Gravity slows down time.

[Lakon]

Paddo, rather than all the ad hominem, hand waving, lecturing, would it not have been more logical, economical, sensible, penetrating, truthful and to the point, to do a 1 - 2 line reply to Chinglus 1 - 2 line question ?

You took up three posts, but didn't answer it. Does that mean he's got you in a corner ?

 

[paddoboy]

Paddo, rather than all the ad hominem, hand waving, lecturing, would it not have been more logical, economical, sensible, penetrating, truthful and to the point, to do a 1 - 2 line reply to Chinglus 1 - 2 line question ?

You took up three posts, but didn't answer it. Does that mean he's got you in a corner ?

As I suggested in the other thread, it would really do your heart good to be truthful and not mis-leading...but that seems to be your nature.
To say, I or anyone else has not answered chnglu is telling a lie.
Now go do some unbiased research and checking of this thread, because at present you are just adding unnecessary noise.

 

[Lakon]

As I suggested in the other thread, it would really do your heart good to be truthful and not mis-leading...but that seems to be your nature.
To say, I or anyone else has not answered chnglu is telling a lie.
Now go do some unbiased research and checking of this thread, because at present you are just adding unnecessary noise.

No, I meant the question a few posts up. You didn't answer it in your posts subsequent to it. Have you and others answered it or canvassed it before ? No doubt. But;

a) you can't expect someone to trawl through 20 pages of posts to try to dig up an answer
b) some of us (me for instance) understand things better concerning these issues when they are put in simple terms such as Chinglu did.

You continue the 'tit for tat' repartee rather that provide a simple reply. That says much to an impartial, curious unbiassed observer, who observes HOW people argue as well as what they argue.

 

[paddoboy]

No, I meant the question a few posts up. You didn't answer it in your posts subsequent to it. Have you and others answered it or canvassed it before ? No doubt. But;

a) you can't expect someone to trawl through 20 pages of posts to try to dig up an answer
b) some of us (me for instance) understand things better concerning these issues when they are put in simple terms such as Chinglu did.

You continue the 'tit for tat' repartee rather that provide a simple reply. That says much to an impartial, curious unbiassed observer, who observes HOW people argue as well as what they argue.

Go back to post 364 if it isn't too much trouble...
On second thought your agenda [and lies] is painfully obvious, do what you like.
The evidence is there from myself and many others many many times... *shrug*

 

[Lakon]

Go back to post 364 if it isn't too much trouble...
On second thought your agenda [and lies] is painfully obvious, do what you like.
The evidence is there from myself and many others many many times... *shrug*

Wow ! Now you've started ad hominen on me !

What's got you so upset today ?

 

[paddoboy]

Wow ! Now you've started ad hominen on me !

What's got you so upset today ?

Just telling the truth as it is.....If that hurts, well tough titty....

Take it easy...maybe you need to take a Disprin and have a good lie down...It works wonders!!

 

[paddoboy]

Now take the bit between the teeth, throw away your agenda, go back to 364, and even further back, notice how many times I and others have answered each and all chinglu's problems and mis-understandings, and you will notice as noted by many others, we just get the same regurgitated stuff back.........

 

[Lakon]

Just telling the truth as it is.....If that hurts, well tough titty....

Take it easy...maybe you need to take a Disprin and have a good lie down...It works wonders!!

The phrase you mangled (again) is 'tough titties'.

Don't know about the Disprin - I haven't taken any kind of pharma's now for over 30 years. But I'll take your word for it. Judging by your level of unwarranted antagonism, you would no doubt have a multitude of occassions where you would have had to resort to such a remedy. Do try, however, not to graduate to the harder stuff.

Oh, OK - I looked at that post - mangled .. again. Hey, instead of all this noise, all these posts, why not just answer the question in the simple terms Chinglu put it ? What's stopping you from doing this ?

PS - stop with the trite, old fashioned phrases, will you (bit between teeth .. etc) you sound like a real dumb bogan ( the equivalent might be hilbilly for our American friends). I'm embarrassed for you every time I read one of your posts. You sound like you really struggle to make an impact though the impact you make is not the one you have in mind.

 

[paddoboy]

The phrase you mangled (again) is 'tough titties'. .

Where I come from, it's tough titty! Live with it!

Don't know about the Disprin - I haven't taken any kind of pharma's now for over 30 years. But I'll take your word for it. Judging by your level of unwarranted antagonism, you would no doubt have a multitude of occassions where you would have had to resort to such a remedy. Do try, however, not to graduate to the harder stuff.

Oh, OK - I looked at that post - mangled .. again. Hey, instead of all this noise, all these posts, why not just answer the question in the simple terms Chinglu put it ? What's stopping you from doing this ?

PS - stop with the trite, old fashioned phrases, will you (bit between teeth .. etc) you sound like a real dumb bogan ( the equivalent might be hilbilly for our American friends). I'm embarrassed for you every time I read one of your posts. You sound like you really struggle to make an impact though the impact you make is not the one you have in mind.

Wow!!!!
Maybe you need to swap the Disprin for something heavier....
Take it easy ol son, the pedant you have raised show you are at the end of your tether.......
I'll go easy OK???

 

[paddoboy]

I take it you have not the intestinal fortitude to go back in the thread to verify what I have said to be factual.
That's OK, it's obvious the agenda you are supporting, and the baggage you carry, would lead to more lies and purposeful mis-interpreting.
Like I said, the evidence is there in black and white and will be there for near eternity I hope.

 

[Lakon]

Agenda ? Each post you make shows yours more and more, and that would be to detract from the simple question that Chinglu put ..

It is simple. The traveling twin witnessed 12 earth orbits with science.

How many earth orbits did his clock claim he witnessed?

Answer the question.

.. and to lose this thread in your silly tit for tats. That, Paddo, is quite obvious.

So, carry on without me. No more helping your obfuscation. If you can answer the question do so. If not .. NOT!

 

[paddoboy]

Agenda ? Each post you make shows yours more and more, and that would be to detract from the simple question that Chinglu put ..

It is simple. The traveling twin witnessed 12 earth orbits with science.

How many earth orbits did his clock claim he witnessed?

Answer the question.

.. and to lose this thread in your silly tit for tats. That, Paddo, is quite obvious.

So, carry on without me. No more helping your obfuscation. If you can answer the question do so. If not .. NOT!

You do the checking. It's been answered by many, many times.
and stop raising pedants to hide your agenda....

sheesh!!!

 

[paddoboy]

Yes, you continue to ignore everything being explained to you again and repeat over and over and over your ignorance.

Yes and it appears he now has a mate to support him in that endeavour.

 

[Lakon]

It's not working Paddoboy. Your ongoing efforts at derailment of this thread only shows Chinglu's got you in a corner. This is probably quite an embarrassment to Rpenner.

Here's Chinglus question again;

It is simple. The traveling twin witnessed 12 earth orbits with science.

How many earth orbits did his clock claim he witnessed?

Answer the question.

You've expended all this energy in subtefurge and derailment. Why not just answer ?

There is no proscription in the forum rules about repetition.

 

[Lakon]

Oh, and Paddo, you're going to say what my agenda is, and offer credible evidence, right ?

 

[Undefined]

Hi chinglu.

I said clocks do what they do.

I did not what they do is correct.

Now, it has been explained to you and others in this thread that the traveling twin scientifically witnessed 12 earth orbits and yet his clock claimed he only witnessed 10 earth orbits.

So, your task to explain how the clock is correct when it contradicts scientific observations. I thought you people claimed anything that contradicts scientific observations is crackpottery.

You see, I agree with that.

So we are agreed; the twins are the scientists/observers who INTERPRET the clock counts; while The clocks just count. If their internal processes CHANGE rate of ticking/counting, then that is all that the clocks do, give a different count to what would have been at starting state. Yes?

Just as the traveling twin's INTERNAL biology AGING PROCESS rate CHANGES from that which he started at, but his stay-put twin remains same as starting state. Yes?


Hence the clocks/age-processes will be DIFFERENT...NOT "WRONG" in either case. Just DIFFERENT. See?

The external astronomical earth-orbit dataset of 12 'years' is neither here nor there, since that hasn't changed for either of them insofar as what they "lived/witnessed" through as "externals" COMMON TO BOTH IRRESPECTIVE of what internal clock/biology is counting/aging internally to them.

Only YOU come along and 'connect' and 'claim' what it 'means' etc. Understand, mate?

And did you understand my "GR"-only example which had both in SAME "SR" all along BUT STILL HAD CLOCK/BIOLOGY DIFFERENCE 'count/age' when compared by science/observer to common external 'years' witnessed by both as 12 orbits? That should tell you what you want to know for BOTH GR-only and SR-only examples of this kind.

So, chinglu, YES, the two twins BOTH 'lived/witnessed" 12 earth orbits ETERNALLY, but INTERNALLY they and their respective clocks 'aged/counted' an INTERNAL PROCESS which represents an INTERNAL DIFFERENCE between them after the experiment which lasted 12 earth orbits as a common external referent for that experimental run duration.

Understand? NEITHER clock is "wrong". Just DIFFERENT. And the 12 years is an EXTERNAL referent, and NOT INTERNAL referents denoting INTERNAL biology/clock PROCESS age/counts. See?

Good luck with your other discussions, mate.

 

[paddoboy]

It's not working Paddoboy. Your ongoing efforts at derailment of this thread only shows Chinglu's got you in a corner. This is probably quite an embarrassment to Rpenner.

Here's Chinglus question again;

It is simple. The traveling twin witnessed 12 earth orbits with science.

How many earth orbits did his clock claim he witnessed?

Answer the question.

You've expended all this energy in subtefurge and derailment. Why not just answer ?

There is no proscription in the forum rules about repetition.

Sure its working! Other forumites are quite capable and willing to check out the whole thread and see the vast number of times the question has been answered....including by myself.
Like I said, if you want to maintain any semblance of respectability in your posts, you'll check it out too.

 

[paddoboy]

Oh, and Paddo, you're going to say what my agenda is, and offer credible evidence, right ?

Sure, since you asked.........
Firstly, it's quite obvious that chinglu is hung up on the establishment or mainstream views on science....so much so, that it has become a fanatical obsession with him, to put science down whenever he gets that urge.
His refusal to check out at least three explanatory illustrative videos I gave support that view, plus the continued refusal to answer questions put to him, and his standard reply that he continually regurgitates, as illustrated in post 375.
And that view is supported by another in post 373.....

So that much is obvious....
Trying to decipher your posts that added nothing to the debate was not as clear at first, except for the fact that you offered "disguised "support for him, although evidence shows he was patently wrong.

Then lo and behold you posted a recommendation in the " What 5 books would you save for the future?" thread and guess what that book was!!!
" Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds "
This revealed that we had another closet anti establishment forumite in our midst.
You obviously equated crowds and science mainstream as being tarred with the same brush, and in doing that tarred yourself with the same brush as chiglu.

And of course the real truth of the matter is, yes sometimes groups do act as unruly mobs, but on many occasions the crowd or the majority is correct.
And in the case of science and the scientific method, it also happens on occasions and as I have explained to you [although not confident as to how you interpreted it with your agenda] I have been involved in a couple of debates where I stood aside from the mainstream answer, although certainly not on scientific doctrine and/or fact.....My disagreements all involved the inevitable place of Imagination and luck in science, and the inevitable presence of ETL somewhere sometime based on numbers extent and content.
On more substantial science matters, I align generally with the scientific method......tried and true.
BTW, did you google as to what a scientific theory was??

Now do you see what your obvious agenda does to good sense and reasoning?

Let me explain it again.....
chinglu has every right to post his nonsense in the pseudoscience forum, and I and others have every right to critically appraise that and reveal it for what it really is......baggage, agenda and all.

and again the question you blindly accuse me and others as not answering, has been answered at least half a dozen times.....all you need to do is check.

 

[Lakon]

Sure, since you asked.........
Firstly, it's quite obvious that chinglu is hung up on the establishment or mainstream views on science....so much so, that it has become a fanatical obsession with him, to put science down whenever he gets that urge.
His refusal to check out at least three explanatory illustrative videos I gave support that view, plus the continued refusal to answer questions put to him, and his standard reply that he continually regurgitates, as illustrated in post 375.
And that view is supported by another in post 373.....

So that much is obvious....
Trying to decipher your posts that added nothing to the debate was not as clear at first, except for the fact that you offered "disguised "support for him, although evidence shows he was patently wrong.

Then lo and behold you posted a recommendation in the " What 5 books would you save for the future?" thread and guess what that book was!!!
" Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds "
This revealed that we had another closet anti establishment forumite in our midst.
You obviously equated crowds and science mainstream as being tarred with the same brush, and in doing that tarred yourself with the same brush as chiglu.

And of course the real truth of the matter is, yes sometimes groups do act as unruly mobs, but on many occasions the crowd or the majority is correct.
And in the case of science and the scientific method, it also happens on occasions and as I have explained to you [although not confident as to how you interpreted it with your agenda] I have been involved in a couple of debates where I stood aside from the mainstream answer, although certainly not on scientific doctrine and/or fact.....My disagreements all involved the inevitable place of Imagination and luck in science, and the inevitable presence of ETL somewhere sometime based on numbers extent and content.
On more substantial science matters, I align generally with the scientific method......tried and true.
BTW, did you google as to what a scientific theory was??

Now do you see what your obvious agenda does to good sense and reasoning?

Let me explain it again.....
chinglu has every right to post his nonsense in the pseudoscience forum, and I and others have every right to critically appraise that and reveal it for what it really is......baggage, agenda and all.

and again the question you blindly accuse me and others as not answering, has been answered at least half a dozen times.....all you need to do is check.

What a nut job you are.

All the above from a self confessed anti-establisment layman who holds unconventional ideas and who can only communicate simplistically. LOL ..

The book " Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds " .. did you even look at it ? Probably way above your pay grade if you did. It is mainly about economic cycles, manias such as the Tulip Mania, etc, and is hailed as brilliant by many economists and historians.

You tied up some reference to it by me in another thread as something to do with here ? That's nut job territory I'm afraid.

You'll be seeing 'reds under the bed' soon.

I didn't read most of your above - it is so contorted, it made me cringe. But I did see you mention fanatical obsession or something, and your post reeks of it.

You think you're defending science, but most serious, impartial scientists would be cringing too.

 

[Lakon]

Sure its working! Other forumites are quite capable and willing to check out the whole thread and see the vast number of times the question has been answered....including by myself.
Like I said, if you want to maintain any semblance of respectability in your posts, you'll check it out too.

Your ongoing efforts to derail the thread .. 'sure they're working' was your response .. OK

I don't care at all for your respectabiltity. As to whether others respect me or not, that's between me and them, unless you presume to speak for them too .. and you do, don't you ?

You're on some self appointed zealotry mission to rescue science .. you caped cruisader you ..

Anyway, enough of my contribution to your derailment. It is now quite plain the nut job that you are. So unless something of value issues from you (a most unlikely proposition, as it hasn't happened yet) I will not be fueling your derailment any further.