Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 02:51:43 -0500 Message-ID: <6242BAA5.F29@ix.netcom.com> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2022 00:52:05 -0700 From: The Starmaker Reply-To: starmaker@ix.netcom.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: I define Time as what my clock shows, but this is my personal time. References: <40be8086-6198-45c2-a4e0-b52e5c5e5109n@googlegroups.com> <71de9f6d-52ee-4388-b46a-0bd8a8fdc3den@googlegroups.com> <41ef65db-bcca-443c-b30d-d02b998c1d80n@googlegroups.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Antivirus: Avast (VPS 220328-16, 03/28/2022), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Lines: 105 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 108.219.229.47 X-Trace: sv3-7iomcXzH2Y4MtYJTgBIxXKZm45dagJkgCY3mXYlMyBTOdwqWhcs43LUUmM5tIOyLCHsFn0RumJryQut!3HRcO8xKuKQEgB40LQAVY/xCtAdOtYCsTXcJCaamXtOGI79ps2ZWweI8E5cHEo7P6EOUcd+CVMls!IlrWLUW8aw== X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 6492 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:581271 Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 11:48:27 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > Richard Hertz wrote: > > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 10:16:27 AM UTC-3, bodk...@gmail.com wrote: > > > > > > Richard Hertz wrote: > > > > > >>> A pet can teach humans what time and time flow is MUCH MORE than any > > >>> human to another. Because they use NATURE, which is embedded into their ADN. > > >>> > > >> This, in the spirit of, “Hey, if science doesn’t reflect what you know > > >> instinctively without any thinking at all, then it’s wrong.” > > >> Way to go for the lowest common denominator, Richard, right where you’re > > >> most comfortable. > > > > > > Bodkin, you have to retrieve your Relativistic ID N° 1378462, printed > > > long time ago. ID N" went to Einstein. > > > > > > As usual, you like to have a wording on anything, IKEA man, with your > > > usual toolkit of sophistry, fallacies and twisting meanings. > > > > > > If you want to adhere to einstenian concept of what time is, buy a wrist > > > or a pocket watch to fit better with that epoch. > > > > > > The problem is that your clock, actually any clock, will show TIME DURATION and not TIME. > > Well, if you think about it, any time coordinate is a duration from a > > selected origin. Really the key of a coordinate reference frame is the > > synchronization of watches distributed in the coordinate system. Any set of > > unsychronized watches will be able to measure a duration for any pair of > > events that occur at the same location. However, to measure either the time > > coordinates of events at different locations, or if you like, the duration > > between the events at different locations, the synchronization is required. > > > > > > Think on it a bit more. As usual, your words reflect more bluster than > > thought. > > > > > > Since relativity is HEAVILY based on the definition of time as described > > > on my OP here, you'll have to admit that the entire relativity > > > theory is A FAIL, because it's based on time duration and yet it's used AS TIME. > > > > > > So go out and get a gifted mathematician to REWRITE the entire theory > > > based on time duration, not time. And this is because such > > > stupid theory (written by an idiot to an audience of more idiotic people) > > > warped the meanings of time (ABSOLUTE) with time duration > > > (RELATIVE). > > > > > > And I don't consider relativity being a science. Not even close. My best > > > calification is to place it in the metaphysics realm, where every > > > possible assertion can be hold, because everything is NON PHYSICAL in such dominion. > > > > > > For the entire building of physics knowledge, void of any trace of > > > relativity, MY DEEPEST RESPECT. > > > > > > But, as I wrote to Dork, if you (Bodkin) have your mind erased with > > > respect ANY TRACE of relativity, your understanding of science > > > collapse entirely and leave you just hollow of scientific knowledge. > > > > > > You invested your adult life adopting and defending relativity, for any > > > given reason: a cult follower or something similar, without THINKING. > > > > > > Pay the price of a life WASTED for nothing, with no visible contribution > > > to society (on the contrary). > > > > > > Stick with woodworking, which poses real physical (and scientific) values. > > > > > > And keep trying to define what time is, in the realm of philosophy, NOT PHYSICS. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > > See Bodkin? That's why I call relativity a pile of crap. > Your borrowed knowledge prevented you to think deep all of these years. > > You keep talking about TIME, and I'm talking along this thread about TIME DURATION! > > You feel that you need to synchronize TIME in your einstenian, deceiving clock, which is plain stupid. > > I wrote that TIME DURATION is universal, absolute and independent of any reference except your local surrounding. > > Go back to your desktop and re-write relativity (SR) using TIME DURATION, not TIME. > HINT: You don't have to synchronize anything, except that your TIME MEDIATION DEVICES mark time differences in the same way. > > You and I are in different galaxies of thought. > > You are in a galaxy wannabe, a nebula, and still don't understand what future is waiting for you. > > I'm in a mature galaxy of thought, where I was able to verify that I'm in the right path of thought since I have memory. > > Keep your sand paper and paint at hand, so you can make a living. You suck even as a METAphilosopher, even when it's only one > of your double majors as a BsC. > > You DESERVE to be a relativist. If there is no duration, there is no time. -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.