Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #575631 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-02-03 09:01 -0800 |
| Last post | 2022-02-05 23:04 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 111 — 19 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-03 09:01 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-03 10:02 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-04 17:33 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-02-03 19:15 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 10:28 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-02-03 10:48 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Wills Duket <nbm@tiitu.va> - 2022-02-03 19:28 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-02-03 17:18 -0800
Crank Richard Hertz goes off the rails "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> - 2022-02-03 18:21 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-04 15:49 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-03 22:34 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-04 19:06 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-04 10:55 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-05 10:46 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-04 22:56 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-05 21:46 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-05 12:19 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-04 01:36 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 10:34 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-07 22:23 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 07:26 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 15:35 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 08:11 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 16:18 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 04:42 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 13:00 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Yasmani Kabai <yask@oennw.jp> - 2022-02-07 18:48 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 20:03 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 04:15 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Randall Hodge <tiie@ncsde.ca> - 2022-02-08 20:12 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-10 02:54 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Scot Dino <ueue@nbvm.ar> - 2022-02-11 02:13 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 05:24 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Scot Dino <ueue@nbvm.ar> - 2022-02-11 23:25 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 05:39 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Scot Dino <ueue@nbvm.ar> - 2022-02-11 23:17 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-04 12:15 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-04 06:26 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-04 15:31 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-04 11:00 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-05 10:52 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 10:56 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 19:30 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-05 12:19 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 07:21 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 15:42 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 11:22 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 19:35 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 06:48 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2022-02-06 15:14 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-02-06 16:26 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 15:18 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 10:14 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 19:25 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 11:40 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 20:19 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 11:24 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 19:30 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 11:46 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 20:19 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 21:58 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Moris Colon <cvb@nwnbw.ca> - 2022-02-06 17:51 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-02-05 15:12 -0500
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Moris Colon <cvb@nwnbw.ca> - 2022-02-05 23:55 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 11:11 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Moris Colon <cvb@nwnbw.ca> - 2022-02-06 19:20 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-02-06 16:28 -0500
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 07:35 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-02-07 15:45 -0500
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-06 09:01 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-06 10:05 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-06 21:51 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 07:44 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 15:59 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-07 21:29 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-07 20:12 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-02-08 13:32 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 05:16 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-08 08:57 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-02-08 16:28 -0500
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 05:36 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 14:04 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 06:22 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 14:27 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 06:33 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 06:37 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 06:42 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 14:46 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 07:15 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 16:03 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 08:12 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-02-12 05:50 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Scot Dino <ueue@nbvm.ar> - 2022-02-12 05:11 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 22:21 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-02-12 15:57 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-12 07:20 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-02-12 16:34 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-12 07:43 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Python <python@example.invalid> - 2022-02-12 16:50 +0100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-12 08:03 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 14:44 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2022-02-12 00:46 -0500
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-11 22:22 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 11:40 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-06 11:05 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2022-02-06 00:23 +0000
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-05 18:00 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-02-06 11:23 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2022-02-05 20:40 -0800
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> - 2022-02-06 17:05 +1100
Re: Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-02-05 23:04 -0800
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 09:01 -0800 |
| Subject | Einstein screwed up the definition of TIME |
| Message-ID | <643f8e19-bbd5-4fb4-9efd-830412a9a5f1n@googlegroups.com> |
He said that: “time is what the clock shows” This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him..
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 10:02 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61FC18C5.B92@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
Ken Seto wrote: > > > He said that: time is what the clock What time does your watch show? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 17:33 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61FDD3DE.46AF@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #575657 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > Ken Seto wrote: > > > > > > He said that: time is what the clock show > > What time does your watch show? > When Einstein looked at his clock to see what time the clock shows... he only saw the time, he couldn't see by looking at the face of of clock whether it was daytime or night time (he would have to look out the window to see if it was 12:am or 12:00 pm.) Also, he didn't know what day it was without looking at a calender... -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 19:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <sth63q$vp6$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
Op 03-feb.-2022 om 18:01 schreef Ken Seto: > > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. Ken, you have said thousands of stupid things over the past decades, but this probably trumps (-pun intended-) them all: "He was wrong because he was right." Congratulations. Dirk Vdm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-06 10:28 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <961305f1-aa3e-4212-8bba-30cb6d4af28an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575662 |
On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 1:15:25 PM UTC-5, Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > Op 03-feb.-2022 om 18:01 schreef Ken Seto: > > > > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > Ken, you have said thousands of stupid things over the past > decades, but this probably trumps (-pun intended-) them all: > "He was wrong because he was right." > Congratulations. > > Dirk Vdme Stupid, there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that represents the same amount of absolute time in different frames.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 10:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <997b4774-1dd6-4344-bd6c-9b338f7f05aan@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 9:01:15 AM UTC-8, seto...@gmail.com wrote: > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. Rate is an absolute... compare it to light speed... It can appear different but still is an absolute. Mitchell Raemsch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Wills Duket <nbm@tiitu.va> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 19:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sthacb$200$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
Ken Seto wrote: > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of > clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in > different frames......unfortunately it does not. > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. > That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different > frames. > So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock > second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time > and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks > moving wrt him.. if not mistaken, that's exactly the theory of Dirk vdM. He takes space as vt, a distance to the observed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 17:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <df085e88-d313-4218-bcfd-4111280d0debn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 2:01:15 PM UTC-3, seto...@gmail.com wrote: The problem with relativism: > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. CORRECTION: Every fucking clock, since the dawn of civilization, marks time differently. It doesn't matter if it's a solar clock, a sand clock, a pendulum clock, even any atomic clock (make your choice for hyperfine transitions for a given element). Relativity needs AN ABSOLUTE, UNDISPUTED source that marks the flow of time. Not on Earth, nor ever. Funny: relativity needs absolutism. I suggest to adopt any cosmic source with proven accuracy and stability, and refer time to that source. Maybe 100 million ly away. It will settle any controversy. And by the way, instead of ether, I suggest to adopt the cosmic background radiation as a reference. But ONLY after the imbeciles decipher what the fuck CBR is. > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Dono." <eggy20011951@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 18:21 -0800 |
| Subject | Crank Richard Hertz goes off the rails |
| Message-ID | <af2ddb13-99be-492c-a09f-7d6103129d97n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575788 |
On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 5:18:19 PM UTC-8, crank Richard Hertz went off the rails: > Relativity needs AN ABSOLUTE, UNDISPUTED source that marks the flow of time. Not on Earth, nor ever. You are one sandwich short of a picnic > And by the way, instead of ether, I suggest to adopt the cosmic background radiation as a reference. CBR is a radiation, it is not a frame, ignoramus. On a different note, you need to use more caps.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 15:49 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <j63pitFomqqU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #575631 |
On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could not measure time? We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-03 22:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61FCC8F6.54A2@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #575792 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > > > > He said that: “time is what the clock shows†> > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > > What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could > not measure time? > > We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. > > Sylvia. you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 19:06 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <j64549FqptaU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #575798 |
On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: >>> >>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows†>>> This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. >>> In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. >> >> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could >> not measure time? >> >> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, >> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. >> >> Sylvia. > > you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? > > No. Why would I mean that? Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 10:55 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61FD76AC.C4C@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #575804 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > >>> > >>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows†> >>> This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > >>> In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > >> > >> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could > >> not measure time? > >> > >> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > >> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? > > > > > > No. Why would I mean that? > > Sylvia. Forgive Miss, i might be reading wrong into what you wrote.. but you last sentence reads: calculations to predict how events will unfold I read it as "predict...events will unfold" as you have some "calculations" to predict events unfolding in the future. I was just wondering what kind of 'calculations' can be used to predict the future? Like horses in a race track. But, nevermind Miss, maybe you mean something else. Women, who can understand them???? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-05 10:46 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <j65s6iF6jd1U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #575855 |
On 05-Feb-22 5:55 am, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: >>>>> >>>>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows†>>>>> This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. >>>>> In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. >>>> >>>> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could >>>> not measure time? >>>> >>>> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, >>>> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? >>> >>> >> >> No. Why would I mean that? >> >> Sylvia. > > > Forgive Miss, i might be reading wrong into what you wrote.. > > but you last sentence reads: calculations to predict how events will unfold > > I read it as "predict...events will unfold" as you have some "calculations" > to predict events unfolding in the future. > > > I was just wondering what kind of 'calculations' can be used to predict the future? Like horses in a race track. > > > But, nevermind Miss, maybe you mean something else. > > > Women, who can understand them???? > > > Useful things like predicting whether an aircraft will fly, or a bridge fall down. The kinds of things you seem to want to predict are problematic due to a lack of information about initial conditions, and chaotic sensitivity to those conditions. This limits the predictive power. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 22:56 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <61FE1F89.6445@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #575899 |
Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 05-Feb-22 5:55 am, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows†> >>>>> This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > >>>>> In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > >>>> > >>>> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could > >>>> not measure time? > >>>> > >>>> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > >>>> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. > >>>> > >>>> Sylvia. > >>> > >>> you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? > >>> > >>> > >> > >> No. Why would I mean that? > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > Forgive Miss, i might be reading wrong into what you wrote.. > > > > but you last sentence reads: calculations to predict how events will unfold > > > > I read it as "predict...events will unfold" as you have some "calculations" > > to predict events unfolding in the future. > > > > > > I was just wondering what kind of 'calculations' can be used to predict the future? Like horses in a race track. > > > > > > But, nevermind Miss, maybe you mean something else. > > > > > > Women, who can understand them???? > > > > > > > > Useful things like predicting whether an aircraft will fly, Sorry Miss, but you lost me there...are you talking about..flight cancellations??? -- The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge the unchallengeable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-05 21:46 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <j672stFdfjgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #575936 |
On 05-Feb-22 5:56 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > Sylvia Else wrote: >> >> On 05-Feb-22 5:55 am, The Starmaker wrote: >>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> >>>> On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: >>>>> Sylvia Else wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows†>>>>>>> This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. >>>>>>> In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. >>>>>> >>>>>> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could >>>>>> not measure time? >>>>>> >>>>>> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, >>>>>> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. >>>>>> >>>>>> Sylvia. >>>>> >>>>> you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> No. Why would I mean that? >>>> >>>> Sylvia. >>> >>> >>> Forgive Miss, i might be reading wrong into what you wrote.. >>> >>> but you last sentence reads: calculations to predict how events will unfold >>> >>> I read it as "predict...events will unfold" as you have some "calculations" >>> to predict events unfolding in the future. >>> >>> >>> I was just wondering what kind of 'calculations' can be used to predict the future? Like horses in a race track. >>> >>> >>> But, nevermind Miss, maybe you mean something else. >>> >>> >>> Women, who can understand them???? >>> >>> >>> >> >> Useful things like predicting whether an aircraft will fly, > > > Sorry Miss, but you lost me there...are you talking about..flight cancellations??? > > > > Now you're just being silly. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-05 12:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1pmwk4g.1cnxdo01jycf8fN%nospam@de-ster.demon.nl> |
| In reply to | #575899 |
Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> wrote: > On 05-Feb-22 5:55 am, The Starmaker wrote: > > Sylvia Else wrote: > >> > >> On 04-Feb-22 5:34 pm, The Starmaker wrote: > >>> Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> He said that: ââ'¬Å"time is what the clock showsââ'¬Â? This > >>>>> definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of > >>>>> clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time > >>>>> in different frames......unfortunately it does not. In real life > >>>>> each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means > >>>>> that a clock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. > >>>>> So that means that Einsteinââ'¬â"¢s definition is wrong. Instead, > >>>>> each clock second in different frames represents a different amount > >>>>> of clock time and thatââ'¬â"¢s why each observer observes clock > >>>>> time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > >>>> > >>>> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could > >>>> not measure time? > >>>> > >>>> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > >>>> and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. > >>>> > >>>> Sylvia. > >>> > >>> you mean flipping a coin, heads or tails? > >>> > >>> > >> > >> No. Why would I mean that? > >> > >> Sylvia. > > > > > > Forgive Miss, i might be reading wrong into what you wrote.. > > > > but you last sentence reads: calculations to predict how events will unfold > > > > I read it as "predict...events will unfold" as you have some "calculations" > > to predict events unfolding in the future. > > > > > > I was just wondering what kind of 'calculations' can be used to predict > > the future? Like horses in a race track. > > > > > > But, nevermind Miss, maybe you mean something else. > > > > > > Women, who can understand them???? > > > > > > > > Useful things like predicting whether an aircraft will fly, or a bridge > fall down. Whatever is more likely, in the good old US of A, eh? Jan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-04 01:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <96ffa8e7-e975-417b-b957-1cefad21375bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575792 |
On Friday, 4 February 2022 at 05:49:36 UTC+1, Sylvia Else wrote: > We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. Oh, do You? Well, unfortunately professionals of UTC, GPS, TAI have different priorities.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-06 10:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8d391bb6-15c9-4c87-bc1e-3c5af89ea456n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #575792 |
On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 11:49:36 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: > > > > He said that: “time is what the clock shows” > > This definition is screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different frames......unfortunately it does not. > > In real life each clock accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a cck second)lock second is not a set amount of time in different frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. > What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we could > not measure time? > > We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of time, > and that can be used in calculations to predict how events will unfold. > > Sylvia. Einstein assumed wrongly that a clock second is an absolute interval of absolute time.....it is not. There is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that represents the same amount of absolute time in different frames.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-02-07 22:23 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <j6cdqbFe662U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #576108 |
On 07-Feb-22 5:34 am, Ken Seto wrote: > On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 11:49:36 PM UTC-5, Sylvia Else > wrote: >> On 04-Feb-22 4:01 am, Ken Seto wrote: >>> >>> He said that: “time is what the clock shows” This definition is >>> screwed up.This definition implies that a unit of clock time such >>> as a clock second represent the same amount of time in different >>> frames......unfortunately it does not. In real life each clock >>> accumulate clock seconds at different rates. That means that a >>> cck second)lock second is not a set amount of time in different >>> frames. So that means that Einstein’s definition is wrong. >>> Instead, each clock second in different frames represents a >>> different amount of clock time and that’s why each observer >>> observes clock time dilation for clocks moving wrt him.. >> What would be the point of having a definition that meant that we >> could not measure time? >> >> We want a definition that fits our experience of the passage of >> time, and that can be used in calculations to predict how events >> will unfold. >> >> Sylvia. > > Einstein assumed wrongly that a clock second is an absolute interval > of absolute time.....it is not. There is no clock time unit > (including a clock second) that represents the same amount of > absolute time in different frames. Einstein made no such assumption, and had no interest in hypothetical quantities that cannot be measured. He was interested in the rates of physical processes. One such process is the one that governs the operation of clocks. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web