The 'problem is' your experiment isn't worth talking about and certainly would be a waste of time to do. I explained why earlier in the thread. All local measurements of the coordinate speed of light are invariant. Remote measurements of the coordinate speed of light can be anything from 0 to slightly < c. The experiment you 'thunk up' doesn't account for what type of measurement being made. IE it's a meaningless nonsense experiment but you seem to want to marry the idea.
Einstein's clock
- Thread starter chinglu
- Start date
The 'problem is' your experiment isn't worth talking about and certainly would be a waste of time to do. I explained why earlier in the thread. All local measurements of the coordinate speed of light are invariant. Remote measurements of the coordinate speed of light can be anything from 0 to slightly < c. The experiment you 'thunk up' doesn't account for what type of measurement being made. IE it's a meaningless nonsense experiment but you seem to want to marry the idea.
Are you claiming Einstein's statement is false yes or no.
The problem, as with all your posts whining about set theory or relativity, is that you don't actually do any calculations. You don't work out what relativity specifically says, instead you trust your own grasp of what you think relativity says. That's the problem.
It happened when the whole light sphere thing you got from Andrew Banks. You didn't ever do the proper SR calculation and ended up mixing frames, which results in your conclusion being false. When I did the calculation for you and draw the relevant diagrams the conclusion wasn't a contradiction, it was entirely to be expected!
Your posts are always "Well SR says...." and "We can therefore conclude SR says...." when in fact what you're concluding isn't what SR says, it's what your misunderstandings make you think SR says.
You're the one claiming therefore some problem in this mathematical construct, one which supposedly no one else has ever noticed. Why don't you demonstrate for all of us that you can actually do the specific, line by line, calculations of what you think SR says. If you're right you should be able to end up showing something like 1=2. Don't post more words, post calculations using Lorentz transforms and the relevant space-time worldlines for the objects in the set up. Your regular tactic of saying "Someone prove to me that SR/Cantor/something is true!" is dishonest and a shifting of the burden. Your Konig thread is a recent example, you demand a proof when its just a Google away.
SR and set theory have decades of work associated to them and you're claiming you've seen something no one else has. The onus is on you to precisely prove the contradiction. Thus far all of your posts have been devoid of any mathematics. Can't you do the mathematics? Personally I don't think you can, you're obviously extremely poor at basic mathematical thinking, let alone knowledge. Please prove me wrong.
Well, I want to stay focused on the SR time dilation portion of this thread since you claim to understand it so well.
We can both agree acceleration/gravity differentials are absolute under GR/SR so we can factor that out of the clock timings as done pre-launch for a GPS satellite.
After that we are left with time dilation of SR.
Is this true or false.
What??chinglu said:
You realise that the GPS system isn't "absolute" or calibrated pre-launch "absolutely"? It has built-in timing corrections for that reason. So there isn't anything to "factor out", quite the opposite, in reality. Time dilation is one of the factors which the corrections have to account for, but there are more than one. Do you know how many there are and why they aren't "factored out"? Otherwise your "problem" seems self referencing: you don't know enough about it.
Oops, I mentioned reality. . .
That has nothing to do with the GR/SR acceleration/gravity effects. These are absolute.
If you believe they are not, then you believe GR is false.
All we have left then is the time dilation effects and the fact that the earth is not a perfect sphere etc.
Is this true of false.
Complete rubbish. That would be true in a static universe, but you may have noticed the one we're in isn't static.chinglu said:
The GPS system has to account for certain dynamical effects, since all the satellites are in orbit around a body which is not homogenous, and which is also in orbit. All the satellites are in relative motion, that is. So we have several effects, not just time dilation.
Part of your problem seems to be, as I said, that you don't understand the problem.
You defiantly continue to avoid paying attention. This is what Einsteins theory says, so listen up: All measurements of the local coordinate speed of light are invariant. Measurements of the remote coordinate speed of light can be any speed < c. For your illiterate experiment where you think the two observers on r_shell should measure a different speed of light they measure the same local coordinate speed of light and the same remote coordinate speed of light if they chose to measure the path of the light they emitted 1 earth year ago. The reason your thought experiment is so 'dumb', for lack of a better word, is because you don't have a clue about what Einstein says [theoretical prediction]. So yes to your cluelessness and no to you having a clue. The other reason your thought experiment is 'so dumb' is because the orbital path of either observer makes no difference during a local measurement or a remote measurement of the coordinate speed of light.
Thanks for proving the point I was making. I can only conclude, seeing as this isn't the first time, that you don't bother to read the posts you quote, you just look for an excuse to post more ignorance.
You clearly cannot do any special relativity or set theory, it's why you demand other people provide proofs (proofs you can find on Google), rather than you doing the algebra yourself.
You are the most rotten to the core person I know. If there is an afterlife, you are so screwed!
And if there is an afterlife made by an angry deity then probably everyone, including you, is screwed. The whole "I believe in Jesus, I'll be okay in the afterlife" assumes the only afterlife is the Christian one. If the muslims are right, you're screwed. If the Hindus are right, all the Abrahamic religions are screwed. And if there really is a god then in all probability no human religion is right and all believers are worshipping made up deities. Or perhaps one of the human religions is right except that the deity is a jackass and will punish everyone just because It can. Or perhaps the deity punishes the kind people and rewards the nasty people, just because It can, in which case if Bruce is as bad as you say maybe he'll get rewarded?
So playing the "if there's an afterlife you're screwed" card is just laughable vapid. Just like all assertions about religions.
The deity is a jackass? What religion is that?
'groan'
Read what I said. I was giving a hypothetical where god isn't like that described in say Christianity, where it's possible to go to heaven, but might just be a jackass and send everyone, regardless of actions or beliefs, to hell. Then you'd be in trouble too.
But that's just a hypothetical religion. As it happens the god of the Bible is a jackass who rewards belief over deeds, has little to no moral compass, is bitter, jealous, vengeful, deals out punishments beyond the scope of the committed crime, often when no crime (moral or legal) has been committed. He demands murder and genocide in his name, declaring it good. He lays down irrational rules which display his jealousy and pettiness. He deliberately forces people to act against their will so that he can then punish them and others for not listening to him (despite their refusal being due to his control of them!).
A lot of believers ask "But don't you think a world with god (their Christian god) is a better place?". No. If the Christian god actually existed it would be, to quote Hitchens, like living in North Korea. An unending dictatorship run by someone who knows what you do, what you think, can control what you think and do and which can NEVER end. At least in North Korea you can escape via death. In Christianity the unelected (there's no democracy in the Bible, it's all "I'm appointed by god, tough ****") leader is the eternal leader (which, incidentally, is what the N. Koreans call Kim Il Sung) and clearly has personality issues.
So while I was originally talking about a hypothetical jackass deity since you asked I happen to think the Christian deity, as described in the bible, is a jackass too. A megalomaniac with genocidal, irrational, jealous, immoral, bigoted, murderous personality issues.
Janus58
Valued Senior Member
Yeah, I read what you said. It was less colorful than bathroom graffiti.
Last edited:
Thanks for sorting that out. I'd put in a smiley face but I don't know how. You wrote a great post on atheism at the other site. The thing that 'got me the most' was your comment that the Prime Minister of the UK is an atheist and that you weren't aware of this until after the election. Wish that was the case for the US. In America he would have to lie about being a christian to even have an opportunity to run for public office for either major party.
I don't know what to tell you.
The effects on an accelerated clock is agreed upon by both the inertial frame and the accelerated frame.
And, you will need to understand this in order to understand the problem.
Let's connect your brain to what Einstein said.
If we assume that the result proved for a polygonal line is also valid for a continuously curved line, we arrive at this result: If one of two synchronous clocks at A is moved in a closed curve with constant velocity until it returns to A, the journey lasting t seconds, then by the clock which has remained at rest the travelled clock on its arrival at A will be $$\frac{1}{2}tv^2/c^2$$ second slow.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/
So, what I said is exactly what Einstein said. So, if you disagree with my statement, then you disagree with Einstein.
Therefore, the observer at rest with the sun frame will conclude that the revolving clock will be slow.
So, since we emitted a light pulse when the origins were common and since they are again common and since they agree on the y axis dimensions and finally, since they agree the moving clock is slow, then there is no choice but to conclude if the light sphere is at the same location on the y axis, then they must disagree on the speed of light locally.