|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Existence | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
fearandloathing Member (Idle past 4175 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: |
I agree, I hope I can maybe learn a little more also.
"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson Ad astra per aspera Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3673 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined:
|
Clocks do not measure time. Really? You are now the expert on physical definitions as well? The last time I checked in, you were asking for an explanation of time. You really have progressed. Given that your claims are essentially a denial of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, and thus the entirety of Quantum Field Theory and Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, I'm intrigued beyond measure to understand the mathematics and physics with which you intend to replace these stalwarts of the last 100 years of physics. Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
ICANT writes: Hi Strraggler,
Straggler writes: ...atomic clocks accurate to 1 second within 3.7 billion years are incapable of measuring time accurately... Clocks do not measure time. Clocks measure duration of events or duration between events. Man's concept of time is the duration between events.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3673 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined:
|
Then be Mr. Fantastic and show where the math is wrong. Well, the obvious is that you are ignoring Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. Was this deliberate?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
Well, the obvious is that you are ignoring Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction. Was this deliberate?
Now that's just cruel.Funny, but cruel. Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7
|
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes: Really? You are now the expert on physical definitions as well? The last time I checked in, you were asking for an explanation of time. You really have progressed. Given that your claims are essentially a denial of Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity, and thus the entirety of Quantum Field Theory and Einstein's General Theory of Relativity, I'm intrigued beyond measure to understand the mathematics and physics with which you intend to replace these stalwarts of the last 100 years of physics. Duration is constant, as it is the duration of an event or the duration between events which exist in existence. Now lets see what some others have to say about SR and the speed of light.
quote: From the same paper the conclusions:
quote:A7OcrDKlowJ:www.worldnpa.org/pdf/abstracts/abstracts_3053.pdf+Conducting+a+Crucial+Experiment+of+the+Constancy+of+the+Speed+of+Light+Using+GPS&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESgpwM1J_oUqlPYHxFv9KHCUzqXgHxnQnjZrZk9pppTXdURxpqz_YyxyZwUrjaIehu7mqXIfmsl0sxmqj1byKHc2mrwmSZKv2tidyzpEDKhUYIiaB6TpM17bfPb9md8SLRpZKCrO&sig=AHIEtbSDwCLtciS2YjN4gMXcyF123KwA9w]-->Source God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Straggler Member (Idle past 96 days) Posts: 10333 From: London England Joined:
|
ICANT writes: Clocks measure duration of events or duration between events. OK.
ICANT writes: I believe duration is constant So we have two clocks. One constructed in, and residing in, Bolder. One constructed in, and residing in, Greenwich. Both of them are constructed identically to be accurate to within one second every 3.7 billion years. I have the precise readout from each of these clocks side by side on the computer screen in front of me (in Madrid). If I want to very very precisely measure how long something takes (i.e the duration) which clock should I use and why?
ICANT writes: Clocks do not measure time. Clocks measure duration of events or duration between events. So how do identically accurate clocks measure different durations for the same event?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7
|
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes: Man's concept of time is the duration between events. So your definition of time is duration between events. How do you measure time? God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8564 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
And yes, according to the folks that build the clocks gravity does affect their ability to keep correct time. No, they did not say that. They said they had to adjust the clock's output signals to account for differences due to ... tada ... time dilation. That is because "correct time" does not exist. "Correct" according to who? Where? Even on the planet surface the measurment of time differs depending on the gavitational field. No one can say one is "correct" while all others are errant. There is no "correct" time, just differences that need to be accounted for between frames.
Clocks do not measure time. And every physicist, clock maker, navy and astonomer in the world disagrees with you. Do you ever wonder why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.7 |
Hi Paul,
AZPaul3 writes: No, they did not say that. They said they had to adjust the clock's output signals to account for differences due to ... tada ... time dilation. You might be right. But I found this in the NIST papers.
quote: I guess you did not read it the last time I presented it to you. That does not say anything about time slowing down. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
ICANT writes:
quote: I guess you did not read it the last time I presented it to you. That does not say anything about time slowing down. The quoted paragraph doesn't say anything about time not advancing faster in the satellite either. Only the relative clock rates as observed from a ground clock frame are important, so the details of why the clocks in the satellite frame must be slowed down are not be discussed. Since nobody is in the satellite, the state of time in the satellite is irrelevant. Only the satellite clock rate as observed by ground observers is relevant. The description in the quoted paragraph is accurate regardless of the reason why the satellite clock is observed to run fast by earth observers. Accordingly, such statements do not contradict general relativity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
cavediver Member (Idle past 3673 days) Posts: 4129 From: UK Joined:
|
Now lets see what some others have to say about SR and the speed of light. Ah, yes, of course... Wang, that hero of modern physics who has overturned the entirety of 20th Century physics with his observations. Oh, sorry, you mean *that* Wang, the idiot engineer who no-one has ever heard of, who thinks he has something interesting to say but is unfortunately clueless about Special Relativity, and whose sole purpose is to provide idiots like ICANT with the ability to drag up "papers" from da internetz *conclusively proving* that all of modern physics is wrong Can one be this stupid naturally, ICANT, or does it take years of study?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
ICANT writes:
But the line above it does:
I guess you did not read it the last time I presented it to you. That does not say anything about time slowing down.quote: I guess you did not read it the last time you presented it to you. Or are you cherry picking your evidence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
fearandloathing Member (Idle past 4175 days) Posts: 990 From: Burlington, NC, USA Joined: |
Panda writes: I guess you did not read it the last time you presented it to you. Or are you cherry picking your evidence? This is the main reason I haven't participated in this topic for a while, I have posted over 20 times and haven't been able to make any progress. He tries to use evidence that has been provided for him to look at as proof he is right by cherry picking the bits he thinks support his position, while ignoring what he either doesn't understand, or refuses to admit it proves him wrong. This whole topic would make a great paper on the science of denial. It is sad and pathetic that he has been provided evidence from so many people from different backgrounds and no one has even once supported him, that speaks volumes about his ideas. He should've never brought relativity into this topic, that doomed it from start. "I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. Thompson Ad astra per aspera Nihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3743 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
fearandloathing writes:
I agree. He tries to use evidence that has been provided for him to look at as proof he is right by cherry picking the bits he thinks support his position, while ignoring what he either doesn't understand, or refuses to admit it proves him wrong. But I'll quote this piece of evidence again, as I find it risible that ICANT has repeatedly refused to acknowledge that actual testing proves his ideas false.
Taq writes:
It has nothing to do with the gravitational force on the clock mechanism. Time ticks at different rates in different interial frames. This was confirmed in the Hafele-Keating experiment where both planes flew at the same altitude. The clocks went out of synch based on which direction they flew (east vs. west) compared to the stationary clock on Earth. The plane flying with the rotation of the Earth did not show as much time dilation as the plane flying against the rotation of the Earth. The effect of altitude is removed from this experiment.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024