Stange Claim From A Physics And Math Forum Thread

[xyz]

I think there must be a much stronger focus on athletics in the US than there is in the UK.

 

Why? Why should academics take a more prominent role than athletics?

 

I think creativity should be given the same value as knowledge too, but that's a whole other discussion.

The thing with academic achievement is,  it is just means a person has a good  memory.  The most ''stupid'' person in the world could know the most knowledge.  I am in agreement that creativity is the signs of smartness.  IF a person can't chuck out a ''theory'' or two about at least one thing in the Universe, then I deem they are not that smart...however, we must not forget learning styles.  

 

I have seen people with A-levels etc, who can't even decorate a room, so in a sense they are ''stupid'', however if I was asked some maths, I would look like the ''stupid'' one, it is a matter of what you learn, how you learn and what you are capable of learning , I am lucky in the respect that whatever I put my mind too, I can learn it . 

Edited February 29, 2016 by xyz

[xyz]

That's your problem. As long as you keep thinking that you'll never learn how it actually works.

 

The Lorentz transformations aren't a visual effect, they're a real change in the distance of time and space as measured from different inertial frames of reference. They have to be or the speed of light couldn't be constant.

You are correct I don't understand (sarcasm),    My observation differs to Einstein's observations, two observers disagree, 

[Maine farmer]

I think there must be a much stronger focus on athletics in the US than there is in the UK.

 

Why? Why should academics take a more prominent role than athletics?

 

I think creativity should be given the same value as knowledge too, but that's a whole other discussion.

It's about a return on investment.  Only the most elite of athletes will be able to make a living as an athlete, but academics opens more possibilities.  I believe art and literature has a place within academics, and agree that we could use more.

 

Creativity is hard to teach, but should always be encouraged.

[xyz]

It's about a return on investment.  Only the most elite of athletes will be able to make a living as an athlete, but academics opens more possibilities.  I believe art and literature has a place within academics, and agree that we could use more.

 

Creativity is hard to teach, but should always be encouraged.

I don't think creativity is hard to each, I think creativity is a natural process of thought, I don't actually ''think'' we think anything as ''such''. On the assumption anything after 0 is  history, that includes our speed of thought,  thinking is of how ''fast''  a person can process close to 0.    My thoughts at this moment in ''time'' are close to 0. 

 

 

My thoughts are flowing at the rate of time. Sometimes my brain enters a state of ''thinking'' where the flow rate remains around processing the one specific piece of information, like now I am writing fluently with ahrdly a pause for thought in the convrersation as if spaking, I amy lok back and think what the hell have i just written, then pause in thoguht processing th g the information, I wonder how many typos I  hae got, I am not oin to correct it, the quicker I typ ethe more typos I make, I slowed down then temporararly to try to spell correctly, If I seppd up the thought again my fingers cant move as fast as my brain, I have to slow down to try and write correttly.

 

added- Well, I have read back my post, wow, the proofs in the ''pudding''.  

 

Whenyoureadatanacceleratedratewithoutthoughtorpauseorbreakyouarekeepingupwithtime.

 

A simple thought, 

 

 

Drop an object and ask a six year old why does the object fall to the ground?   give them a piece of paper and some crayons and observe their creativity.  The trick to creativity is to avoid giving the answer.  

Edited February 29, 2016 by xyz

[A-wal]

You are correct I don't understand (sarcasm),    My observation differs to Einstein's observations, two observers disagree, 

There you go, delusional. You don't understand it but instead of trying to learn it, you think that it's wrong and you know better.

 

If something is moving away from you at 10mph and then something in the opposite direction heads towards it and passes you at 20mph then it will pass the other object at 10mph.

 

If something is moving away from you at 10mph and then something in the opposite direction heads towards it and passes you at 30mph then it will pass the other object at 20mph.

 

Follow?

 

Now that something that passes you both is light. It passes you at the full speed of light but it doesn't pass the second object at the speed of light minus 10mph, it passes them at the full speed of light as well.

 

This proves that length contraction and time dilation are real physical effects, because light passes all non accelerating objects at the same speed.

 

It's about a return on investment.  Only the most elite of athletes will be able to make a living as an athlete, but academics opens more possibilities.  I believe art and literature has a place within academics, and agree that we could use more.

 

Creativity is hard to teach, but should always be encouraged.

https://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity?language=en Best talk I've ever seen.

[xyz]

There you go, delusional. You don't understand it but instead of trying to learn it, you think that it's wrong and you know better.

 

If something is moving away from you at 10mph and then something in the opposite direction heads towards it and passes you at 20mph then it will pass the other object at 10mph.

 

If something is moving away from you at 10mph and then something in the opposite direction heads towards it and passes you at 30mph then it will pass the other object at 20mph.

 

Follow?

 

 

All relative to the rotational speed of the Earth .... follow?  

 

Person trying to teach-''white light is a mixture of frequencies''

 

student - ''yes ok, I understand that, but what about if ..........''

 

Person trying to teach-''white light is a mixture of frequencies''

 

student - ''yes ok, I understand that, but what about if ..........''

 

Person trying to teach-''white light is a mixture of frequencies''

 

student - ''yes ok, I understand that, but what about if ..........''

 

Person trying to teach-''white light is a mixture of frequencies''

 

student - ''yes ok, I understand that, but what about if ..........''

Edited February 29, 2016 by xyz

[A-wal]

What are you on about? Forget about rotation. Use two space ships moving away from each other at half the speed of light. Light passes the first one at the speed of light but doesn't pass the second one at half the speed of light, it passes the second one at the same speed that it passed the first one. The only way that can happen is because of time dilation and length contraction. Speed is a measurement of distance over time. The distance shortens and it takes less time to cover that distance and it's this that allows light to pass the second observer at the same speed that it passed the first observer, because each observer sees the other as length contracted and time dilated.

 

Do you have another explanation of how the speed of light can be the same in all inertial reference frames?

[xyz]

What are you on about? Forget about rotation. Use two space ships moving away from each other at half the speed of light. Light passes the first one at the speed of light but doesn't pass the second one at half the speed of light, it passes the second one at the same speed that it passed the first one. The only way that can happen is because of time dilation and length contraction. Speed is a measurement of distance over time. The distance shortens and it takes less time to cover that distance and it's this that allows light to pass the second observer at the same speed that it passed the first observer, because each observer sees the other as length contracted and time dilated.

 

Do you have another explanation of how the speed of light can be the same in all inertial reference frames?

30cm

[A-wal]

Huh? :wacko:

[xyz]

Huh? :wacko:

 

''Do you have another explanation of how the speed of light can be the same in all inertial reference frames?''

I don't understand your question then and the relativity. 

 

 

''What are you on about? Forget about rotation. Use two space ships moving away from each other at half the speed of light. Light passes the first one at the speed of light but doesn't pass the second one at half the speed of light, it passes the second one at the same speed that it passed the first one. The only way that can happen is because of time dilation and length contraction. Speed is a measurement of distance over time. The distance shortens and it takes less time to cover that distance and it's this that allows light to pass the second observer at the same speed that it passed the first observer, because each observer sees the other as length contracted and time dilated.''

 

You don't see laser beams of light in space without a medium of smoke. The third observer observes both spaceships because space is not opaque. Parlour tricks.

[A-wal]

You don't see laser beams of light in space without a medium of smoke. The third observer observes both spaceships because space is not opaque. Parlour tricks.

What? :huh: Use star light.

 

I don't understand your question then and the relativity.

It's actually very simple. Normally if an object passes you and then passes another object that's moving away from you, you subtract the speed that the other object is moving away from you to get the speed that the passing object moves past the second object. So if something passes you at ten mph and then passes an object that's moving away from you at 5mph, it will pass the second object at 5mph.

 

This only works at low speeds though. If light passes you and the second object is moving away from you at half the speed of light, it will still pass the second object at the full speed of light because light moves at the same speed relative to all non accelerating observers.

 

The only way this can be resolved is if time dilates and length contracts to keep the speed of light constant.

[xyz]

What? :huh: Use star light.

 

It's actually very simple. Normally if an object passes you and then passes another object that's moving away from you, you subtract the speed that the other object is moving away from you to get the speed that the passing object moves past the second object. So if something passes you at ten mph and then passes an object that's moving away from you at 5mph, it will pass the second object at 5mph.

 

This only works at low speeds though. If light passes you and the second object is moving away from you at half the speed of light, it will still pass the second object at the full speed of light because light moves at the same speed relative to all non accelerating observers.

 

The only way this can be resolved is if time dilates and length contracts to keep the speed of light constant.

When I mentioned relativity, I did not literally mean relativity.  I know what you just said is very simple. 

 

I already said else where , the length is constant and time is constant and light is a variant. What you fail to realise is the rocket ship, the astronaut, the imaginary laser, are all relative to the not opaque visual clarity of space,  the speed of light between point A and point B is unaltered. 

[A-wal]

You really need to stop thinking you know better than verified experiments! Get a sodding grip!

 

The speed of light is NOT variable! This has been tested and proven countless times. It's always the same speed relative to non accelerating objects, proving that time dilation and length contraction are real physical effects!

[Maine farmer]

 

 

(incomplete)  

 

Do you think it is worth me continuing, I am nobody and this is a lot of hard work and effort?

 

There is a concept in economics known as "opportunity cost."  What that means is you need to consider other possible uses of your assets as a cost against your current uses.  

 

Sometimes shifting to other challenges brings clarity. 

Edited March 2, 2016 by Farming guy

[xyz]

You really need to stop thinking you know better than verified experiments! Get a sodding grip!

 

The speed of light is NOT variable! This has been tested and proven countless times. It's always the same speed relative to non accelerating objects, proving that time dilation and length contraction are real physical effects!

The may I suggest you do not know about force and pressure, an object needs two points of pressure to contract, e.g squeeze a rubber ball, I have a physical real experiment that shows the length doe's not contract, how do you explain that then?

[xyz]

There is a concept in economics known as "opportunity cost."  What that means is you need to consider other possible uses of your assets as a cost against your current uses.  

 

Sometimes shifting to other challenges brings clarity. 

At the moment I am not working or claiming any type of benefits, I am literally has free as a bird.  I suppose this freedom is why I can think.   So in economics terms, it cost me nothing to sit here but I earn nothing.  

 

However my new model on another site has rocked science I am sure. 

[A-wal]

The may I suggest you do not know about force and pressure, an object needs two points of pressure to contract, e.g squeeze a rubber ball, I have a physical real experiment that shows the length doe's not contract, how do you explain that then?

It's explained by your misconceptions about length contraction. Pressure has nothing to do with why length contracts.

 

The speed of light has been proven to be constant. If two objects moving relative to each other measure the same speed of light then time dilation and length contraction HAVE to occur. There's no other way to keep the speed of light the same for both of them.