Relativity And Simple Algebra

[Moronium]

Even causal time is relative and not absolute. The only way to sync all clocks to the same time and not mess that up is if nothing changed its velocity or there was no gravity (which can be thought of as acceleration). 

 

 

I've said this to you a hundred times to you, Ralf, and it's never sunk in yet, so I really don't know why I bother, but....

 

1. Motion does not affect "time."  You seem to acknowledge this at times, and deny it at others.

 

2.  Whether two or more clocks are, or remain, synchronized likewise says nothing about "time."  That whole question is about clocks, and the rate of internal physical processes in those clocks, not time.

 

3.  You still don't understand the meaning of, or the difference between, the concepts of absolute and relative in this context. I've explained to you, in elaborate detail, where you're going wrong, but, as is your standard procedure, you ignore it all.

Edited April 12, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

Stop acting like you're an authority on anything. I don't "listen" to you because I consider what you're saying to be based in total ignorance. I'm confused why you believe you should be considered an authority because I consider you to know nothing.

[Moronium]

I consider you to know nothing.

 

 

Well, of course you do, Ralf.  I'm no different than anybody else.  In your mind, NOBODY knows anything except you.

 

Well, unless they agree with your nonsense, that is.  Kinda like your dad, ya know?

Edited April 12, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

Right or you could just know nothing.

[Moronium]

Well, unless they agree with your nonsense, that is.  

 

But nobody ever does. So, you say, you "feel alone."

 

But at least it's an extra-special kind of loneliness, eh?

 

You are unique.  You are the only person on the entire planet who "knows the truth."

Edited April 12, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

I've long suspected Einstein's method of clock sync manipulated the interpretation of the results to be in line with what the theory of relativity wanted them to be. That desire was to define subjective perspective presents as the only type of present. None of these subjective presents can agree so he made them agree by setting all their clocks to the same time from one subjective present. Each subjective present could do the same so each person would need to carry around an infinite number of watches to tell what is the present time from other perspectives.

 

For example,  Bob syncs an entire network of clocks across the universe using Einstein's method so they all tell the same time according to his watch. It's how Einstein defined a universal present. It means if a supernova goes off everyone could agree on a universal time when they saw that nova by calculating how long it would take light to traverse the distance between them and the nova. But if any of them were moving at a constant velocity relative to Bob's universal clock network, the times on their watches would not all agree due to time dilation. So long as their velocity remained constant, their clocks would be running slow (due to relative time running slow) at a constant rate which could be compensated for like it is in GPS satellites. But if any of them changed their constant velocity, the time on their clocks would be knocked out of sync and then run at a new constant slower rate.

 

As Moronium believes, these clocks are made mechanically defective by the physical stresses they are put under. It's like if you bought two Rolexes, one for each wrist to check their accuracy. But one runs slower because you keep one in an ice bucket. Taken out of that ice bucket, it would run perfectly like the other and so long as you kept the ice temp steady, it would run at a predictably slower rate. But in the transition from ice to wrist, there is a glitch in time. It will never catch up to the time on your other Rolex even though they were sync'd before one went into the ice bucket. This is the difference between time dilation and age difference, caused by two separate phenomena. This is just an analogy which Moronium believes as fact. The watches are not being manipulated, time itself is. 

 

As I have said many times before, time dilation is just an illusion of perspective; Einstein based his reality (the present) on that illusion. There would have been less need to break up the universal present into an infinite number of subjective presents if he had not excluded frames in constant relative motion. His idea of a universal present is fine so long as no one is relatively moving. The supernova will go off at the same time on everyone's watch if all are stationary wrt each other and they account for the light speed delay. If they're in constant relative motion, accounting for light speed delay is not enough to agree on a mostly universal present according to the time on your watch. (I say mostly because a change in velocity or experiencing different gravity fields  causes permanent clock differences like the ice bucket transition for the Rolex.)

 

Proper time  is far more universal than Einstein's idea because it includes frames in constant relative motion not just 0 relative motion. The clocks are all sync'd within each frame and the rate of time is also universal. To agree on a proper universal present time for an event, you take into account the normalized light speed delay and the equivalent of distance time formula 

 

t_x = t'(Y_m-1) where Y_m is the Y in the minkowski depiction.

 

Here's an example of what this looks like. Alice is doing her usual rountrip at .6c. Using proper simultaneity, they send a signal to each other when their on-board clocks hit 1. In the depiction, it takes Alice's signal .75 yrs to reach Bob at 2. t_x = .25 yrs. So, in perspective time, Bob was 1.25 when Alice sent her signal. But in proper time with the t_x correction, he was 1 and Alice was 1 in the universal proper present. The calculation for Alice is a little more complicated because the Minkowski depiction of how long Bob's light signal takes to reach her is distorted by the depiction of relative velocity. The 1.5 yr travel time must be multiplied by DSR = .5 so it equals her signal travel time to Bob. Then the math can continue and we see in proper time, Alice was 1 when Bob was 1. There is agreement in the universal proper present that they sent their light signals simultaneously in proper time. If you want to think in Einstein's faulty idea of perspective time, just leave out the correction factor t_x.

 

Of course this improvement does not apply to time discrepancies that occur as the Rolex is transferred out of the ice bucket. Proper time is itself permanently affected by changes in velocity or gravity so the clocks will not all share the same time in the universal present unless you account for the effects of velocity changes or gravity on time and add those appropriately to the clock readings. The fact is, a universal present based on proper time clocks accommodates relativistic effects on clocks much easier than a universal present based on perspective time clocks. Reality would no longer be based on the illusion of time dilation.

 

PS. Remember: time slowing due to time dilation cannot be experienced in real time but time slowing due to the doppler shift ratio can be. The DSR is in the domain of proper time while time dilation only exists in perspective time. Which is more real then? 

 

In later posts I show time dilation is not due to time slowing but to relativity of simultaneity affecting when the two clocks start timing in order to be compared.

Edited December 21, 2019 by ralfcis

[Vmedvil2]

You know Ralfcis you aren't wrong but these equations are generally accepted more or less in SR with the 4 Velocity current in relativity.

 

 

The only thing you have done differently is not use the Gamma function or Beta Function.

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by VictorMedvil

[ralfcis]

Victor I'm going to try to understand the math but 1st, there's no need for  y and z for understanding so I will re-write the equations without them. Second, I need to know what = means. v with a ^, does that mean scalar? I'm going to get rid of your B_p notations. What is r and R and u and U? What is a referential? Are you addressing my last post where I change the basis of reality from perspective t to proper time tau? I'm not familiar with your notations but on a superficial glance all I see is that you're presenting the derivation for Y here. This thread is about simplifying the math, not trying to bury it in obfuscation. No one here understands algebra so how is it going to be any easier for them to pick up on 4-vector math when we only really need 2 vectors for understanding?

 

Plus which part is not wrong? You can't possibly agree with me if you're a relativist because I've taken that entire theory, torn it to shreds, and thrown it in the garbage. I'd rather concentrate on the parts you find are wrong rather than be steered into an introductory course in relativistic math right now. The theory is being presented to the masses in algebraic form so let's concentrate on cleaning that up first.

Edited April 14, 2019 by ralfcis

[Moronium]

I've long suspected Einstein's method of clock sync manipulated the interpretation of the results to be in line with what the theory of relativity wanted them to be. 

 

What you have "long suspected" has been widely known for over a century, Ralf.  Einstein openly admitted that his clock synchronization method was not dictated by either fact or principle.  Instead it was, he said, merely a product of his own voluntary choice.

 

Without "Einstein synchronization" SR goes out the window, you're right.  PFT's use external synchronization, not Einstein synchronization.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Moronium

[Moronium]

This is why I introduced causal time based on the proper time within each frame. It is far more universal than Einstein's idea because it includes frames in constant relative motion not just 0 relative motion. The clocks are all sync'd within each frame and the rate of time is also universal. 

 

 

"You" introduced? You think that's something novel?  The concept of absolute time, which is all you're talking about, was introduced long before Newton and is quite ancient.

 

Unfortunately, you follow up on this new "insight" of yours with all kinds of serious misconceptions.  You still don't quite know how to apply it.

 

Neither the doppler shift nor delays in transmission time resulting from the limited speed of light have ANYTHING to do with either (1) so-called "time dilation" in SR or (2) clock retardation in LR (which is all so-called "time dilation" really is).  Time does not dilate.  Clocks slow down with increased speed, that's all.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

What I've suspected and what I can now prove are 2 different things. Einstein's clock sync method has always been presented as a tool that can be used outside the theory. It's supposed to be theory neutral, it should not have any influence on the theory itself. How can it be neutral when it is Einstein's very basis for the definition that perspective time is reality and that time is subjective? It's like saying I'm just going to use this hammer on this nail but in my reality, the nail and the board jump up to the hammer and everyone else's hammer and nail don't work the same way from my perspective. 

 

I don't use PFT's absolute sync and I will now use Einstein's light signal sync for proper time which is still relative but based on the DSR (which is observable) and not time dilation (which is a non-observable mathematical construct).

Edited December 21, 2019 by ralfcis

[Moronium]

 I will now use Einstein's light signal sync for causal time which is still relative but based on the DSR (which is observable) and not time dilation (which is a non-observable mathematical construct).

 

Like I just said (after editing), Ralf:

 

Unfortunately, you follow up on this new "insight" of yours with all kinds of serious misconceptions.  You still don't quite know how to apply it.

 

Neither the doppler shift nor delays in transmission time resulting from the limited speed of light have ANYTHING to do with either (1) so-called "time dilation" in SR or (2) clock retardation in LR (which is all so-called "time dilation" really is).  Time does not dilate.  Clocks slow down with increased speed, that's all.

 

Edited April 14, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

You can repeat your same old stuff that I absolutely reject a billion more times and it won't become any more valid. Learn some math to try to back up what you're saying and you'll find out for yourself it's nonsense. Stop reading comic books for your world view. If you deny relativistic facts, you are wrong. Relativistic facts are backed up by empirical evidence (that your comic books say is wrong) even though the theory itself is pure fiction.

Edited April 14, 2019 by ralfcis

[Moronium]

You can repeat your same old stuff that I absolutely reject a billion more times and it won't become any more valid. Learn some math to try to back up what you're saying and you'll find out for yourself it's nonsense. Stop reading comic books for your world view. If you deny relativistic facts, you are wrong. Relativistic facts are backed up by empirical evidence (that your comic books say is wrong) even though the theory itself is pure fiction.

 

You have no idea of how to properly understand or apply "relativistic facts" either.

 

Carry on, Ralf.  

Edited April 14, 2019 by Moronium

[Moronium]

Carry on, Ralf.  

 

 

You are actually making progress.  Just not enough to prevent you from failing to seeing the forest because of the trees.  The biggest tree of all is your megalomanic slavery to your own misconceived ideas.  You'll never see past that one.

 

If not for that, you might eventually stumble onto a path leading to a hilltop, where you could look down and see a forest rather than just a bunch of distracting trees. Until then, you'll never see the big picture.

Edited April 14, 2019 by Moronium

[ralfcis]

My ideas are evolving constantly so I'm not a slave to all of them. I've been correcting past posts. I'm not yet at the mountain top, but I've seen the promised land.

[Moronium]

PS. Remember: time slowing due to time dilation cannot be experienced in real time but time slowing due to the doppler shift ratio can be. The DSR is in the domain of causal time while time dilation only exists in perspective time. Which is more real then? 

 

 

I really know better than to bother, Ralf, but I''m kinda bored right now.

 

Tell me, what possible connection is there between the DRS and "time slowing?"