have even REACHED the actual location
of the black hole itself!
Yes, we might see (in our non-accelerating
rest-frame) something appear to fall inward to an unseen destination
very quickly, but the REALITY might be extremely different than we
think we see!
Perceived Brightness
Note also that there would have been 12 years worth of radiated energy
that would have arrived here in a period of one hour! This suggests
that the object would appear to us to be 100,000 times brighter than
it actually is.
Possibly some of the great difficulties of Physics dealing with
Quasars, Pulsars and the like might turn out to be far simpler to
resolve. We have generally assumed that if an object sends us the
radiation equivalent to 10 million stars, it must be quite huge, but
when we see it have brightness variations on the period of months,
we see a great dilemma because that implies that it is small. If
the actual object was actually only 1/100,000 as bright as we perceive
it to be AND if the months we see during a variation are actually
many years, many of the serious problems of Astrophysics might find
some fairly simple resolutions.
But, of course, that would depend on whether GR effects actually apply
for Relativistic radial acceleration. It is merely mentioned here as
one of many possible implications of this new perspective.
Relativity has many aspects which are hard to understand or to see
where logic exists.
I see one that seems especially troublesome.
Imagine that there were two planets near opposite sides of the Universe,
each headed toward the other at extremely high CONSTANT speed.
That means
that Special Relativity should apply and therefore Time Dilation.
within two meters per second of the speed of light, where the Time Compression
effect would be more than a thousand trillion to one IN BOTH DIRECTIONS.
There is an accurate atomic clock on both planets and they each have
amazing telescopes to be able to see the clock on the other planet
at any time.
See the problem?
While planet 1 SEES exactly one
year pass on planet 2, planet 1 actually would experience a thousand
trillion years, longer than anything has ever existed.
requires that planet 1 is immensely old.
Now look from planet 2,
and see the similar situation, where only one year on planet 1 would
pass while planet 2 experiences a thousand trillion years, but we just
saw that planet 1 necessarily existed a thousand trillion years,
EACH of which would have to match up with a thousand trillion years
on planet 2.
As Special Relativity and Time Dilation is currently
understood, BOTH planets would have to exist for impossible periods
That indicates that the current theory must somehow be wrong.
But Time Dilation is considered to be a simple and obvious consequence
of Special Relativity.
The explanation of this bizarre situation is equally bizarre!
order that two objects GET to a relative CONSTANT velocity of just
two m/s less than the velocity of light REQUIRES the one which had
done all that accelerating to have &aged& astoundingly fast,
due to the Time Compression effect of acceleration (in General
Relativity).
In other words, the one that did the acceleration
would have to have ALREADY experienced those thousands of trillions
of years of acceleration, BEFORE the situation that we now are
considering.
The point being made here is that, since the Universe
appears to be about 13 billion years old, NEITHER object had enough time
to accelerate to that great a relative CONSTANT velocity, which
means that the example we have been speculating about could NOT
have been possible!
Even though Relativity often seems very
peculiar, it STILL has to comply with the Laws of science!
The equations above make clear that there
is an intimate relationship between the Time Dilation of Special
Relativity and the Time Compression of General Relativity.
A trip can
only make sense once it is completed, that is that the observer and
traveler are both again in the same inertial reference frame.
That indicates that acceleration is a necessary PRE-CONDITION for
Time Dilation as an EARLIER Time Compression due
to acceleration, at least for any Static Reference Frame.
More, whatever
the total cumulative effect of that (previous) Time Compression might
then become available for a later Time Dilation effect being witnessed.
Actually, BOTH the Time Compression of the ACCELERATION and then the
later DECELERATION, must necessarily EXACTLY MATCH the total
observed Time Dilation.
The final result is that the trip
ALWAYS takes the &correct& amount of total time, from BOTH
of their perspectives as well as from the perspective of ANY other
observer of their interactions.
No matter who is watching, when they
get back to the SAME Static Reference Frame, they WILL be exactly the
same total age (and will again appear as Twins!)
This presentation was first placed on the Internet in August 2004.
Advanced Physics-related presentations in this Domain:
Astro-Physics Related Subjects:
(Sept 2006)
Stability and Dynamics A purely Newtonian gravitational explanation (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
(research , published Aug 2004)
. Gravitational Theory and Resonance (Aug 2001, Dec 2001)
. Planetary Gravitational Resonances (Dec 2001)
(Jan 2000)
. Cosmogony - Cosmology (more logical than the Big Bang) (devised 1960, internet 1998)
(but only a fraction of a second per year!) (Jan 2009)
. All Globulars Must Regularly Pass Through the cluttered Galaxy Plane, which would be very disruptive to their pristine form. (Nov 1997, Aug 1998)
. A Hubble Experiment to Confirm the Existence of Individual Photons (experimental proof of quanta) (Feb 2000)
(June 2000)
(Jupiter has a lot of gaseous turbulence which should have slowed down its rapid rotation over billions of years) (March 1998)
. Velocity Graph Analysis (Feb 2003)
. A Possible New Compton Effect (Mar 2003)
(Oct 2004)
. Calculations (2006)
. Pulsars May Be Quite Different than we have Assumed (June 2008)
in Creating Light and Heat (Aug 2006)
. Lives of Stars and You (Aug 2004)
. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
. Confirming General Relativity with a simple experiment.
(Jan 2009)
. Does Time Dilation Result? (Jan 2009)
. Source of Driving Energy (June 1998)
. A New Explanation for Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (May 1998, August 2001)
. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
. Mathematical Explanation of Tides (Jan 2002)
(1990, Dec. 2009)
. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
From the Earth's Spinning (1990, Nov. 2002)
Nuclear or Atomic Physics Related Subjects:
Nuclear Structure.
(research , published Nov 2003)
The Quantum Defect is a Physical Quantity and not a Fudge Factor(July 2007)
Surprising Patterns in the NIST Data Regarding Atomic Ionization (June 2007)
(August 2007)
(August 2004)
(Oct 2004)
. A Possible Alternative (Aug 2001, Dec 2001, Jan 2004)
. A Potential Improvement (2006)
(2002, Sept 2006, Oct 2010)
(March 2008)
. Surprising patterns among different elements (March 2003)
. (calculation, formula) (research , published Nov 2003)
Assorted other Physics Subjects:
. Gyroscope Precession and Precession of the Earth's Equinoxes (Apr 1998)
. Complex nature of the magnetic field and its source (March 1996)
(1990, Nov. 2002)
(63,000 MegaWatts) (Sept 2006)
. Gravitational Constant - An Important Gravitation Experiment. (Feb 2004)
, including How they Form. Solar Energy, an Immense Source of Energy, Far Greater than all Fossil Fuels (Feb 2000, Feb 2006, May 2009)
. Carbon-14, C-14 (Dec 1998)
. An Old Explanation for Apparent Periodicity of Mass Extinctions (Aug 2003)
A Credible Approach to Hurricane Reduction (Feb 2001)
. Sundial to Clock-Time Correction Factor (Jan 2009)
This page - -
This subject presentation was last updated on - -
Carl Johnson
Theoretical Physicist,
Degree in Physics, University of Chicago, '67
Link to the
/index,html
Link to the
/public/othersci.htmlincredibly extreamly absolutely的区别_百度作业帮
incredibly extreamly absolutely的区别
incredibly extreamly absolutely的区别
虽然都是副词,意思完全不同.incredibly令人难以置信的extreamly 极度的absolutely绝对的From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is a 2011 American
adaptation of the
by , directed by
and written by . It stars , , , , , , , and .
Production took place in . The film had a limited release in the United States on December 25, 2011, and a wide release on January 20, 2012. Despite mixed reviews, the film was nominated for two ,
for von Sydow.
Nine-year-old Oskar Schell () is the son of
Thomas Schell (). Thomas would often send Oskar on missions to do something involving one of his riddles. The last riddle he ever gives Oskar is proof that New York City once possessed a Sixth Borough. In a flashback, Thomas and Oskar play a scavenger hunt to find objects throughout New York City. The game requires communication with other people and is not easy for the socially awkward Oskar who is told "If things were easy to find, they wouldn't be worth finding".
On September 11, 2001, Oskar and his classmates are sent home from school early while his mother Linda () is at work. When Oskar gets home, he finds five messages from his father on the answering machine saying he is in the . When Thomas calls for the sixth time, although Oskar is present to answer this call he is too scared to answer. The machine records a sixth message which stops when the . Oskar knows his father has been killed and falls to the floor. He replaces the answering machine with a new one and hides the old one so his mother will never find out.
A few weeks after what Oskar calls "the worst day" he confides in his German grandmother and they become closer. Oskar's relationship with his mother worsens since she cannot explain why the World Trade Center was attacked and why his father died. Oskar tells his mother he wishes it had been her in the building, not his father, and she responds, "So do I". After, Oskar says he did not mean it, but his mother doesn't believe him.
A year later, Oskar finds a vase in his father's closet with a key in an envelope with the word "Black" on it. He vows to find what the key fits. He finds 472 Blacks in the New York phone book and plans to meet each of them to see if they knew his father. He first meets Abby Black (), who has recently divorced her husband. She tells Oskar she did not know his father.
One day, Oskar realizes that a strange man () has moved in with his grandmother. This stranger does not talk because of a childhood trauma caused by his parents' death in World War II. He communicates with written notes and with his hands which have "yes" and "no" tattooed on them. As they become friends and go together on the hunt to find what the key fits, Oskar learns to face his fears, such as those of public transport and bridges. Eventually Oskar concludes that the stranger is his grandfather and plays the answering machine messages for this stranger. Before playing the last message, the stranger cannot bear listening any longer, this message being his son's last words, and stops Oskar. Later on, the stranger moves out and tells Oskar not to search anymore.
When Oskar looks at a newspaper clipping his father gave him, he finds a circled phone number with a reference to an estate sale. He dials the number and reaches Abby, who wants to take Oskar to her ex-husband, William, who may know about the key. William () tells Oskar he has been looking for the key. William had sold the vase to Oskar's father who never knew the key was in the vase. The key fits a safe deposit box where William's father left something for him. Disappointed and distraught because the key does not belong to him, Oskar confesses to William that he did not pick up the phone during his father's sixth and final phone call and then goes home.
Oskar's mother tells Oskar she knew he was contacting the Blacks. She then informs him that she visited each Black in advance and informed them that Oskar was going to visit and why. Oskar makes an artbook-like scrapbook filled with pop-ups and pull tabs like a children's book, of his scavenger hunt and all the people he met and titles it "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close." At the end of the book there is a pull tab, showing an animation in which Thomas's body is falling up instead of down.
Oskar's grandfather returns to live with Oskar's grandmother.
as Oskar Schell
as The Renter
as Linda Schell
as Thomas Schell
as Abby Black
as Stan the Doorman
as William Black
as Oskar's grandmother
as Hazelle Black
as Hector Black
In August 2010, it was reported that director
and producer
had been working on a film adaptation of the
for five years.
was hired to write the script. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is a co-production with
and , with Warner being the "lead studio".
served as ,
were the first to be cast in the film. A nationwide search for child actors between the ages of 9 and 13 began in late October 2010 for the role of Oskar Schell. , who had won over $30,000 at age 12 on the 2010 , was chosen for the role in December 2010. Horn had had no prior acting interest but was approached by the producers based on his quiz-show appearance. On January 3, 2011
announced that
joined the cast. That same month
were cast.
was credited in the film poster as the composer, but on October 21, 2011 it was reported that
was chosen to compose the score. Similarly,
was credited on the initial poster, and was originally in the film as a love interest for Bullock's character. However, test audiences reacted negatively to their scenes together, and he was cut. Austrian actress
was offered a role in the film, but refused.
Daldry stated in an interview that the film is about "a special child who is somewhere on the , trying to find his own logic – trying to make sense of something that literally doesn’t make sense to him." When asked how much research was necessary to realistically portray a character with such a condition, he answered "we did a lot of research," and that he "spent a lot of time with different experts of
and talked to them." In the film, Oskar reveals that he was tested for Asperger syndrome, but the results were inconclusive. As Daldry explained: "Every child is different on the autistic spectrum, so we created our own version of a child that was in some way – not heavily, but somewhere on that spectrum in terms of the fears and the phobias."
There are no references to autism in the novel. Author
stated in an interview that he had never thought of Oskar as autistic, but added, "Which is not to say he isn't - it's really up for readers to decide. It's not to say that plenty of descriptions of him wouldn't be fitting, only that I didn't have them in mind at the time."
was expected to begin in January, but started in March 2011 in . Filming went on hiatus in June. On May 16, 2011, scenes were shot on the streets of the
were used to shoot scenes on the corner of
and . Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was filmed with an
and was the first Hollywood feature film to use 's ArriRaw format to store the data for post-production. Several scenes for the film were shot in Central Park, a location that is integral to the storyline, near The Lake and Wollman Rink. The Seaport Jewelry Exchange on
was used for a pivotal scene in the film when the son is searching through a jewelry store and its back room.[]
Daldry had hoped to have the film released around the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. A
took place in New York on September 25, 2011 to a positive reaction. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close had a limited release in the United States on December 25, 2011, and a wide release on January 20, 2012. It was released in the United Kingdom on February 17, 2012.
The film was released in , , and
formats in
on March 27, 2012.
The film received mixed reviews, though Horn's performance was praised. The
reported a 46% approval rating with an average rating of 5.5/10 based on 176 reviews. The website's consensus reads, "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close has a story worth telling, but it deserves better than the treacly and pretentious treatment director Stephen Daldry gives it." , which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from mainstream critics, gives the film a score of 46 based on 41 reviews.
Critics were sharply divided about the subject matter of the film. Betsy Sharkey of the
wrote that the film was a "handsomely polished, thoughtfully wrapped Hollywood production about the national tragedy of 9/11 that seems to have forever redefined words like 'unthinkable,' 'unforgivable,' 'catastrophic'." Andrea Peyser of the New York Post called it "Extremely, incredibly exploitive" and a "quest for , cheap thrills and a naked ploy for an ." Peter Howell of the
gave the film one out of four stars saying that "[the] film feels all wrong on every level, mistaking precociousness for perceptiveness and catastrophe for a cuddling session. It's calculated as , but the bait is poisoned by opportunism and feigned sensitivity".
Best Picture
Best Supporting Actor
Best Art Direction in a Contemporary Film
K.K. Barrett
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Young Actor/Actress
Best Adapted Screenplay
Georgia Film Critics Association
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Picture
Phoenix Film Critics Society
Best Original Score
Best Performance by a Youth in a Lead or Supporting Role - Male
Breakthrough Performance on Camera
Best Supporting Actor
Best Score
Sandra Bullock
Before the film's release, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close was expected to be a major contender at the
('s previous two films had garnered
nominations). However, due to the film's polarizing reception and being ignored by most of the Critics Groups Awards, the , the , and the , it was no longer deemed as a major contender. Nevertheless, the film was nominated for
and . Critics and audiences criticized the film's nomination for Best Picture, with some calling the film one of the worst Best Picture nominees ever. It is the only widely reviewed film on aggregator
with a "rotten" rating to receive a Best Picture nomination. Chris Krapek of
wrote very negatively about the film's nomination, calling the film "not only the worst reviewed Best Picture nominee of the last 10 years, [but] easily the worst film of 2011".
Magazine's Adam Vitcavage called the film's consensus for a Best Picture nominee "certainly the worst for at least 28 years", and David Gritten of
calls the nomination "mysterious".
Many critics have blamed the new Best Picture rules for the nomination. John Young at
says that when it comes to the new rules, "it's better to be loved by a small and passionate group instead of liked by a much larger group", and Jen Chaney at , believes that, "the Academy should've just stuck to the 10 rule so that films like
could've joined the other worthy contenders, because if you’re going to create a bunch of drama around the number of nominees and then come up one shy of what has become the typical total, that just feels like a letdown."
writes that the new rules are a failure, as it lets "smaller, divisive movies that the Academy had hoped to weed out, like
and Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close in, but prevents critically-praised crowd pleasers like
from being nominated."
Not all critics were negative about the nomination. Tom O'Neil, a former L.A. Times critic, analyzed the film's few nominations in other awards and its polarizing reaction from critics stating: "This is a movie that we unwisely wrote off, but we did it because we believed the critics. This movie delivers. It is a superb motion picture. It is moving, it is relevant to our time, it is extremely well made."
At the , Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close lost in both of its categories (Best Picture to
and Best Supporting Actor to
. IMDb 2013.
Fleming, Mike (August 22, 2010). .
from the original on October 22, .
Kit, Borys (October 14, 2010). .
from the original on June 6, .
. . March 1, 2011.
from the original on May 30, .
. ComingSoon.net (). August 23, .
, , interview with Daltry, All Things Considered, , December 20, 2011. Audio only. Retrieved .
Fleming, Mike (December 15, 2010). .
from the original on October 22, .
Kit, Borys (January 3, 2011). .
from the original on June 6, .
Bamigboye, Baz (January 21, 2011). .
(London: ).
from the original on October 22, .
Tapley, Kristopher (October 21, 2011). . .
from the original on October 22, .
(in German). .
Gilchrist, Todd (December 20, 2011). .
Kahn, Joseph P. (January 25, 2012). .
. . . June 23, 2011.
from the original on October 22, .
Hedlund, Patrick (May 16, 2011). . .
from the original on May 30, .
Giardina, Carolyn (April 14, 2011). .
from the original on October 22, .
. Central Park Sunset Tours 2013.
Tapley, Kristopher (September 28, 2011). . .
from the original on October 22, .
Fleming, Mike (August 3, 2011). .
from the original on October 22, .
Gritten, David (October 18, 2011). .
from the original on October 22, .
Whitman, Howard. . Technology Tell. .
Srisavasdi, Greg (February 22, 2012). . Hollywood Outbreak.
. Rotten Tomatoes 2014.
Sharkey, Betsy (December 23, 2011). .
from the original on December 25, .
Peyser, Andrea (January 19, 2012). . New York Post.
Howell, Peter (December 22, 2011). . . .
from the original on December 25, .
. Phoenix Film Critics Society 2012.
Brooks, Xan (February 23, 2012). . The Guardian (London).
. . February 22, 2012.
Gritten, David (January 27, 2012). . The Daily Telegraph (London).
Bierly, Mandi. . .
Chaney, Jen (). . The Washington Post.
. The Week.
: Hidden categories: