carlosncarlos Posted September 15, 2003 Report Posted September 15, 2003 This message has been removed since it was posted previously by the same author. Please note that it was not moved nor deleted by Noah, but by myself. Tormod
carlosncarlos Posted September 15, 2003 Author Report Posted September 15, 2003 The scientific method requiresof several steps to analyse and evaluate the events in front f us. The scientific methods must be in accord to impartial research and with the required honesty by the researchers to come out with conclusions..even when those conclusions are not final. What evidence is at hand to prove that time travels?...Maybe the use of clocks as devices able to measure the passage of time? Dear readers, you will understand now that such fallacy of above is just a misunderstanding of reality. Clocks are devices calibrated to a determinated functional work. Clocks are not connected directly or indirectly to any imaginary dimension of time. Clocks are connected solely to their source of energy in order to provide a calibrated data to us. Those are clocks, and nothing more than that. Clocks can't measure anything at all. In case someone disagree with these statements, well, just search the journals, search the web and check if you can find those "hundreds and hundreds" of records of experiments made solely to prove that clocks can indeed measure the passage of time. Please dear readers...do it...and welcome to reality...such tests have never been made: the idea of clocks as devices which can measure the passage of time is a fantasy. The data provided by clocks is a calibrated reference based in the observation of the rotation of Earth. Also, today the atomic clocks are just the reference obtained by the observation of the natural vibration frequency of the atom of Caesium. So far, neither the rotation of Earth...neither the vibration frequency of an atom can be considered as an "extra physical dimension." Then, the complete assumption that the theories of relativity have been proved correct by the malfunction of clocks when these devices are exposed to different enviroments...such assumption is just...a mere fantasy. When atomic clocks are installed in a satellite, their calibrated functional work will be in accord ith other similar clocks located on Earth. But, as soon the satellite reach the outerspace, the matter of the clocks will suffer variations. This is a common observation made with matter: mater is ALWAYS affected when is exposed to different enviroments. Those clocks in the satellites are freed from gravity, exposed to strongest cosmic rays, etc, etc... The matter of those clocks will suffer variations and clocks will malfunction. The "light clock" suggested by Einstein was a ridiculous idea...so ridiculous that such clock never was able to be made and work. So, today, the followers of Einstein just cover up such stupidity and use the "atomic clocks" malfunction to try -in vain- to prove correct their theories. But dear readers, we must talk about reality and not of fantasies in a science forum..so..if any of you can prove that clocks can measure the imaginary passage of time...welll, welcome...give your best... And Noah, please don't delete this topic again...don't do as some women do..when instead of cleaning the dirt in their finger nails...they just paint them over... It is time to clean out the hallways of science...it is time to return back to reality. The Perceptional Law is the way.Text
wholloway Posted September 15, 2003 Report Posted September 15, 2003 The topic wasn't deleted, it was moved. Heres my reply from your first post..Thanks Tormod for the reply, of course I have to get my hands into this one, so here goes.... I think our perceptions can lie to us. We are after all human with human shortcomings. For instance we percieve that the earth is the center of the universe and everything revolves around us. But it took advanced mathematics to prove this perception wrong and to account for the strange path planets traveled across our sky. Our math of course is perfect, it assumes perfect conditions when applied to real world events, but other than that it's perfect. I can use math to describe a perfect circle, but i could never draw one even with the most advanced computer aided tools. Mathematics is an amazing thing if you think about it. It's a system of absolute truths invented by a species with limited perception and a overall poor understanding of what is true. Mathematics is as close to perfect as our limited minds can conceive. The application of math to the real world is called science or physics. This of course is not perfect, but the great thing about the scientific method is that if I discover a repeatable result that disproves the mathematical theory of gravity, then the scientific community has no choice but to accept it. I think I know how you might repond, by saying that perception is absolute and that if the planets travel strange paths then that must be the truth. And your right, I can not prove the theory of gravity is any more correct than your law of perception. But with the theory placed forth by physics we have a logical description of all our perceptions, and if anyone should come up with something better, we can all agree on it and modify our theory for the better.
wholloway Posted September 15, 2003 Report Posted September 15, 2003 This is a reply to your second post. You are correct that a clock does not measure the passage of time. A clock is just a tool we set up to create a re-occuring event. The "time" lapse between these events is of human design. But that does not negate the existance of time. The very fact the two different objects can occupy the same space is proof. In order for two objects to occupy the same space it has to be at different times. Time is just the measurement between events. It's the same with distance. A scale doesn't realing have any meaning except to the humans that devised it. The unit of foot is a perfect example. We measure how many feet something is, but it doesn't really tell you anything. All measurments are just mutally agreed on standards. They have no connection to anything and are subject to outside influences, and therefore they are not perfect.
Tormod Posted September 15, 2003 Report Posted September 15, 2003 carlosandcarols wrote:----And Noah, please don't delete this topic again...don't do as some women do..when instead of cleaning the dirt in their finger nails...they just paint them over... It is time to clean out the hallways of science...it is time to return back to reality. ---- This is utter nonsense, and aimed at the wrong person. Please step down from your soapbox now. As for clocks not measuring time - it will depend on what you mean by "time". For all practial purposes, a clock measures time passing in its own frame in space-time. I disagree with whollowhay in that the time lapse between moments are human made. Rather, it is our division of time into days, hours, minutes, seconds etc which are human. So the measurements are human, but the flow of time is very real. Tormod
wholloway Posted September 16, 2003 Report Posted September 16, 2003 I guess what I was trying to say is that the measured distance between the events of a clock, is human design. The re-occuring event of a clock could be concieved as the second hand clicking away. I should start proof reading before I post.
Tormod Posted September 16, 2003 Report Posted September 16, 2003 No, you're doing a good job wholloway. Sorry if I misinterpreted you. Tormod
I.D Posted December 30, 2003 Report Posted December 30, 2003 By the perception Law, If I thought that I could fly and I jumped of a bridge would I start flying?
Recommended Posts