Time Does Not Exist

[A-wal]

If the Universe is an interpretation in our mind, how do you derive that a photon exists or moves at all?

 

But in regards to thought , it doesn't work like that, that is what I am saying is wrong, If you actually here me out and listen and discuss the idea, you will also see why it is wrong. 

 

 

Let us imagine we are plotting a vector to a distance star , drawing a straight  line from our starting point 0 to our finishing point 0.  The reason they are both zero is the journey is bi-directional, it can be made from either A to B or B to A and the result is the same. 

 

You travel from A to B, v=c

 

I travel from B to A   v=c

 

 

 

We start our journey simultaneously. 

 

 

 

My journey takes exactly  1 hr, can you tell me how long your journey takes?

You're completely delusional. You're unable to grasp basic concepts but instead of trying to learn, you're assuming they must be wrong because you can't understand them.

 

Your example is symmetrical so of course it will take the same amount of time from both perspectives. Also no massive object can ever reach the speed of light relative to any other object. From the perspective of observers who remain stationary relative to the two points, A and B, the journey would take longer. You can work this out by imagining a light beam passing between the points, it has to move at the same speed relative to point A and B and relative to the two observers traveling between them. So the spatial distance between the two point is less from the perspective of the two observers moving between A and B (length contraction) and they also cover the same distance in less time (time dilation). Put the two together and you get a constant speed of light from every inertial frame of reference, exactly as observed by experiments over and over again.

 

I really am done now.

Edited February 22, 2016 by A-wal

[xyz]

You're completely delusional. You're unable to grasp basic concepts but instead of trying to learn, you're assuming they must be wrong because you can't understand them.

 

Your example is symmetrical so of course it will take the same amount of time from both perspectives. Also no massive object can ever reach the speed of light relative to any other object. From the perspective of observers who remain stationary relative to the two points, A and B, the journey would take longer. You can work this out by imagining a light beam passing between the points, it has to move at the same speed relative to point A and B and relative to the two observers traveling between them. So the spatial distance between the two point is less from the perspective of the two observers moving between A and B (length contraction) and they also cover the same distance in less time (time dilation). Put the two together and you get a constant speed of light from every inertial frame of reference, exactly as observed by experiments over and over again.

 

I really am done now.

Of course everything is symmetrical and simultaneous, because my clock is the photon that has a constant speed from A to B. My object is a Photon, the observer is the photon, I suggest you have no idea of what you are talking about, I understand time dilation, I understand seeing things in the said past, I have used Einsteins; own analogy. Let us imagine a photon travelling in a straight line from A to B.  Let us only account for one direction so we can create a parlour trick illusion. 

 

 

Remind me on again about how time dilation and the Caesium atom uses light to time, time.

 

 

I am very accurately true.

 

+ve=c

 

-ve=c

 

d=x

 

net difference t=0

 

 

added - cgi showing why we see things in the now and not in the past.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLKVSOUnsVM

Edited February 23, 2016 by xyz