Paper help.
- Thread starter theorist-constant12345
- Start date
- Status
Size, speed , perspective view, is relative to the observers size and speed and relative view. A true reality logical statement is, that if I made my cube twice the size of the 9 dimensions, and the Earth was twice it own dimensions, and the Earth maintained it's velocity of rotation, then the Earth would have a 48 hr day.
Are you sure that instead of looking at the computer screen you might be looking into a mirror?
I did not say time is a device nor did I imply it.
The rest of the universe does not agree with you.
This hypothetical 'void' does not exist in this universe so your point is moot.
This is not correct. The universe is not expanding into anything.
Our solar system holds no special place in the universe so cannot be the center.
maybe use the word scale instead of view ?
No.
This is neither true nor logical: a cube doesn't have "9 dimensions".
This too is neither true nor logical. Since you specified that it maintains velocity of rotation (i.e. 360 degrees per 24 hours) then it would still - by definition - have a 24 hour day.
WTF does the cube have to do with the Earth?
I think this link will help: http://www.timecube.com/
Nope. If it maintained the same rate of rotation it would, by definition, have a 24 hour day, exactly the same as it does now. If you slowed the planet so that the linear speed at the _surface_ is the same as it is now (i.e. ~1035 mph at the equator) then the Earth would revolve half as fast - thus your 48 hour thing. In that case the Earth would have half the rate of rotation it does now.
Correct. A change in time affects all mechanisms equally. Thus if you had a clock that relied on gravity, and you reduced gravity, the clock might report time passing more slowly - but a clock that relied on, say, the mechanical resonance of a crystal or the atomic characteristics of a structure would not.
If something changed such that all measurable processes were affected equally, then you have a true change in time. (As you get at high speeds and in gravity wells.)
Indeed, no universe. Which is quite true (no time or space without a universe) but is something we cannot observe, so is fairly meaningless.
Well, no. If you have absolutely nothing you have no time or space. (Think of this as the state of our universe before it existed.)[/QUOTE]
he's trying to use an example, not an realistic one, to describe " scale ".
scale(2)-size ratio: a ratio representing the size of an illustration or reproduction, especially a map or a model, in relation to the object it represents
The Universe/spacetime is expanding into nothing...The BB was an evolution of the Universe/spacetime. The Universe according to the BB and which aligns with GR, is everything...It has no center because it happened everywhere at the same time [because everywhere was contained to within the volume of an atomic nucleus]
There is no center [except that of our Hubble volume] and no edges.
But you have been told all this before, and yet you still willfully disregard what the BB and the evidence that supports it says, and then implement your own fairy tales.
The only willful blinding to reality is your own, and this was probably why you have been permanently banned from at least one form previously that we know about......
Time is real, like space, time is not absolute..Every FoR will always see time [within their own frame], passing at one second/second.
The effects of time dilation are observed when viewing another FoR and is dictated by that frames gravity well, and the speed of that frame.
Each frames passage of time, are as valid as the others.
It is no illusion. This has been observed and shown to be correct.
The other aspect with regards to time, is that there is no universal NOW.
Time is relative.
But as with other facts, this has also been pointed out to you.
I think I must definitely be on another planet by the response posts. If the Earth was twice the circumference and rotated at the same speed of 1035 mph, then a day would be 48 hrs.
The answers you provide are astonishing, and rather strange.
''Each frames passage of time, are as valid as the others.
It is no illusion. This has been observed and shown to be correct.''
This has been observed, are you serious?, you are now suggesting that time can be observed, it has a Physical presence?
''Time is real, like space, time is not absolute.''
You are talking utter gibberish. Time is not a real thing of substance.
''The Universe/spacetime is expanding into nothing...The BB was an evolution of the Universe/spacetime.''
Huh, all the stars are expanding into nothing, really? all the stars are expanding through space.
Time still exists in the void, but nothing else except spacial emptiness. Hence , Time and space.
''Well, no. If you have absolutely nothing you have no time or space. (Think of this as the state of our universe before it existed.''
I will bang my head against a wall later. I am thinking of the state of our visual Universe before it existed, and it is simple, space had to exist for the big bang to be made in, and also even without matter time exists. It is timing humanity uses.
Time exists in a void but at zero value, there is no one or any physical presence to count.
''Correct. A change in time affects all mechanisms equally. Thus if you had a clock that relied on gravity, and you reduced gravity, the clock might report time passing more slowly ''
Time does not change.....ever.....it never alters, it is an invention like the rest of it, like my abstract is saying.
For those who do not understand the simple cube diagram.
The cube represents our visual Universe, the timing by sight of what we can see by the intensity range of the Sun, and the stars fading ambience has they go beyond our perspective view, into a seemingly nothing.
The cube is a prediction of the future. In years to come, our visual 3 dimensional space, will be solely based on the Sun and 8 planets, has the rest would of expanded out of sight.
Time and space is the darkness, and you are wrong and not I. The diagram, and the previous diagram of the train example, shows you the true reality, and clearly explains the notion , showing the logical assumptions by my oneself, to be of axiom truth.
You can not observe time, that is garbage , you can place timing on the existence of matter, and matter interaction, you can also say that gravity effects the timing and life expectancy of an atom. But please science , stop trying to deceive us, with illusions of dilation of time, and make belief time travel.
The only reason we only see what we can see, is because of perspective view. If we could travel to one of the expanding stars, our sun would look like a distance star, and we would see the same distance again, the opposite way, that normally we can not see.
The answers you provide are astonishing, and rather strange.
''Each frames passage of time, are as valid as the others.
It is no illusion. This has been observed and shown to be correct.''
This has been observed, are you serious?, you are now suggesting that time can be observed, it has a Physical presence?
''Time is real, like space, time is not absolute.''
You are talking utter gibberish. Time is not a real thing of substance.
''The Universe/spacetime is expanding into nothing...The BB was an evolution of the Universe/spacetime.''
Huh, all the stars are expanding into nothing, really? all the stars are expanding through space.
Time still exists in the void, but nothing else except spacial emptiness. Hence , Time and space.
''Well, no. If you have absolutely nothing you have no time or space. (Think of this as the state of our universe before it existed.''
I will bang my head against a wall later. I am thinking of the state of our visual Universe before it existed, and it is simple, space had to exist for the big bang to be made in, and also even without matter time exists. It is timing humanity uses.
Time exists in a void but at zero value, there is no one or any physical presence to count.
''Correct. A change in time affects all mechanisms equally. Thus if you had a clock that relied on gravity, and you reduced gravity, the clock might report time passing more slowly ''
Time does not change.....ever.....it never alters, it is an invention like the rest of it, like my abstract is saying.
For those who do not understand the simple cube diagram.
The cube represents our visual Universe, the timing by sight of what we can see by the intensity range of the Sun, and the stars fading ambience has they go beyond our perspective view, into a seemingly nothing.
The cube is a prediction of the future. In years to come, our visual 3 dimensional space, will be solely based on the Sun and 8 planets, has the rest would of expanded out of sight.
Time and space is the darkness, and you are wrong and not I. The diagram, and the previous diagram of the train example, shows you the true reality, and clearly explains the notion , showing the logical assumptions by my oneself, to be of axiom truth.
You can not observe time, that is garbage , you can place timing on the existence of matter, and matter interaction, you can also say that gravity effects the timing and life expectancy of an atom. But please science , stop trying to deceive us, with illusions of dilation of time, and make belief time travel.
The only reason we only see what we can see, is because of perspective view. If we could travel to one of the expanding stars, our sun would look like a distance star, and we would see the same distance again, the opposite way, that normally we can not see.
How many forums have you been banned from theorist constant?
You do realise you are in the fringe section don't you?
You also do realise that your insistance on the reality of your nonsense, is making you a laughing stock, don't you?
TIP: THIS WILL END UP IN PSEUDOSCIENCE AS THE OTHER HAIR-BRAINED THREAD ABOUT LIGHT AND DARK:
You do realise you are in the fringe section don't you?
You also do realise that your insistance on the reality of your nonsense, is making you a laughing stock, don't you?
TIP: THIS WILL END UP IN PSEUDOSCIENCE AS THE OTHER HAIR-BRAINED THREAD ABOUT LIGHT AND DARK:
[/QUOTE]
See people! All of science is wrong!...our observations are illusions! our experimental results are all invalid!This giant, this constant theorist that we have been lucky enough to snare, has revealed to us the reality of 21st century cosmology.
nudge, nudge, wink, wink!They're Coming to Take Me Away, Ha-Haaa
from: Dr. Demento's Delights
Warner Bros. 1975 BS 2855 0698
Remember when you ran away and I got on my knees and begged you not to
leave because I'd go berserk?? Well...
You left me anyhow and then the days got worse and worse and now you see
I've gone completely out of my mind.. And..
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa!!
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa
To the funny farm. Where life is beautiful all the time and I'll be
happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they're
coming to take me away, ha-haaa!!!!!
You thought it was a joke and so you laughed, you laughed when I had said
that loosing you would make me flip my lid.. RIGHT???
I know you laughed, I heard you laugh, you laughed you laughed and
laughed and then you left, but now you know I'm utterly mad... And..
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa,
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa.
To the happy home. With trees and flowers and chirping birds and basket
weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes and they're
coming to take me away, ha-haaa!!!
I cooked your food, I cleaned your house, and this is how you pay me back
for all my kind unselfish loving deeds.. Huh??
Well you just wait, they'll find you yet and when they do they'll put you
in the ASPCA, you mangy mutt!!! And...
They're coming to take me away, ha-haaa.
They're coming to take me away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa.
To the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time and I'll be happy
to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they're coming
to take me away, ha-haaa!!!
To the happy home, with trees and flowers and chirping birds and basket
weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes and they're
coming to take me away, ha-haa!!!
To the funny farm, where life is beautiful all the time... (fade out)
On a more serious, and scientifically factual note......
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_time_dilation.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/HEP/QuarkNet/time.html
http://homepages.rpi.edu/~newbeh/gersonaguiblava.pdf
http://newt.phys.unsw.edu.au/einsteinlight/jw/module4_time_dilation.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation
http://www.phy.olemiss.edu/HEP/QuarkNet/time.html
http://homepages.rpi.edu/~newbeh/gersonaguiblava.pdf
Science forums and the people who comment give science a bad name. If Einstein was alive today but a nobody you would send him to the bin.
To be honest I am getting bored of trying to explain, some of my ideas, I have discussed with various people from different walks of life, and it is strange that the public agree with me.
I receive an array of answers and ideas back, including some plants grow in the dark.
I am genuine, I am tired of trying to explain now, science is really missing the big picture which I have said. Thank you for the links, I do and have read before about timing dilation.
From your link.
T' = T(1 - (v/c)2)1/2 = T/γ, where γ = 1/(1 - (v/c)2)1/2
Where has the third clock timing the entire experiment, witnesses no change.
''It turns out that as an object moves with relativistic speeds a "strange" thing seems to happen to its time as observed by "us" the stationary observer (observer in an inertial reference frame). What we see happen is that the "clock" in motion slows down according to our clock, therefore we read two different times. Which time is correct???''
The third observer from an outer perspective view,<observing the experiment>, times no change in time, relative to all observers.
Last edited:
No that is not correct.
Lets assume the clocks are A and B and we are the third clock (observer). A third observer in a different inertial frame than the A and B would see a different time dilation for both A and B. If the third observer was in the same inertial frame as one of the first two, A for instance, then he would only see time dilation for B.
Of course both clocks are correct. For all the inertial frames the observer reading his own clock would always see 1 second as 1 second.
You said "observer in an inertial reference frame", which is strange because all observers are in an inertial reference frame. I think you meant to say an observer in a DIFFERENT inertial reference frame.
As I said before this is not correct. If you had 100 observers in 100 different reference frames each of the observers would see time dilaton in the other 99. The amount of dilation would depend on how different the speeds were of the other inertial frames.
- Status