Stange Claim From A Physics And Math Forum Thread

[A-wal]

I tell you what my persistent friend , answer a simple question then I will agree with you if you can answer it. 

 

 

Any measurement regarding time greater than the amount of 0 is instantaneous history, so how do you presume 0 can dilate?  

 

 

Have a proper think my friend , we record history, we never did measure time to begin with.  

That makes no sense!

 

Time dilates in the sense that observers view objects that are in motion relative to themselves as moving through time slower than themselves, as well as squashed in the direction of motion. The combination of these two effects causes light to be measured as moving at the same speed to both of them.

 

Without time dilation, an object that's moving away from you at a quarter the speed of light would measure light moving at three quarters the speed of light, in the same way that a car that overtakes you at 40mph would overtake a car that's going 10mph faster than you at 30mph.

 

Light passes the first ship at 186'000 mps, it passes the second ship at 139,500mps from the perspective of the first ship but it's time dilated and length contracted from the perspective of the first ship. If we view it from the perspective of the second ship we need to undo the length contraction by increase the amount of space in that dimension, making light cover more ground in the same amount of time and we need to undo time dilation, making light cover the same amount of ground in less time. The two together increase the speed (distance over time) of the light to 186,000mps, exactly the same same speed as it moves past the first ship.

 

It works both ways. The first ship is length contracted and time dilated from the perspective of the second ship. This is the only way objects that are in motion relative to each other can measure light moving at the same speed, something that has been tested countless times and proven to be the case. Do you understand?

[Maine farmer]

I tell you what my persistent friend , answer a simple question then I will agree with you if you can answer it. 

 

 

Any measurement regarding time greater than the amount of 0 is instantaneous history, so how do you presume 0 can dilate?  

 

 

Have a proper think my friend , we record history, we never did measure time to begin with.  

 

I think I have an idea of your line of thinking , and the problem is that you can't really separate the word "history" from the concept of time.  As I have said before, time is sort of a measurement of events as they relate to how many times another event takes place, and those events can be broken up into infinitesimally smaller portions of events.  I know you don't like the concept of infinity any more than the concept of time, and I also know that you like video representation of ideas.  If you have access to Netflix, I recommend that you look for a documentary entitled "The History of Maths"  I have been watching it a little bit at a time when I eat meals, and have been finding it to be fascinating. 

Edited March 9, 2016 by Farming guy

[xyz]

I think I have an idea of your line of thinking , and the problem is that you can't really separate the word "history" from the concept of time.  As I have said before, time is sort of a measurement of events as they relate to how many times another event takes place, and those events can be broken up into infinitesimally smaller portions of events.  I know you don't like the concept of infinity any more than the concept of time, and I also know that you like video representation of ideas.  If you have access to Netflix, I recommend that you look for a documentary entitled "The History of Maths"  I have been watching it a little bit at a time when I eat meals, and have been finding it to be fascinating. 

I do not have Netflix but will try to find The history of Maths by alternative methods to have a nosey thanks.  

 

 

 

'' time is sort of a measurement of events as they relate to how many times another event takes place,''

 

 

My point is ''time'' is nothing, it never was and can't be. All observers experience the observation of time in synchronisation of 0 . 

 

1 replaces 0 but remains 0. 

 

01=00

 

012=000

 

0123=0000

 

01234=00000

 

 

See how we expand 0 replacing 0 with a numerical position. 

 

 

 

1 digit v 1 digit is an equal digit.

Edited March 9, 2016 by xyz

[xyz]

That makes no sense!

 

Time dilates in the sense that observers view objects that are in motion relative to themselves as moving through time slower than themselves, as well as squashed in the direction of motion. The combination of these two effects causes light to be measured as moving at the same speed to both of them.

 

Without time dilation, an object that's moving away from you at a quarter the speed of light would measure light moving at three quarters the speed of light, in the same way that a car that overtakes you at 40mph would overtake a car that's going 10mph faster than you at 30mph.

 

Light passes the first ship at 186'000 mps, it passes the second ship at 139,500mps from the perspective of the first ship but it's time dilated and length contracted from the perspective of the first ship. If we view it from the perspective of the second ship we need to undo the length contraction by increase the amount of space in that dimension, making light cover more ground in the same amount of time and we need to undo time dilation, making light cover the same amount of ground in less time. The two together increase the speed (distance over time) of the light to 186,000mps, exactly the same same speed as it moves past the first ship.

 

It works both ways. The first ship is length contracted and time dilated from the perspective of the second ship. This is the only way objects that are in motion relative to each other can measure light moving at the same speed, something that has been tested countless times and proven to be the case. Do you understand?

Do I understand that is what Wiki says and Einstein said, ermmm?  no I can't read or see videos.  

 

 

Absolutely nothing to do with my theory, why do you insist on being some sort of parrot and keep repeating yourself?  

 

Are you a troll?

[A-wal]

You either don't understand it or you're choosing to ignore it because it completely disproves your ridiculous notions of time and space.

 

The consistency of the speed of light proves that time dilation and length contraction are real, while in your theory they aren't so how could it possibly have nothing to do with your 'theory' (that is NOT a theory!)?

[xyz]

You either don't understand it or you're choosing to ignore it because it completely disproves your ridiculous notions of time and space.

 

The consistency of the speed of light proves that time dilation and length contraction are real, while in your theory they aren't so how could it possibly have nothing to do with your 'theory' (that is NOT a theory!)?

It is called the theory of realistic and has a box singularity in it, it is not called the theory of relativity . 

 

Which part don't you understand about the word realistic?

 

 

Do you not understand wiki and theory is not 100% fact?

 

Do you not know the difference between fact and assumption?

Edited March 10, 2016 by xyz

[A-wal]

That isn't a theory.

 

I don't agree with a lot of mainstream physics including the general theory of relativity.

 

I know the difference between theory fact and nonsense. You ramblings are clearly the latter.

 

You still haven't addressed the fact the consistency of the speed of light disproves what you're saying and shows that time dilation and length contraction genuinely occur. How can you expect to be taken seriously if you either ignore, or more likely can't comprehend, evidence that clearly disproves you and proves that what you're trying to refute is accurate?

[xyz]

That isn't a theory.

 

I don't agree with a lot of mainstream physics including the general theory of relativity.

 

I know the difference between theory fact and nonsense. You ramblings are clearly the latter.

 

You still haven't addressed the fact the consistency of the speed of light disproves what you're saying and shows that time dilation and length contraction genuinely occur. How can you expect to be taken seriously if you either ignore, or more likely can't comprehend, evidence that clearly disproves you and proves that what you're trying to refute is accurate?

Correct it is not a theory, it is realistic and tells the ''truth'' based on our limitations. 

 

 

''You still haven't addressed the fact the consistency of the speed of light disproves what you're saying and shows that time dilation and length contraction genuinely occur. How can you expect to be taken seriously if you either ignore, or more likely can't comprehend, evidence that clearly disproves you and proves that what you're trying to refute is accurate?''

 

 

 

Time dilation has nothing to do with the speed of light being constant in a vacuum, there you go , addressed. 

 

My theory is this 

 

f(x)=(cos=n),(sin=0),(tan=n)

 

f(y)=(cos=n),(sin=0),(tan=n)

 

f(z)=(cos=n),(sin=0),(tan=n)

 

f(t)=(cos=n),(sin=0),(tan=n)

Edited March 10, 2016 by xyz

[A-wal]

Correct it is not a theory, it is realistic and tells the ''truth'' based on our limitations. 

Realistic means relates to reality. Your notions of time and space bare no relation to reality because they are disproved by experiments showing that the speed of light is constant.

 

Time dilation has nothing to do with the speed of light being constant in a vacuum, there you go , addressed.

:) Time dilation and length contraction are inseparable in the sense that they're are part of the same physical process, you can't have one without the other. You still don't understand special relativity. If you did you'd understand why the consistency of the speed of light proves that what you're saying is wrong and that dime dilation and length contraction are the only way that observers moving relative to each other could measure light moving at the same speed.

 

You're proven wrong but you don't even understand enough to see why.

[Maine farmer]

I do not have Netflix but will try to find The history of Maths by alternative methods to have a nosey thanks.  

 

 

Oops, I got the title wrong, It's "The Story of Maths"  It starts out with how the ancient civilizations developed and used math and developed the numerical system, so I think that implanted the notion of history in my mind.  I didn't pay attention to the credits, but it looks British 

[xyz]

Realistic means relates to reality. Your notions of time and space bare no relation to reality because they are disproved by experiments showing that the speed of light is constant.

 

:) Time dilation and length contraction are inseparable in the sense that they're are part of the same physical process, you can't have one without the other. You still don't understand special relativity. If you did you'd understand why the consistency of the speed of light proves that what you're saying is wrong and that dime dilation and length contraction are the only way that observers moving relative to each other could measure light moving at the same speed.

 

You're proven wrong but you don't even understand enough to see why.

I am proven wrong about a box singularity?  so describe then what a box singularity is, what is my idea, you tell me my own idea in your own words?   

 

YOU do not understand what a box singularity is or you would not keep repeating the same thing which I have explained already several times , does not involve this 

 

''time dilation and length contraction are inseparable in the sense that they're are part of the same physical process, you can't have one without the other. You still don't understand special relativity. If you did you'd understand why the consistency of the speed of light proves that what you're saying is wrong and that dime dilation and length contraction are the only way that observers moving relative to each other could measure light moving at the same speed.''

 

 

You clearly are being an annoying troll, I will no longer reply to you same comments so do not waste your time trying to get a reaction by your troll game. 

 

Goodbye..