|
Author
|
Topic: The one and only non-creationist in this forum.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Vatican sophistry
Sorry your claim is a logical contradiction. You have not shown that. Furthermore, we observe that the universe is expanding. Period. That you refuse to accept this observation is quite telling.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Vatican sophistry
To observe means to see. Therefore to observe the Universe to expand would mean to stand outside the Universe and to see it gradually grow in size relative to something else. No you wouldn't. We observe that galaxies are moving away from us, and that movement correlates with distance. We observe that the universe is expanding.
All that you actually do is to read the reports of other people who observe the light from distant sources shifted to the red end of the spectrum. You may also observe them to make an irrational inference that the Universe is expanding. What is irrational about it? What other explanation do you have for the correlation between distance and redshift?
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Reasons to be humble
The whole Universe is one at that instant with zero surroundings. One and zero. That's all you've got. What arithmetic operations can you do with that? If you multiply that by itself you get the same one, if you multiply one by zero you still don't get nothing much It would seem that if you have 1 of something then you have 1 of something. If you have one apple does that apple disappear if it is surrounded by vacuum? No. The apple still exists.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Reasons to be humble
There is only one rabbit of Planck size in the theorem, remember? No environment either, you are forgetting the zero in the equation. So is there one rabbit or isn't there?
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Reasons to be humble
The apples do not grow in vacuum though. If you have one apple how many apples do you have?
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Reasons to be humble
There is one Planck size rabbit there Then there is a rabbit. Is your grasp of logic so frail that even this escapes you? There is a universe. You don't get to sit in a universe and claim it doesn't exist. The universe is expanding. The other galaxies are all moving away from us. We can see them moving away by their redshift. We don't need to sit outside of the universe to see it expanding since we can sit in the universe and see it expanding. Can the fly in the baloon see the sides of the baloon moving away from it? Yes, absolutely. The fly doesn't need to be outside of the baloon to see it expand.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Reasons to be humble
The rabbit is not legitimate to begin with, remember? Then it is a poor analogy for the universe since the universe does exist.
The fly inside a balloon is another cheat. Of course, the fly cannot conclude anything. To conclude it's a balloon that expands the fly would need to conceptualise that the inside surface has an outside to expand into and so on. Besides, you are not that fly, you see no surface on the inside.
No need to conceptualize. We observe that everything is moving away from us. We observe the expansion.
I said there are perfectly rational explanations of the redshift phenomenon not involving any impossible expansion of abstractions. Such as?
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
Re: Reasons to be humble
Do you observe everything moving away from you? Astronomers observe a correlation between distance and redshift when looking at other galaxies. Redshift is due to those galaxies moving away from us, and the farther away they are the faster they are moving away. This is further supported by relativistic effects seen in highly redshifted type Ia supernovae where the evolution of the supernova appears to move more slowly due to the difference in velocity.
What I observe though is that any object moving away from something is moving towards something else. No exceptions so far. I have just shown you the exception.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
Re: Reasons to be humble
That is not any example of such. It's a weak inference you still need to demonstrate to be anything more. Stop begging the question. Such a fervent gall in defence of bigbangism!! When you stop ignoring the evidence for expansion perhaps you can be taken seriously.
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
|
Message 496 of 558 (681912)
11-28-2012 3:06 PM
|
Reply to: Message 495 by ICANT
11-28-2012 2:55 PM
|
|
Re: travel through time
Maybe these people have no idea what they are talking about, but I doubt it as they work with the real atomic clocks at Bolder. They have it right. A clock at the Earth's surface is in a lower gravitational potential because it has a shorter distance between it and the Earth's center of gravity (or more appropriately, the barycenter). The shorter distance means it can produce less work, hence less potential. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 495 by ICANT, posted 11-28-2012 2:55 PM | | ICANT has seen this message but not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
|
|
Message 502 of 558 (681925)
11-28-2012 4:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 500 by ICANT
11-28-2012 3:36 PM
|
|
Re: GR and SR
Duration between events can be measured by time which is based upon mankinds concept of time using seconds, minutes, hours, days and weeks, etc. Those are just the units that humans use to describe the very real passage of time.
I could not go to the doctor for my appointment of Dec. 3 rd when it was made. I had to wait the duration in existence from Nov. 19th until Dec. 3rd before keeping that appointment.
This is actually a good example of why time is the 4th coordinate. For the appointment, it is important to know where you should be within the 3 spatial dimensions and when you will be there in the 4th time dimension. You need all 4 in order to describe the appointment.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 500 by ICANT, posted 11-28-2012 3:36 PM | | ICANT has seen this message but not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
|
|
Message 505 of 558 (681978)
11-29-2012 10:44 AM
|
Reply to: Message 504 by kofh2u
11-28-2012 7:50 PM
|
|
Re: travel through time
In regard to this discussion about time: Kant recognized that the concept of time was apriori. It is a fundamental aspect of the universe due to entropy. Entropy increases over time. That is how the universe works. Nothing in the universe would work as it does if this was not true. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 504 by kofh2u, posted 11-28-2012 7:50 PM | | kofh2u has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
|
|
Message 507 of 558 (682001)
11-29-2012 12:52 PM
|
Reply to: Message 506 by ICANT
11-29-2012 12:44 PM
|
|
Re: travel through time
The 7,200 ocsillations that do not take place in the atomic clock on the satellite is caused by time shrinking instead of the ocsillations not taking place due to the velocity of movement of the satellite relative to the clock on Earth. The 45,900 ocsillations that do take place in the atomic clock on the satellite is caused by time streaching instead of the ocsillations taking place due to the height of the satellite from the surface of the Earth. An observer on the Earth would observe more ticks per second in satellite's clock as compared to a comparable clock on Earth. The oscillations are ticking away at a faster rate on the satellite as compared to the surface of the Earth. If that observer took that Earth clock up to the satellite and compared them side by side he would observe that they tick at the same rate. This is because time ticks at different rates in different positions within a gravitational field.
Neither of the above has time streaching or shrinking. The do have the oscillations of the clocks speeding or slowing due to the height above the Earth's surface and the velocity the clock is traveling relative to the earthbound clock. Those are one in the same. The clocks merely measure time. It is time itself that is changing.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 506 by ICANT, posted 11-29-2012 12:44 PM | | ICANT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 508 by ICANT, posted 11-29-2012 1:42 PM | | Taq has replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
|
|
Message 521 of 558 (682174)
11-30-2012 11:53 AM
|
Reply to: Message 508 by ICANT
11-29-2012 1:42 PM
|
|
Re: travel through time
Does the clock on the satellite tick faster than the clock on Earth due to the fact it is higher in the gravatational field? Time itself moves at different speeds at different positions in the gravitational field.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 508 by ICANT, posted 11-29-2012 1:42 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Taq
Member Posts: 10067 Joined: 03-06-2009 Member Rating: 5.2
|
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 522 of 558 (682176)
11-30-2012 12:02 PM
|
Reply to: Message 514 by ICANT
11-29-2012 3:48 PM
|
|
Re: travel through time
The second is defined as 9,192,631,770 oscillations of the caesium-133 atom? Yes, in a non-accelerating frame from reference. This doesn't apply to the satellite since there is a difference in acceleration due to gravitational equivalence. If you are in the same frame of reference as the clock then the second is defined as you describe. If two clocks are in different frames of reference then they will have different amounts of oscillations per unit of time as observed from each frame of reference.
The atomic clock at Bolder Colorado is set to operate at 9,192,631,770 oscillations per second? The other way around. The second is defined as those many oscillations. Cesium can not oscillate at any other rate in a given frame of reference. Scientists are not adjusting the rate at which the cesium atom oscillates.
What has to be done to insure that the duration experienced by the earthbound clock is represented by the clock in the satellite? The basic laws of physics are what governs the rate of oscillations. That ensures that the clocks are the same both on the ground and in orbit.
The signal between the clock on the satellite and the receiver on the ground may be curved due to the velocity the satellite is traveling and the velocity of the receiver on and with the Earth.. I think you are starting to catch on. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 514 by ICANT, posted 11-29-2012 3:48 PM | | ICANT has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 523 by NoNukes, posted 11-30-2012 12:50 PM | | Taq has replied |
|
™ Version 4.2