Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #585932 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2022-05-26 21:17 -0700 |
| Last post | 2022-06-02 20:58 -0700 |
| Articles | 15 on this page of 255 — 23 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-26 21:17 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-26 21:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-26 22:23 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-26 23:41 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 00:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-27 13:27 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 10:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 10:33 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 12:36 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-27 14:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-27 07:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-27 09:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 09:40 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Python <python@python.invalid> - 2022-05-27 19:09 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 11:11 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 11:26 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 13:26 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2022-05-28 14:13 +0000
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-05-27 12:14 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 11:12 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-27 12:30 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 13:11 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 07:48 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-27 17:11 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-27 21:36 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 22:07 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 09:22 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 09:25 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 07:16 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 07:50 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 08:36 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 09:12 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 09:30 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-07 19:19 -0400
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-07 22:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-08 11:36 -0400
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-08 20:39 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-09 13:30 -0400
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-08 21:29 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 10:24 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 11:46 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 12:34 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 13:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-28 18:03 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 09:53 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-29 12:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 13:09 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-29 16:17 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-30 09:00 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-30 09:25 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-30 09:51 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 11:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-30 13:20 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 14:05 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-30 14:40 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 15:40 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-30 16:58 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 20:47 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 00:51 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 10:02 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 10:24 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-31 07:21 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 10:27 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-31 10:54 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 11:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 13:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 12:52 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-31 13:13 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-31 14:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-05-31 14:31 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 12:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-28 23:45 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 11:42 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 12:51 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 13:05 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 13:22 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Aldo <aldo.mayme.11084@cap.edu.mx> - 2022-05-29 19:45 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 20:23 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Aldo <aldo.mayme.11084@cap.edu.mx> - 2022-05-29 21:50 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 09:38 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 10:35 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 11:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 12:52 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 15:02 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 15:00 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 11:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 13:00 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 13:46 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-28 14:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 14:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 09:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 10:20 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 12:42 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 14:44 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-30 09:15 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-30 10:01 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-30 13:17 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-30 13:58 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-31 00:47 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 17:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Aldo <aldo.mayme.11084@cap.edu.mx> - 2022-05-29 20:03 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 21:16 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Aldo <aldo.mayme.11084@cap.edu.mx> - 2022-05-29 21:43 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-30 02:29 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-05-31 12:06 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-31 13:03 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-31 13:43 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Python <python@python.invalid> - 2022-05-31 23:10 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 12:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-02 15:35 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 15:55 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-02 21:03 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2022-06-02 19:07 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 06:04 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 07:02 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-03 10:05 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-03 10:50 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 19:47 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-03 10:43 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 08:50 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 22:43 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 07:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 08:44 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 09:06 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 11:40 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 12:39 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 14:37 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 07:30 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 07:53 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 08:54 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-04 09:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 09:29 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 10:12 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 11:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-04 12:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 14:33 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-04 15:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 17:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 09:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-04 12:25 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 13:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-03 12:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 13:06 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-01 14:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-02 07:20 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-02 14:55 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 21:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 07:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 08:08 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-03 10:38 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-03 10:51 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 09:59 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-03 11:59 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 12:55 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-04 12:33 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-03 13:01 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 13:47 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-03 14:27 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-03 23:17 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 07:26 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2022-06-04 08:50 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 10:01 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-04 11:17 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 12:20 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 12:42 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-04 14:00 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 14:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 14:37 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-05 07:27 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 08:46 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-05 09:04 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 09:39 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-06-05 19:52 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 11:30 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@notmail.com> - 2022-06-05 20:47 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-08 13:21 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-08 21:30 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-09 10:57 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Al Coe <coeal5136@gmail.com> - 2022-06-09 12:07 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-09 14:36 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-09 05:44 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-09 10:38 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-09 22:36 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-04 15:12 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-06-04 19:25 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 17:40 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-06-04 21:00 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 21:13 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-05 07:41 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-05 13:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 12:48 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-05 15:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 20:53 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-06-05 23:07 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2022-06-06 13:55 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-06-06 16:53 -0700
Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-04 14:01 -0500
Re: Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-04 12:58 -0700
Re: Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) "Kevin Aylward" <kevinRemoveandReplaceATkevinaylward.co.uk> - 2022-07-13 16:57 +0100
Re: Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-07-14 08:20 -0500
Re: Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-07-14 21:19 -0500
Re: Ed Lake's confusions (was: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again.) RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-07-16 15:49 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2022-06-04 18:36 -0400
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 22:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-06-04 22:42 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-06-05 09:47 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-05 08:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 09:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2022-06-05 21:41 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-06-05 13:15 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-06-03 12:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-06-03 13:24 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-05-31 21:35 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 14:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Stan Fultoni <fultonistan@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 14:53 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 14:58 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 08:32 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 09:16 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 12:03 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 12:46 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 13:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 23:05 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 23:42 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 11:24 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2022-05-28 17:53 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 09:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-28 23:53 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 12:01 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-30 11:44 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-30 11:52 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2022-05-28 17:29 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 18:11 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 20:18 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-28 20:31 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ed Lake <detect@outlook.com> - 2022-05-29 09:33 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 07:39 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 08:39 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 09:23 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 09:14 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 09:33 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 09:57 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 10:19 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 10:35 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 11:10 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> - 2022-05-27 21:49 +0200
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-27 17:16 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-05-27 12:38 -0500
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> - 2022-05-29 11:02 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2022-05-29 11:37 -0700
Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-06-01 07:51 -0700
Absolute time Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> - 2022-06-01 15:43 +0000
Re: Absolute time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 07:56 -0700
Re: Absolute time whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2022-06-02 12:05 -0500
Re: Absolute time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2022-06-02 20:58 -0700
Page 13 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 09:33 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <d1b2ec71-4af9-44bf-9a26-eec74ac80c42n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585949 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:14:43 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > But, some cretins are working on attosecond clocks. A farmer may not need such clocks. But some 'cretins' require sending a lot of info away 'over there', really fast. Such clocks gives them this edge; its useful for them. Are you still using a 300 baud modem to watch youtube?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 09:57 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <89b47190-0ebf-4311-8694-e6d42ec36587n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585951 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:33:44 PM UTC-3, rotchm wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:14:43 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > > > But, some cretins are working on attosecond clocks. > A farmer may not need such clocks. > > But some 'cretins' require sending a lot of info away 'over there', really fast. > Such clocks gives them this edge; its useful for them. > Are you still using a 300 baud modem to watch youtube? You are confused. I'm mocking at femtosecond or attosecond movements in STEM to MEASURE time, not about generating any process to move information on channels at tera, femto or atto bits/sec. They are two completely different fields. Right now, technology provides channels running at 400 Terabits/sec, on 4 single FOptics. Chinese Huawei, Japanese Fujitsu and French Alcatel are leading this segment in submarine FO cables, which run more than 1,000 Km without regenerators. Imagine that. But, on other institutions that are taking care of time measurement (like BIMP, NIST, etc.), there is a movement of a group of fucking cretins that INSIST that UTC and TAI has to be kept up to attosecond level of accuracy, FORCING the redefinition of UTC/TAI as dependent on GRAVITATIONAL FIELD (that is the shitty einstenian theory of GR). These cretins are 5th. columnists of science, working INSIDE institutions to indoctrinate others about the NEED to observe general relativity everywhere. Got it? I can clarify it further, if you need it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 10:19 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <c051a9a6-f6ce-4b34-9cba-28f1ef47f630n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585953 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:57:36 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:33:44 PM UTC-3, rotchm wrote: > I'm mocking at femtosecond or attosecond movements in STEM to MEASURE time, They are not doing that to 'measure time'. See below. > not about generating any process to move information on channels > at tera, femto or atto bits/sec. They are two completely different fields. Scientists (and standards bureaus) are advancing femto/atto second devices so as to make more precise & useful instruments (to probe further our universe, say) ...and to make quicker communications... > there is a movement of a group of fucking cretins that INSIST that UTC and TAI has to be > kept up to attosecond level of accuracy, FORCING the redefinition of UTC/TAI as > dependent on GRAVITATIONAL FIELD For everyday use, such timing is overkill; farmers don't need it. But for some people, such accuracies are desired. This won't change the way the farmer is farming... Thus, such accuracies satisfies 'them' and farmers alike. Its a win-win situation (in that sense).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 10:35 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <0de3d85a-832e-46e1-8eba-c1ba1977cfdbn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585957 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 2:19:17 PM UTC-3, rotchm wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:57:36 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:33:44 PM UTC-3, rotchm wrote: > > > I'm mocking at femtosecond or attosecond movements in STEM to MEASURE time, > They are not doing that to 'measure time'. See below. YES THEY ARE! Months ago, I had a serious discussion with Paul Andersen about this matter. I put a link from the PTB Institute (Germany), where there was an official page written by this "separate group" within the PTB. They claimed that UTC/TAI clocks at BIMP (and any other standard body) SHOULD be adjusted at the level of 10E-18 seconds (attoseconds), having in mind the effect of changes due to THE HEIGHT at which every atomic clock in the world was located. When confronted with the evidence of the PTB website, Paul just dissapeared. His usual M.O. when he can't reply. Now, you find the thread, if interested. Just search this site using "Hertz Andersen PTB UTC TAI". I'm not going to do it for you. > > not about generating any process to move information on channels > > at tera, femto or atto bits/sec. They are two completely different fields. > Scientists (and standards bureaus) are advancing femto/atto second devices > so as to make more precise & useful instruments (to probe further our universe, say) > ...and to make quicker communications... > > there is a movement of a group of fucking cretins that INSIST that UTC and TAI has to be > > kept up to attosecond level of accuracy, FORCING the redefinition of UTC/TAI as > > dependent on GRAVITATIONAL FIELD > For everyday use, such timing is overkill; farmers don't need it. > But for some people, such accuracies are desired. This won't change > the way the farmer is farming... Thus, such accuracies satisfies 'them' and farmers alike. > Its a win-win situation (in that sense).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 11:10 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <e82b1edc-4c71-4504-a1b9-1d96ba22a8een@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585964 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:35:21 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 2:19:17 PM UTC-3, rotchm wrote: > > They are not doing that to 'measure time'. See below. > YES THEY ARE! We are referring to different 'they'. Physicists & standards bureaus are searching & experimenting ways to attain higher accuracies of their systems. They are advancing more precise instruments. This then can be used by other individuals as per their needs. > Months ago, I had a serious discussion with Paul Andersen about this matter. > I put a link from the PTB Institute (Germany), where there was an official page written by this "separate group" within > the PTB. They claimed that UTC/TAI clocks at BIMP (and any other standard body) SHOULD be adjusted at the level > of 10E-18 seconds (attoseconds), having in mind the effect of changes due to THE HEIGHT at which every atomic clock > in the world was located. Yes, there are people/groups who desire this for their needs. This won't affect the farmer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 21:49 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <hX9kK.1845174$5u1.174524@fx13.ams4> |
| In reply to | #585964 |
Den 27.05.2022 19:35, skrev Richard Hertz: > > Months ago, I had a serious discussion with Paul Andersen about this matter. > I put a link from the PTB Institute (Germany), where there was an official page written by this "separate group" within > the PTB. They claimed that UTC/TAI clocks at BIMP (and any other standard body) SHOULD be adjusted at the level > of 10E-18 seconds (attoseconds), having in mind the effect of changes due to THE HEIGHT at which every atomic clock > in the world was located. > > When confronted with the evidence of the PTB website, Paul just dissapeared. His usual M.O. when he can't reply. > > Now, you find the thread, if interested. Just search this site using "Hertz Andersen PTB UTC TAI". > > I'm not going to do it for you. So I will do it for you: Den 14.10.2021 20:11, skrev Richard Hertz: > > Excerpt from the German PTB site (Read the OP in this thread, at any case): > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's gravitational potential, the SI second could only be realised by atomic clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied. October 17, 2021 Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > Den 16.10.2021 18:51, skrev Richard Hertz: >> >> What is funny (or sad) for me that Paul, the relativist, is willing to state that the German PTB site is wrong, >> as well as the entire staff of serious and meticulous Germans involved in this subject, because HE IS RIGHT >> and an entire official agency is WRONG! > > The following statement is plain wrong!: > "Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's > gravitational potential, the SI second could only be realised > by atomic clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied." > > I have a hard time believing that this is written by > a "scientists at the German PTB " as you claim. > > So either it is written by a scientist who is extremely > bad in expressing himself, or you have translated > a German statement wrongly, or it is written by a journalist > (or similar) who has tried to paraphrase a statement he > didn't understand. > > I think the latter is the most probable. > It could be a very sloppy paraphrase of a statement like > the following (which is correct, if poorly stated): > > "Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's > gravitational potential, the UTC second could only be realised > by SI-clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied." > > See below how the correction should be. > >>> On Saturday, 16 October 2021 at 15:17:15 UTC+2, Paul B. Andersen wrote: >>> >>>> Since the UTC is a theoretical time which simultaneous >>>> in the ECI frame is the same everywhere, independent >>>> of its altitude, (like GPS-time), no SI clock will >>>> stay in synch with UTC unless it is at the geoid. >>>> The point is that a clock showing UTC does NOT advance one >>>> second per second unless it is on the geoid. >>>> >>>> To stay in synch with UTC a clock at altitude h >>>> must advance ≈(1 - gh/c²) seconds per second. >>>> That's not a SI-clock. > > ------------- > > The following statements of mine are simple facts > which no scientist at the German PTB will dispute: > > The frequency of the photon associated with the hyperfine transition in the Cs atom in ground-state is 9192631770 Hz BY DEFINITION. > > So a Cs clock based on this definition will always advance one second per second. > > On the geoid, at the top of Mont Everest, in a satellite, on the Moon - you name it. The clock will run at its normal rate. > > Case closed. > And stays closed. -- Paul https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 17:16 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <2cc75e88-85d3-4ffa-ab4c-2241c70cc577n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585972 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 4:49:38 PM UTC-3, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > Den 27.05.2022 19:35, skrev Richard Hertz: > > > > Months ago, I had a serious discussion with Paul Andersen about this matter. > > I put a link from the PTB Institute (Germany), where there was an official page written by this "separate group" within > > the PTB. They claimed that UTC/TAI clocks at BIMP (and any other standard body) SHOULD be adjusted at the level > > of 10E-18 seconds (attoseconds), having in mind the effect of changes due to THE HEIGHT at which every atomic clock > > in the world was located. > > > > When confronted with the evidence of the PTB website, Paul just dissapeared. His usual M.O. when he can't reply. > > > > Now, you find the thread, if interested. Just search this site using "Hertz Andersen PTB UTC TAI". > > > > I'm not going to do it for you. > So I will do it for you: > > > Den 14.10.2021 20:11, skrev Richard Hertz: > > > > Excerpt from the German PTB site (Read the OP in this thread, at any case): > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's gravitational potential, the SI second could only be realised by atomic clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied. > > > > October 17, 2021 Paul B. Andersen wrote: > > > > Den 16.10.2021 18:51, skrev Richard Hertz: > >> > >> What is funny (or sad) for me that Paul, the relativist, is willing to state that the German PTB site is wrong, > >> as well as the entire staff of serious and meticulous Germans involved in this subject, because HE IS RIGHT > >> and an entire official agency is WRONG! > > > > The following statement is plain wrong!: > > "Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's > > gravitational potential, the SI second could only be realised > > by atomic clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied." > > > > I have a hard time believing that this is written by > > a "scientists at the German PTB " as you claim. > > > > So either it is written by a scientist who is extremely > > bad in expressing himself, or you have translated > > a German statement wrongly, or it is written by a journalist > > (or similar) who has tried to paraphrase a statement he > > didn't understand. > > > > I think the latter is the most probable. > > It could be a very sloppy paraphrase of a statement like > > the following (which is correct, if poorly stated): > > > > "Due to the relativistic time dilatation caused by the earth's > > gravitational potential, the UTC second could only be realised > > by SI-clocks at sea level if no corrections were applied." > > > > See below how the correction should be. > > > >>> On Saturday, 16 October 2021 at 15:17:15 UTC+2, Paul B. Andersen wrote: > >>> > >>>> Since the UTC is a theoretical time which simultaneous > >>>> in the ECI frame is the same everywhere, independent > >>>> of its altitude, (like GPS-time), no SI clock will > >>>> stay in synch with UTC unless it is at the geoid. > >>>> The point is that a clock showing UTC does NOT advance one > >>>> second per second unless it is on the geoid. > >>>> > >>>> To stay in synch with UTC a clock at altitude h > >>>> must advance ≈(1 - gh/c²) seconds per second. > >>>> That's not a SI-clock. > > > > ------------- > > > > The following statements of mine are simple facts > > which no scientist at the German PTB will dispute: > > > > The frequency of the photon associated with the hyperfine transition in the Cs atom in ground-state is 9192631770 Hz BY DEFINITION. > > > > So a Cs clock based on this definition will always advance one second per second. > > > > On the geoid, at the top of Mont Everest, in a satellite, on the Moon - you name it. The clock will run at its normal rate. > > > > Case closed. > > > > And stays closed. > > -- > Paul > > https://paulba.no/ LOL! I see your DEFINITIONS (Cs hyperfine transition, speed of light, etc.) and I raise my bet to the Hubble's constant. About 74.03±1.42 Km/s/Mpc (NASA Hubble 2019) About 67.74±0.46 Km/s/Mpc (ESA Planck Mission 2015) Let's DEFINE Ho = 70.0000 Km/s/Mpc. Problem solved. NEXT!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-27 12:38 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <jfcgkrFgd5uU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585951 |
On 5/27/2022 11:33 AM, rotchm wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:14:43 PM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > >> But, some cretins are working on attosecond clocks. > > A farmer may not need such clocks. > > But some 'cretins' require sending a lot of info away 'over there', really fast. > Such clocks gives them this edge; its useful for them. > Are you still using a 300 baud modem to watch youtube? Three hundred baud may be something of a joke today, but I remember when 300 was fast and 110 baud was more or less the standard. Once, just for the experience, I used a terminal that printed out the input (no screen) and one pressed a POTS telephone handset into the "acoustic modem" to transfer data to and from an ordinary voice phone line. <https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Analogue_modem_-_acoustic_coupler.jpg/220px-Analogue_modem_-_acoustic_coupler.jpg> When I first started reading Usenet I was using a 300 baud modem and I had to manually dial a phone to connect to the modem on the other end, then turn on the modem once to other end connected and hang up the phone quickly. At 300 baud one could actually read (with a little difficulty) streaming Usenet without using a pager.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hertz <hertz778@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-29 11:02 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <5aa1d100-f118-4031-9dba-aca8e8ef35a8n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585932 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:17:42 AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > Once upon the time, a cretin wrote a paper that had an assertion about time > which was bought by generations of followers who worshiped him: > > "Time is what my clock shows", wrote the imbecile. And from that, he > developed a fairy tail about time and length, which plagiarized a prior paper > from Lorentz, which dismissed the expression of time as non-linear undesired > result of his pursuit of length contraction due to inertial motion. > > But actually, I never read about any scientific attempt to define time, in the > following 100 years. This is because time is an auxiliary variable to describe > motion, and only has any value as a relative interval or duration. Not an > absolute mark with physical meaning. > > Do the following experiment: > > Sit and do nothing, except the mental effort trying to capture the pass of > time. If possible, do it in a quiet room with nothing moving. You can have > a clock, either analog or digital. > > Do the following: > > I) Mark a timestamp, and just allow things happens. You can move or > be still. > > Do you feel the pass of time? Check the elapsed timestamp. Did it feel > real? > Now try to focus on the pass of time for one hour (set an alarm). > Once the alarm goes off, what did you experienced? Did you feel the pass > of time? Really? By the second or by the minute? > > Think about what time was for you in these experiments. > > II) Now repeat I) but looking at the clock all the time, sensing (but not counting) > every second as you observe the clock. > > Once a time duration of the experiment (as measured by your clock), think > about time and if you felt that it was passing. > > Did the pass of time had ANY MEANING to you? > > Probably not. Then ask yourself WHAT THE FUCK TIME IS. > > For some cretins, time is the fourth dimension of the aberration called > spacetime. > > According to these cretins, you HAVE BEEN TRAVELING in the fourth dimension, moving but not moving. > > Does it make any sense to you? Of course not. > > But more than 50,000 cretins made a living with this shit in the last 100 years. > > You don't feel an IMBECILE yet? Well, keep thinking until you really start > to be mad about this shit. > > Then, when you're mad enough, you become A NORMAL PERSON. > > It is worth the effort to BE AWAKE. > > Congratulations. Sad to see how the topic of this thread has derailed, because relativists can't stand to THINK beyond the fucking 1905 paper. Now, it turned into a discussion of the twins' paradox, speed of light and similar subjects again and again and again. And this happens when people, indoctrinated to the core with SR, can't think beyond their noses. Pathetic show of fossilized minds, stuck in the doctrines of a cult. Nobody seems to be capable to discuss the concept of time in the quantum world or in the entire universe. It's a pity, but a predictable behavior. There is a narrative, consolidated for decades, and there is not any intellectual capability at this forum to discuss things that are detached from such narrative, which provides a comfort zone for mentally weakened snowflakes.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-05-29 11:37 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <6293BD7C.2CD3@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #586077 |
Richard Hertz wrote: > > On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 1:17:42 AM UTC-3, Richard Hertz wrote: > > Once upon the time, a cretin wrote a paper that had an assertion about time > > which was bought by generations of followers who worshiped him: > > > > "Time is what my clock shows", wrote the imbecile. And from that, he > > developed a fairy tail about time and length, which plagiarized a prior paper > > from Lorentz, which dismissed the expression of time as non-linear undesired > > result of his pursuit of length contraction due to inertial motion. > > > > But actually, I never read about any scientific attempt to define time, in the > > following 100 years. This is because time is an auxiliary variable to describe > > motion, and only has any value as a relative interval or duration. Not an > > absolute mark with physical meaning. > > > > Do the following experiment: > > > > Sit and do nothing, except the mental effort trying to capture the pass of > > time. If possible, do it in a quiet room with nothing moving. You can have > > a clock, either analog or digital. > > > > Do the following: > > > > I) Mark a timestamp, and just allow things happens. You can move or > > be still. > > > > Do you feel the pass of time? Check the elapsed timestamp. Did it feel > > real? > > Now try to focus on the pass of time for one hour (set an alarm). > > Once the alarm goes off, what did you experienced? Did you feel the pass > > of time? Really? By the second or by the minute? > > > > Think about what time was for you in these experiments. > > > > II) Now repeat I) but looking at the clock all the time, sensing (but not counting) > > every second as you observe the clock. > > > > Once a time duration of the experiment (as measured by your clock), think > > about time and if you felt that it was passing. > > > > Did the pass of time had ANY MEANING to you? > > > > Probably not. Then ask yourself WHAT THE FUCK TIME IS. > > > > For some cretins, time is the fourth dimension of the aberration called > > spacetime. > > > > According to these cretins, you HAVE BEEN TRAVELING in the fourth dimension, moving but not moving. > > > > Does it make any sense to you? Of course not. > > > > But more than 50,000 cretins made a living with this shit in the last 100 years. > > > > You don't feel an IMBECILE yet? Well, keep thinking until you really start > > to be mad about this shit. > > > > Then, when you're mad enough, you become A NORMAL PERSON. > > > > It is worth the effort to BE AWAKE. > > > > Congratulations. > > Sad to see how the topic of this thread has derailed, because relativists can't stand to THINK beyond the fucking > 1905 paper. > > Now, it turned into a discussion of the twins' paradox, speed of light and similar subjects again and again and again. > > And this happens when people, indoctrinated to the core with SR, can't think beyond their noses. > > Pathetic show of fossilized minds, stuck in the doctrines of a cult. > > Nobody seems to be capable to discuss the concept of time in the quantum world or in the entire universe. > > It's a pity, but a predictable behavior. There is a narrative, consolidated for decades, and there is not any intellectual capability > at this forum to discuss things that are detached from such narrative, which provides a comfort zone for mentally weakened snowflakes. Now you sound like Einstein talking about...other people. -- 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 | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-01 07:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Do you feel the pass of time? Really? Think again. |
| Message-ID | <f1105dd5-827e-4b31-b5e2-e1690e4ec5e3n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585932 |
On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 12:17:42 AM UTC-4, Richard Hertz wrote: > Once upon the time, a cretin wrote a paper that had an assertion about time > which was bought by generations of followers who worshiped him: > > "Time is what my clock shows", wrote the imbecile. And from that, he > developed a fairy tail about time and length, which plagiarized a prior paper > from Lorentz, which dismissed the expression of time as non-linear undesired > result of his pursuit of length contraction due to inertial motion. > > But actually, I never read about any scientific attempt to define time, in the > following 100 years. This is because time is an auxiliary variable to describe > motion, and only has any value as a relative interval or duration. Not an > absolute mark with physical meaning. > > Do the following experiment: > > Sit and do nothing, except the mental effort trying to capture the pass of > time. If possible, do it in a quiet room with nothing moving. You can have > a clock, either analog or digital. > > Do the following: > > I) Mark a timestamp, and just allow things happens. You can move or > be still. > > Do you feel the pass of time? Check the elapsed timestamp. Did it feel > real? > Now try to focus on the pass of time for one hour (set an alarm). > Once the alarm goes off, what did you experienced? Did you feel the pass > of time? Really? By the second or by the minute? > > Think about what time was for you in these experiments. > > II) Now repeat I) but looking at the clock all the time, sensing (but not counting) > every second as you observe the clock. > > Once a time duration of the experiment (as measured by your clock), think > about time and if you felt that it was passing. > > Did the pass of time had ANY MEANING to you? > > Probably not. Then ask yourself WHAT THE FUCK TIME IS. > > For some cretins, time is the fourth dimension of the aberration called > spacetime. > > According to these cretins, you HAVE BEEN TRAVELING in the fourth dimension, moving but not moving. > > Does it make any sense to you? Of course not. > > But more than 50,000 cretins made a living with this shit in the last 100 years. > > You don't feel an IMBECILE yet? Well, keep thinking until you really start > to be mad about this shit. > > Then, when you're mad enough, you become A NORMAL PERSON. > > It is worth the effort to BE AWAKE. The only time exist is absolute time (AT). The rate of passage of AT is constant everywhere. Unfortunately we don't have a clock time unit (including a clock second) that represents the same amount of absolute time in different frames. A clock second at the rest frame of the clock will represent a specific amount of absolute time....that's why we have the LT to predict this specific amount of absolute time to a clock moving wrt the observer Delta(t')=gamma*delta(t). The GPS uses absolute time to synch the GPS wrt the ground clock as follows: 1. redefine the GPS second to have 4.1617 more periods of the Cs 133 radiations than the ground clock second. 2.This means that: 9,192,631,770 periods of Cs 133 radiation on the ground will contain the same amount of absolute time as 9,192,631,774.1617 periods of Cs 133 radiation on the GPS. 3. This makes the GPS and the ground clock are in synch in terms of absolute time. .
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Richard Hachel <r.hachel@tiscali.fr> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-01 15:43 +0000 |
| Subject | Absolute time |
| Message-ID | <rmtKDakOwtCaOY77dsVcruqhhHQ@jntp> |
| In reply to | #586259 |
Le 01/06/2022 à 16:51, Ken Seto a écrit : > in terms of absolute time. Absolute time does not exist. Absolute simultaneity does not exist. Even worse, and this is where we have to pull out the tissues, the notion of an “absolute present time plan” is fake news. Fake news taught by hundreds of relativist theorists who think they figured out they were smart, and who aren't smart at all. Arrogant towards the "cranks" yes. But smart, no. R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 07:56 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Absolute time |
| Message-ID | <170051ca-a6a0-48ad-969a-8695ae1958fcn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #586260 |
On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 11:43:28 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote: > Le 01/06/2022 à 16:51, Ken Seto a écrit : > > > in terms of absolute time. > Absolute time does not exist. > Absolute simultaneity does not exist. t. Assertions are not valid argument. > > Even worse, and this is where we have to pull out the tissues, the notion > of an “absolute present time plan” is fake news. > > Fake news taught by hundreds of relativist theorists who think they > figured out they were smart, and who aren't smart at all. Arrogant towards > the "cranks" yes. > > But smart, no. > > > R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 12:05 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Absolute time |
| Message-ID | <jfs8ulFi8nuU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #586307 |
On 6/2/2022 9:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote: > On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 11:43:28 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote: >> Le 01/06/2022 à 16:51, Ken Seto a écrit : >> >>> in terms of absolute time. >> Absolute time does not exist. >> Absolute simultaneity does not exist. > t. > Assertions are not valid argument. While you're right, Ken, there's much more to the statements he's made than meets the eye. What sort of valid arguments can be made that something does not exist? This is not a trick question. >> Even worse, and this is where we have to pull out the tissues, the notion >> of an “absolute present time plan” is fake news. >> >> Fake news taught by hundreds of relativist theorists who think they >> figured out they were smart, and who aren't smart at all. Arrogant towards >> the "cranks" yes. >> >> But smart, no. >> >> >> R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2022-06-02 20:58 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: Absolute time |
| Message-ID | <1af48796-f86f-46bd-8e1a-9f2873060aadn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #586320 |
On Thursday, June 2, 2022 at 1:05:29 PM UTC-4, whodat wrote: > On 6/2/2022 9:56 AM, Ken Seto wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 11:43:28 AM UTC-4, Richard Hachel wrote: > >> Le 01/06/2022 à 16:51, Ken Seto a écrit : > >> > >>> in terms of absolute time. > >> Absolute time does not exist. > >> Absolute simultaneity does not exist. > > t. > > Assertions are not valid argument.ust made an assertion instead. > While you're right, Ken, there's much more to the statements he's made > than meets the eye. What sort of valid arguments can be made that > something does not exist? This is not a trick question. are an assertion that absolute time I presented my argument why absolute time exists. He should present his argument why absolute time doesn't exist......but instead he just made an assertion that absolute time doesn't exist. > >> Even worse, and this is where we have to pull out the tissues, the notion > >> of an “absolute present time plan” is fake news. > >> > >> Fake news taught by hundreds of relativist theorists who think they > >> figured out they were smart, and who aren't smart at all. Arrogant towards > >> the "cranks" yes. > >> > >> But smart, no. > >> > >> > >> R.H.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 13 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 11 12 [13]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web