Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (9005 total)
53 online now:
PaulK, Son Goku, Tangle (3 members, 50 visitors)
Newest Member: kanthesh
Happy Birthday: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 881,074 Year: 12,822/23,288 Month: 547/1,527 Week: 226/207 Day: 3/45 Hour: 0/1

Announcements: Topic abandonment warning (read and/or suffer the consequences)


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I Know That God Does Not Exist
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1171
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 2626 of 2686 (881283)
08-21-2020 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 2623 by ICANT
08-21-2020 11:57 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Do you have any evidence other than an assumption?

There’s tons of evidence, but here’s a really compelling and straightforward one to understand:

Hafele–Keating experiment - Wikipedia

The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory. When reunited, the three sets of clocks were found to disagree with one another, and their differences were consistent with the predictions of special and general relativity.

Also, you misunderstand when I said you could come back from a space flight and be younger than your kids - you wouldn’t reverse your ageing process by doing that and get younger yourself - you would just age much more slowly than your kids back on Earth (relatively speaking, of course), who would catch you up and then get older than you.

Edited by vimesey, : No reason given.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2623 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 11:57 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2627 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 3:55 PM vimesey has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2627 of 2686 (881292)
08-21-2020 3:55 PM
Reply to: Message 2626 by vimesey
08-21-2020 1:02 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Hi vimesey,

vimesey writes:

There’s tons of evidence,

They prove two things to me. The first is that the closer to the center of the earth a clock is the slower it will operate due to the effect of gravity on the equiptment.

Since they were using atomic clocks they proved that the fluctuations of the atom is slower the closer it is to the center of the earth.

The second thing they proved was that the velocity time dilation predictions of special relativity was wrong, since the Sagnac term was not accounted for.

The satellites that has the clocks in that control our GPS have to be offset to account for altitude and sagana effect. before launch.

vimesey writes:

Also, you misunderstand when I said you could come back from a space flight and be younger than your kids


How did I misunderstand you when you actually said:
vimesey writes:

you could return to Earth younger than your kids ?

Now if I could take a trip and come back younger than my son that would be proof that duration in eternity is not the same everywhere in eternity.

Let me try something that maybe you can explain to me. If I had taken this hypothetical trip when I was 20 years old and my son 2 years old. I came back when I am 50 years old. Since my clock average running at 1/2 the speed of my sons clock I have been gone only 30 years according to my clock but my sons clock has recorded 60 years that would make me 60 years old and him 62 years old.

You tell me in your original post to me that is exactly what would happen and then in the post I am answering you say I misunderstood you and I would not be younger than my son.

The only way I could not be 2 years younger than my son is if my clock was off and running half as fast as my sons clock due to the proximity of his clock to the center of the earth.

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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2626 by vimesey, posted 08-21-2020 1:02 PM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2628 by vimesey, posted 08-21-2020 4:45 PM ICANT has responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1171
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 2628 of 2686 (881293)
08-21-2020 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 2627 by ICANT
08-21-2020 3:55 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Did you not read the article ? They took gravitational time dilation into account and still evidenced time dilation through relativistic spatial motion to within the predicted 10% range of accuracy. That range has been narrowed in subsequent more accurate experiments.

As for your misunderstanding of you coming back to earth younger than your kids, I quote your earlier post:

 I would like to take a trip that would reduce my age by about 50 years.

Therein lay your misunderstanding.


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2627 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 3:55 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2630 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 6:08 PM vimesey has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2629 of 2686 (881294)
08-21-2020 5:09 PM
Reply to: Message 2624 by ringo
08-21-2020 12:53 PM


Re: After We Die
Hi ringo,

ringo writes:

Well, you weren't there in Genesis 1.

Nope.

But the writer of Genesis was told what to write in a book.

ringo writes:

If there was a "first day", then it had to start with either an evening or a morning. In case you haven't heard, the Jewish day always starts at sundown, so the first day COULD NOT close a light period.

First off there is no first day referred to in Genesis 1:5, only day one.
Genesis 1:1 tells us God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 2:4 tells us the heavens and earth was created in one day. Therefore God's definition of a day is light would mean that they were created in a light period.

How many hours can you get between evening and morning, and what did God call that period.

ringo writes:

I said they were not there on Day One.

And you know that because.

Genesis 1:1 uses the Hebrew bra to tell us what the results of subject of the verbs actions. It tells us the heavens and the earth existed. So you are saying the sun and moon are not a part of the universe.

The verb in Genesis 1:1 is ברא which is qal perfect telling us the action of the subject of the verb was a completed action. Had the sun and moon been missing the results of the action would not have been completed.

ringo writes:

Nope. The Bible says explicitly that they were not created until Day Four.

So you are telling me that the Bible says the lights were ברא

explicitly definition: in a clear and detailed manner, leaving no room for confusion or doubt.

quote:
Genesis
1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,


Would you be explicit pointing out the explicit verse and word 14-17 that states these lights were ברא.

ringo writes:

That's a silly question. I don't have to believe The Lord of the Rings is true to know what it says.

Now who was that that could not understand English.

ringo writes:

It says God MADE two great lights.

But it does not say He ברא (created, caused to exist) them. It did say אשה He did do some work on them.

ringo writes:

And you don't know either what it says or what it means.

Since you are so smart why don't you explain it to me? OR cut bait.

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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2624 by ringo, posted 08-21-2020 12:53 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2632 by ringo, posted 08-22-2020 12:26 PM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2630 of 2686 (881295)
08-21-2020 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 2628 by vimesey
08-21-2020 4:45 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Hi vimesey

vimesey writes:

Did you not read the article ?

If I hadn't read the article how would I know to bring up the sagana problem?
How would I have known the clocks in the GPS satellites had to be compensated for the altitude and sagana effect?

vimesey writes:

As for your misunderstanding of you coming back to earth younger than your kids, I quote your earlier post:

But that statement was made after you said in Message 2622:

quote:
For example, are you aware that if you left Earth in a spaceship which (purely in spatial terms) could travel at speeds of a decent fraction of the speed of light, you could return to Earth younger than your kids ?

vimesey writes:

Therein lay your misunderstanding.

I don't have any misunderstanding. I know that what you are trying to say is at near the speed of light eternity would not pass as fast as it does on earth.

You see I know eternity is not made out of rubber therefore it can not be stretched nor shrunk, nor can it be bent to suit mankind.

Let me give an example.

I had a friend in high school that could run a hundred yards in 9.6 seconds.
Now if I were to change the seconds in a minute to 30 instead of 60 would my friend be able to run the 100 yards in half of the measured time that it took when there was 60 seconds in a minute. He would run the 100 yards in 4.8 seconds according to my new watch.

The duration between him starting and finishing would be equal so I have not shrunk duration. It makes no difference how fast you go duration stays the same.

Just because you can make numbers say something does not change the fact eternity never changes.

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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2628 by vimesey, posted 08-21-2020 4:45 PM vimesey has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2631 by vimesey, posted 08-22-2020 2:04 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 2635 by NosyNed, posted 08-22-2020 8:06 PM ICANT has responded

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1171
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 2631 of 2686 (881309)
08-22-2020 2:04 AM
Reply to: Message 2630 by ICANT
08-21-2020 6:08 PM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Then it is clear that you have no understanding of relativity and spacetime. Which is fine - it’s not a concept for which our day to day existence gives us any instinctive understanding - it’s counter-intuitive. But it’s the way the universe is. We have the theories and the evidence to back it up.

Your instinctive approach seems to be to resist any science which is counter to your own personal world view, because to accept one iota of that contrary science would be to threaten the foundations of your absolute belief in every letter of one particular translation of some words written down thousands of years ago by some Bronze Age tribesmen. Open your mind a little - you can maintain your faith and start to wonder at the true complexity and amazing beauty of the universe - I know many scientists who are men and women of faith. To know your God, do you truly, truly need to cling to what you see as the truth of a few ancient stories, and ignore the deeper and so much more amazing majesty of the genuine universe ?


Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2630 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 6:08 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2638 by ICANT, posted 08-23-2020 11:20 PM vimesey has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18753
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


Message 2632 of 2686 (881332)
08-22-2020 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 2629 by ICANT
08-21-2020 5:09 PM


Re: After We Die
ICANT writes:

But the writer of Genesis was told what to write in a book.


The writers were not there either - and there's no reason to think their source was accurate.

ICANT writes:

First off there is no first day referred to in Genesis 1:5, only day one.


See, that's why I say you can't read English. Day One is by definition the first day.

ICANT writes:

Genesis 1:1 tells us God created the heavens and the earth.
Genesis 2:4 tells us the heavens and earth was created in one day. Therefore...


Therefore there is a discrepancy. That's all we can say about it.

ICANT writes:

... God's definition of a day is light would mean that they were created in a light period.


Non sequitur. In Genesis One, the word "Day" is used for both the light part of the day and the whole day: "The evening and the morning were the nth day."

ICANT writes:

How many hours can you get between evening and morning....


Twenty-four.

ICANT writes:

ringo writes:

I said they were not there on Day One.


And you know that because.

Because it says explicitly that they were created on Day Four.

ICANT writes:

ringo writes:

I don't have to believe The Lord of the Rings is true to know what it says.


Now who was that that could not understand English.

Still you. If you think you've made a point here, you'll have to make it plainer. I don't have to believe The Lord of the Rings is true to know what it says.

ICANT writes:

ringo writes:

And you don't know either what it says or what it means.


Since you are so smart why don't you explain it to me?

I have been explaining it to you. For example: Day One is by definition the first day.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2629 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 5:09 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2633 by Phat, posted 08-22-2020 3:51 PM ringo has responded
 Message 2639 by ICANT, posted 08-24-2020 12:35 AM ringo has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 14587
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 2633 of 2686 (881346)
08-22-2020 3:51 PM
Reply to: Message 2632 by ringo
08-22-2020 12:26 PM


Re: After We Die
ringo writes:

The writers were not there either - and there's no reason to think their source was accurate.

If so, there is no reason to think that God is even necessary. There is no reason to think that if He does exist He has the capability of communing with us. You have thrown the Holy Baby out with the bathwater and placed all of your chips on human wisdom and our interpretation of evidence. Shame on you.

"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
***
“We must realize that the Reformation world view leads in the direction of government freedom. But the humanist world view with inevitable certainty leads in the direction of statism. This is so because humanists, having no god, must put something at the center, and it is inevitably society, government, or the state.”- Francis A. Schaeffer

“The whole war between the atheist and the theist comes down to this: the atheist believes a 'what' created the universe; the theist believes a 'who' created the universe.”
- Criss Jami, Killosophy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2632 by ringo, posted 08-22-2020 12:26 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2634 by Coragyps, posted 08-22-2020 6:29 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply
 Message 2636 by ringo, posted 08-23-2020 10:08 AM Phat has not yet responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5546
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 2634 of 2686 (881357)
08-22-2020 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 2633 by Phat
08-22-2020 3:51 PM


Re: After We Die
You have hit the nail on the head, Phat. What reason might there be to think that any gods/Gods/God is necessary? I can’t think of one. I suppose gods might be a reasonable way to keep folks a bit more orderly in some cases, but if you can’t show any evidence that they exist, why bother?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2633 by Phat, posted 08-22-2020 3:51 PM Phat has acknowledged this reply

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8948
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 6.9


(1)
Message 2635 of 2686 (881365)
08-22-2020 8:06 PM
Reply to: Message 2630 by ICANT
08-21-2020 6:08 PM


Sagana effect?
Is the article you are referring to the wiki one about measuring time differences between atomic clocks? I couldn't find a mention of the sagana effect in it. Could you point me to a description.

I would note that Vimesey hasn't been very clear and careful in what he's said to you and that may have contributed to your confusion and apparent disagreement. But then you discuss your trip and being 60 when you son is 62 when you meet up again and have that result right at least which was, I think, Vimesey's only point.

Now I'll stick my neck out and talk as if I actually understood relativity well. (Ha!).

A number of people when exposed to the crazy results of relativistic calculations get the idea that somehow the motion or gravitational fields are messing the clocks up. You've hinted at that in your posts.

This is not correct. The clocks in all the various frames of reference are all working fine and measuring time correctly. What is actually happening is that the passage of time being measured is itself changing. But the change can only be perceived by observations from another frame of reference. And there is no "correct" frame.

The results of the calculations have been tested, tested and tested again. They are correct. Our understanding of the universe derived from our local, slow, middle scale observations is wrong. Period.

If you think otherwise and you actually think you can over turn special and general relativity then you are also wrong. Very, very wrong. Period.

Edited by NosyNed, : fixed title


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2630 by ICANT, posted 08-21-2020 6:08 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2640 by ICANT, posted 08-24-2020 1:08 AM NosyNed has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 18753
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 1.7


(1)
Message 2636 of 2686 (881390)
08-23-2020 10:08 AM
Reply to: Message 2633 by Phat
08-22-2020 3:51 PM


Re: After We Die
Phat writes:

If so, there is no reason to think that God is even necessary.


Bingo.

Phat writes:

There is no reason to think that if He does exist He has the capability of communing with us.


Actually, it's more like: If He does exist, WE don't have the ability to receive communications from Him.

Phat writes:

You have thrown the Holy Baby out with the bathwater...


On the contrary, I have checked the bath water very carefully for babies and there are none there. You, on the other hand, are so terrified of losing the baby that you're keeping the same filthy bath water forever. Don't you know that dirty water won't get you clean?

Phat writes:

... and placed all of your chips on human wisdom and our interpretation of evidence.


Which is all we have.

Phat writes:

Shame on you.


Shame on YOU for falsely accusing me of child abuse.

"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2633 by Phat, posted 08-22-2020 3:51 PM Phat has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2637 by jar, posted 08-23-2020 10:12 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
jar
Member
Posts: 32911
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 1.9


(1)
Message 2637 of 2686 (881392)
08-23-2020 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 2636 by ringo
08-23-2020 10:08 AM


Re: After We Die

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2636 by ringo, posted 08-23-2020 10:08 AM ringo has acknowledged this reply

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2638 of 2686 (881432)
08-23-2020 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 2631 by vimesey
08-22-2020 2:04 AM


Re: No evidence = irrational
Hi vimesey,

vimesey writes:

Your instinctive approach seems to be to resist any science which is counter to your own personal world view,

So you are telling me space and time are the same thing.

I can not comprehend how that can be. So please explain.

What is the time part of space that can be measured. Now if you said that there was spaceexistence I could understand that space exists. There are events in existence and there is duration between those events and I know how to measure that duration but I don't know how or what to use to measure time.

I think I understand what space is. It is a volume in something that I can stick my hand in. But when I stick my hand in that space it does not exist any longer as my hand occupies that space. So space is an area where objects large or very small can exist. Our universe is a big place with a very large volume that some of it is occupied by stars, planets, suns, moons, asteroids, energy and all other kind of matter and mass. If I understand correctly there is no unoccupied space in the universe. There are parts that we do not know what occupies that part of space and we call it dark matter, and dark energy because it is invisible and has never been found.

Scientist will probably discover that energy and mass is the same stuff the universe is made of, then maybe not. It only holds the universe together.

vimesey writes:

To know your God, do you truly, truly need to cling to what you see as the truth of a few ancient stories, and ignore the deeper and so much more amazing majesty of the genuine universe ?

The universe is a very large place and has many wonderful sights in it. It was marvelously created by something like Hawking's instanton from an absente of existence or an all powerful God. If the instanton did it I would say the instanton was God because it was required to produce all the energy to produce the matter in the universe as well as enough energy to hold it together.

My problem with the scientific view is they start with an assumption and will never be able to replace that assumption with the facts. It has to be assumed that that little pea/pin head sized universe that expanded into the universe we have had no place to exist as there is nothing outside of the self contained universe. I have been told that there is nothing outside the universe many times by cavediver and Son Goku. I could probably find a quote or two from them in one of my old threads.

It takes more faith to believe that our universe was a self contained something the size of a pea, or a pin head as some have said popped into existence from non existence and created our universe than it does to believe God did it.

Explain the difference to me.

I simply believe my God created the universe. Why do I believe that.

He wrote me a love letter and in that letter he placed information that only He knew. He revealed the life of the flesh is in the blood. He revealed the earth had a circle. He revealed the earth was hung in the heavens on nothing. He revealed the universe was expanding. He revealed the land mass that was in one place was divided. He gave us the definition of a day as a light period followed by a dark period so we could figure out how to measure duration between events in existence. He revealed that one day the earth will melt with fervent heat. All of these are considered scientific facts as they have been discovered. There is no way those Bronze Age tribesmen could have known those scientific facts without someone telling them.

There are many other things that were foretold that has come true but I think the things that have turned out to be scientific facts is the best information to make my decision on. The one about the earth melting hasn't come to pass yet and the green energy movement think they can stop what is inevitable.

Long live the Queen I have not seen her in person since February 1994 in Grand Cayman CI BWI I was working on the Governor's residence.

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."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2631 by vimesey, posted 08-22-2020 2:04 AM vimesey has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2639 of 2686 (881435)
08-24-2020 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 2632 by ringo
08-22-2020 12:26 PM


Re: After We Die
Hi ringo,

ringo writes:

The writers were not there either - and there's no reason to think their source was accurate.

Moses spent 80 days and nights on Mt Sinai with God. At the end of which time God told Moses the write those things down in a book, and read it to the people every year. It is called the Pentateuch. I don't think they spent 80 days and nights without God telling him what He wanted wrote down in a book.

ringo writes:

Therefore there is a discrepancy. That's all we can say about it.

What discrepancy?

Verse 4 of chapter 2 only declares that it is the history of the universe in the day God created the heavens and the earth.

Verse 1 just tells us God created the heavens and the earth.

ringo writes:

Non sequitur. In Genesis One, the word "Day" is used for both the light part of the day and the whole day: "The evening and the morning were the nth day."

If you made an appointment to meet somebody at 12:00 tomorrow, when would you show up at noon or midnight?

ringo writes:

Twenty-four.

You are making fun of my question I assume.

Evening is at 6 PM Morning is 6 AM even in the Jewish day and you can pack no more than 12 hours into that.

ringo writes:

Because it says explicitly that they were created on Day Four.

quote:
Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.

1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


Show me the explicit word that mentions anything about the sun, moon, and stars being created. The Hebrew word ברא translation created does not exist in those verses.

So why are you insistent that created does exist in those verses. Talk about me not being able to read English.

ringo writes:

I have been explaining it to you. For example: Day One is by definition the first day.

As I said the first day of what?

One and First are two differ words.

You can only ever have "day one" of creation.
But there are many firsts. You have the first day of the week every 7 days.

You can't have the first day of creation every 7 days there was only "one".

God Bless,

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2632 by ringo, posted 08-22-2020 12:26 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2641 by ringo, posted 08-24-2020 10:01 AM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6384
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 2640 of 2686 (881437)
08-24-2020 1:08 AM
Reply to: Message 2635 by NosyNed
08-22-2020 8:06 PM


Re: Sagana effect?
Hi Ned,

Ned writes:

Could you point me to a description.

My mistake I misspelled sagnac you can find an explanation here:what is the sagnac effect - Bing

Ned writes:

A number of people when exposed to the crazy results of relativistic calculations get the idea that somehow the motion or gravitational fields are messing the clocks up. You've hinted at that in your posts.

An atomic clock sitting at sea level and one sitting in Denver Colorado will not keep the same time unless the one in Denver is adjusted for the elevation of 5k+ feet.

Ned writes:

What is actually happening is that the passage of time being measured is itself changing.

But what is this time you are measuring? Are they calculations or something physical you can measure. You can't measure duration. You can only measure the duration between events. So how do you measure time?

Yep I know that is what is preached. But eternity is what we exist in. There are events that happen in eternity. We measure that duration by our concept of time. Like timing the duration it takes a runner to run 100 yards, or 1 mile. We use time which is divided up into hundredths of a second, a second, a minute, an hour, days, weeks, months, years, etc.

Ned writes:

If you think otherwise and you actually think you can over turn special and general relativity then you are also wrong. Very, very wrong. Period.

People with a lot more smarts than I have has already done that. Or at least they have very different views.


"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2635 by NosyNed, posted 08-22-2020 8:06 PM NosyNed has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 2642 by NosyNed, posted 08-24-2020 11:11 AM ICANT has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020