Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #665283 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Street <street@shellcrash.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2025-07-27 11:14 +0000 |
| Last post | 2025-08-02 10:15 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 58 — 18 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Rate of Change Street <street@shellcrash.com> - 2025-07-27 11:14 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Willilam Babuh <bim@aimwi.ru> - 2025-07-27 11:39 +0000
Re: Rate of Change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2025-07-27 13:59 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-07-27 18:03 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-07-28 20:27 +0200
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-07-30 22:33 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2025-07-31 06:03 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-07-30 22:56 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-07-31 23:27 -0700
Re: Rate of Change nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2025-08-01 09:50 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-07-31 08:43 +0200
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-07-31 22:16 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-01 09:53 +0200
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-08-01 22:31 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-01 23:42 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-02 10:11 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-01 23:45 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-02 10:04 +0200
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-08-02 11:36 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-03 08:06 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Edmund Balanovski <bmesnl@akvdb.ru> - 2025-08-03 09:54 +0000
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-08-03 22:35 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-03 22:05 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-04 09:06 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-04 09:11 -0700
Re: Rate of Change squalk <sq@net.inv> - 2025-08-04 18:01 +0100
Re: Rate of Change Python <jp@python.invalid> - 2025-08-04 17:23 +0000
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-04 12:40 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-04 22:43 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-05 09:46 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-05 21:30 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-07 10:12 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-10 06:20 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-10 23:34 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-12 08:55 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Marcelino Valchikovsky <vch@kosiea.ru> - 2025-08-12 08:19 +0000
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-15 10:29 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-16 07:23 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Bubba Kalimahi <mkiu@miiibak.ru> - 2025-08-16 10:34 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-17 10:30 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Bowen Metrofanis <nomo@sbbeww.gr> - 2025-08-17 13:07 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-18 09:13 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-17 22:17 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-18 09:39 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-20 01:07 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-04 08:59 +0200
Re: Rate of Change "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2025-08-04 11:51 +0200
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-04 09:17 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-04 09:24 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Percival Dudorov <duadc@dlo.ru> - 2025-08-04 14:33 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2025-08-05 09:00 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Johnathon Babadzhanov <nbnz@daa.ru> - 2025-08-05 11:51 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Moshe Stavropoulos <eeou@svh.gr> - 2025-07-31 16:08 +0000
Re: Rate of Change Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2025-07-31 19:54 +0200
Re: Rate of Change Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-07-27 07:47 -0700
Re: Rate of Change Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> - 2025-12-08 13:02 -0800
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-07-27 11:05 -0700
Re: Rate of Change The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2025-08-02 10:15 -0700
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
| From | Edmund Balanovski <bmesnl@akvdb.ru> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-03 09:54 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <106nblg$1hn5f$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #665376 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > You can measure all those quantities, but that is not a requirement. > > Many things in nature are not measurable for one reason or the other, > but do still exist. > > Physics deals also with distant stars, for instance, which are too far > away to measure them. once materialized (high amplitude probability distribution) and made visible, that thing is already measured. You are just another kind of jew, in Barlin. Jew rob jew, alot of wars between the jews. All wars are jew.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-03 22:35 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <106oh5o$1ptoq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #665376 |
Den 03.08.2025 08:06, skrev Thomas Heger:
> Am Samstag000002, 02.08.2025 um 11:36 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
>> Den 02.08.2025 10:04, skrev Thomas Heger:
>>> Am Freitag000001, 01.08.2025 um 22:31 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
>>>> Den 01.08.2025 09:53, skrev Thomas Heger:
>>>>> Am Donnerstag000031, 31.07.2025 um 22:16 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Please answer the following questions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have
>>>>>> a meaning in _physics_?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If no, post in another news group.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If yes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that measures time?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is always a difference between a measurement and the things
>>>>> we measure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Measurements are usually conducted with some kind of measuring
>>>>> devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> E.g. we measure voltage with a Volt-meter and temperature with a
>>>>> thermometer.
>>>>>
>>>>> But temperature has nothing to do with thermometers, because
>>>>> temperature also exists without any measurements.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is similar to any other quantity, because 'device' is an
>>>>> indicator for 'man-made' and that the opposite to 'nature'.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since physics is a natural science, we need to think about nature
>>>>> as something, which would exist without our aid or our measuring
>>>>> devices.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's why 'measurements' are not natural and that's why nature
>>>>> doesn't take those measurements into consideration.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you reject this setting, than feel free to do whatever you like.
>>>>> But don't expect anybody do the same.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> TH
>>>>
>>>> Is there any particular reason why you don't even try to answer my
>>>> questions?
>>>>
>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> I told you already, that any quantity in nature is entirely
>>> independent of any kind of measurements.
>>>
>>> Since physics is a natural science, physics deals with natural
>>> phenomena, hence also with quantities, which are not measured.
>>
>> So according to you, physics is about natural phenomena which
>> are not measured.
>
> No!
>
> You can measure all those quantities, but that is not a requirement.
>
> Many things in nature are not measurable for one reason or the other,
> but do still exist.
>
> Physics deals also with distant stars, for instance, which are too far
> away to measure them.
>
> And, of course, we do not decide about existence by measuring something
> (or not).>>
>>> Man made devices like e.g. clocks are not part of nature, hence
>>> belong to the realm, which deals with man made devices.
>>
>> And since all measuring instruments are man made,
>> they have no place in physics?
>
> No!
>
> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call
> that 'engineering'.
>
> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them.
>
>>>
>>> This is usually called 'engineering'.
>>
>> OK, let me reformulate:
>>
>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have
>> a meaning in engineering?
>>
>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time?
>
> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size.
>
> But time does not use clocks!
>
> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use
> any man-made devices.
>
> TH
You have still not even tried to answer my questions:
1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have
a meaning in engineering?
2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time?
Or alternatively:
You which to travel in your car to a town 100 km away.
Your car has no speedometer.
How will you measure your average speed?
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-03 22:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fgf09kd5qhlnhis2kkkrq4bjevbqejbh99@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665386 |
On Sun, 3 Aug 2025 22:35:14 +0200, "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> wrote: >Den 03.08.2025 08:06, skrev Thomas Heger: >> Am Samstag000002, 02.08.2025 um 11:36 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen: >>> Den 02.08.2025 10:04, skrev Thomas Heger: >>>> Am Freitag000001, 01.08.2025 um 22:31 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen: >>>>> Den 01.08.2025 09:53, skrev Thomas Heger: >>>>>> Am Donnerstag000031, 31.07.2025 um 22:16 schrieb Paul.B.Andersen: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Please answer the following questions: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>> a meaning in _physics_? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If no, post in another news group. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If yes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that measures time? >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> There is always a difference between a measurement and the things >>>>>> we measure. >>>>>> >>>>>> Measurements are usually conducted with some kind of measuring >>>>>> devices. >>>>>> >>>>>> E.g. we measure voltage with a Volt-meter and temperature with a >>>>>> thermometer. >>>>>> >>>>>> But temperature has nothing to do with thermometers, because >>>>>> temperature also exists without any measurements. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is similar to any other quantity, because 'device' is an >>>>>> indicator for 'man-made' and that the opposite to 'nature'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Since physics is a natural science, we need to think about nature >>>>>> as something, which would exist without our aid or our measuring >>>>>> devices. >>>>>> >>>>>> That's why 'measurements' are not natural and that's why nature >>>>>> doesn't take those measurements into consideration. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you reject this setting, than feel free to do whatever you like. >>>>>> But don't expect anybody do the same. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> TH >>>>> >>>>> Is there any particular reason why you don't even try to answer my >>>>> questions? >>>>> >>> >>>> Yes. >>>> >>>> I told you already, that any quantity in nature is entirely >>>> independent of any kind of measurements. >>>> >>>> Since physics is a natural science, physics deals with natural >>>> phenomena, hence also with quantities, which are not measured. >>> >>> So according to you, physics is about natural phenomena which >>> are not measured. >> >> No! >> >> You can measure all those quantities, but that is not a requirement. >> >> Many things in nature are not measurable for one reason or the other, >> but do still exist. >> >> Physics deals also with distant stars, for instance, which are too far >> away to measure them. >> >> And, of course, we do not decide about existence by measuring something >> (or not).>> >>>> Man made devices like e.g. clocks are not part of nature, hence >>>> belong to the realm, which deals with man made devices. >>> >>> And since all measuring instruments are man made, >>> they have no place in physics? >> >> No! >> >> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >> that 'engineering'. >> >> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >> >>>> >>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>> >>> OK, let me reformulate: >>> >>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>> a meaning in engineering? >>> >>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >> >> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >> >> But time does not use clocks! >> >> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >> any man-made devices. >> >> TH > >You have still not even tried to answer my questions: > >1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have > a meaning in engineering? > >2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. > >Or alternatively: > >You which to travel in your car to a town 100 km away. >Your car has no speedometer. >How will you measure your average speed? That is the dunbest question asked on Usenet. If the town is 100 km away, what difference what speed one uses to get there???? No need to measure. you get there when you get there.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 09:06 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mfb49dF17h4U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #665388 |
Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: ... >>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>> that 'engineering'. >>> >>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>> >>>>> >>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>> >>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>> >>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>> >>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>> >>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>> >>> But time does not use clocks! >>> >>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>> any man-made devices. >>> >>> TH >> >> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >> >> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >> a meaning in engineering? >> >> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > > > They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. > check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your > calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky is caused by Earth' rotation. So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 09:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8om19kt1r1hp6uf47eelsrf5am0jjmftg9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665390 |
On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >... >>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>> that 'engineering'. >>>> >>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>> >>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>> >>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>> >>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>> >>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>> >>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>> any man-made devices. >>>> >>>> TH >>> >>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>> >>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>> a meaning in engineering? >>> >>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >> >> >> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. > > >Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >is caused by Earth' rotation. > >So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >... > > >TH I forgot about rotate time. So the numbers on the clock don't rotate?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | squalk <sq@net.inv> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 18:01 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <OjydnfmM3pOGdw31nZ2dnZfqn_SdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #665394 |
The Starmaker wrote: > On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> > wrote: > >> Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >> ... >>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>> >>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>> >>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? -------------------------------------------------- Hunger mostly. >>>>> >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Python <jp@python.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 17:23 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <AUo6jqWNrInQqbfQTqCBCZhx5ms@jntp> |
| In reply to | #665397 |
Le 04/08/2025 à 19:12, squalk a écrit : > The Starmaker wrote: >> On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >> wrote: >> >>> Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>> ... >>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > -------------------------------------------------- > > Hunger mostly. Good one!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 12:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <gs229klapm2tu0o58vkck4vqjgil9eb17m@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665394 |
On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >wrote: > >>Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>... >>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>> >>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>> >>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>> >>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>>> >>>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>>> >>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>>> any man-made devices. >>>>> >>>>> TH >>>> >>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>>> >>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>> >>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>> >>> >>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. >> >> >>Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>is caused by Earth' rotation. >> >>So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>... >> >> >>TH > >I forgot about rotate time. But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the earth to keep solar time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-04 22:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f7639kl9mlofjotnrsj4eb6dd9d4jndl49@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665400 |
On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >>wrote: >> >>>Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>>... >>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>>> >>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>> >>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>>>> >>>>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>>>> >>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>>>> any man-made devices. >>>>>> >>>>>> TH >>>>> >>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>> >>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>> >>>> >>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. >>> >>> >>>Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>is caused by Earth' rotation. >>> >>>So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>... >>> >>> >>>TH >> >>I forgot about rotate time. > >But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >earth to keep solar time. But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth ...spins.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-05 09:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <m6d49k9dfvgfg46dqvjhqmf5dllbbtp8j2@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665403 |
On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 22:43:01 -0700, The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker >><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>>>... >>>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>>>>> any man-made devices. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TH >>>>>> >>>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >>>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >>>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. >>>> >>>> >>>>Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>> >>>>So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>... >>>> >>>> >>>>TH >>> >>>I forgot about rotate time. >> >>But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>earth to keep solar time. > >But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >...spins. Whether you use 'spin' or 'rotation'...the earth does not the capabilities to spin on it's own...it is the Sun that spins the earth.. that which makes the wheels of a clock turn.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-05 21:30 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6892DA4A.996@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #665411 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 22:43:01 -0700, The Starmaker > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > >On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker > ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker > >><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > >> > >>>On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> > >>>wrote: > >>> > >>>>Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: > >>>>... > >>>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call > >>>>>>> that 'engineering'. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have > >>>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> But time does not use clocks! > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use > >>>>>>> any man-made devices. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> TH > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have > >>>>>> a meaning in engineering? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. > >>>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your > >>>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky > >>>>is caused by Earth' rotation. > >>>> > >>>>So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. > >>>>... > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>TH > >>> > >>>I forgot about rotate time. > >> > >>But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so > >>something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the > >>earth to keep solar time. > > > >But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth > >...spins. > > Whether you use 'spin' or 'rotation'...the earth does not the > capabilities to spin on it's own...it is the Sun that spins the > earth.. > > that which makes the wheels of a clock turn. i guess if the earth stop spinning it would be Sunday...everyday. -- 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 | 2025-08-07 10:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6894DE92.5837@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #665403 |
The Starmaker wrote: > > On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker > <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > >On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker > ><starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > > >>On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> > >>wrote: > >> > >>>Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: > >>>... > >>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call > >>>>>> that 'engineering'. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. > >>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have > >>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But time does not use clocks! > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use > >>>>>> any man-made devices. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> TH > >>>>> > >>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: > >>>>> > >>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have > >>>>> a meaning in engineering? > >>>>> > >>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. > >>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your > >>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. > >>> > >>> > >>>Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky > >>>is caused by Earth' rotation. > >>> > >>>So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. > >>>... > >>> > >>> > >>>TH > >> > >>I forgot about rotate time. > > > >But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so > >something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the > >earth to keep solar time. > > But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth > ...spins. Let me put it this way.. a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. Not an earth clock. All time on earth is determined by the Sun. So, if the sun is up there... or over there.. or on the otherside.. Why do you confuse an earth clock with Time? Sun time?? A earth clock is just a highly sophiscated sundial... I'm not even sure the sun is trying to tell you what time it is. When the sun is up there...it is just 'up there', dats it! It's is not 12 o'clock, dat another word for up there! What's up there? it's on minute past up there! OH MAN, I'M LATE! I GOTTA GO BEFORE IT GOES DOWN THERE!!! don't worry about it, you got plenty of time.. Germans call it rotation. -- 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 | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 06:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mfqkptFjf55U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #665421 |
Am Donnerstag000007, 07.08.2025 um 19:12 schrieb The Starmaker: > The Starmaker wrote: >> >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker >> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker >>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>>>> ... >>>>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>>>>>> any man-made devices. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TH >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >>>>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >>>>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>> is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>>> >>>>> So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> TH >>>> >>>> I forgot about rotate time. >>> >>> But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>> something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>> earth to keep solar time. >> >> But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >> ...spins. > > Let me put it this way.. > > a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. > > It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. > > Not an earth clock. NO!!! The shadow moves at the sun-clock, because the Earth rotates (not the Sun). This is why a sun-clock measures actually Earth' rotation (in respect to the Sun).> > All time on earth is determined by the Sun. > > So, if the sun is up there... > > or over there.. > > or on the otherside.. > > Why do you confuse an earth clock with Time? Sun time?? > > > A earth clock is just a highly sophiscated sundial... > > I'm not even sure the sun is trying to tell you what time it is. ???? TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-10 23:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ot2j9khmhcnjaftercfs3ji80dssopipp9@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665455 |
On Sun, 10 Aug 2025 06:20:33 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >Am Donnerstag000007, 07.08.2025 um 19:12 schrieb The Starmaker: >> The Starmaker wrote: >>> >>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 12:40:02 -0700, The Starmaker >>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 09:11:22 -0700, The Starmaker >>>> <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 4 Aug 2025 09:06:32 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Am Montag000004, 04.08.2025 um 07:05 schrieb The Starmaker: >>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>> Devices belong to a realm, which is not nature. I would prefer to call >>>>>>>>> that 'engineering'. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Physicists use all sorts of devices, but would not necessarily build them. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This is usually called 'engineering'. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OK, let me reformulate: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Physicists use clocks of various forms, technology and size. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But time does not use clocks! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This is so, because time is a natural phenomenon and nature does not use >>>>>>>>> any man-made devices. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TH >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You have still not even tried to answer my questions: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 1. Do you think that "time" must be measurable to have >>>>>>>> a meaning in engineering? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2. What is the instrument that engineers use to measures time? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> They all use the sun as the instrument. It will be ready on Sunday. >>>>>>> check your calender...when you wake up, change the page on your >>>>>>> calender to the next day. All clocks give solar time. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>>> is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>>>> >>>>>> So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>>> ... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> TH >>>>> >>>>> I forgot about rotate time. >>>> >>>> But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>>> something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>>> earth to keep solar time. >>> >>> But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >>> ...spins. >> >> Let me put it this way.. >> >> a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. >> >> It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. >> >> Not an earth clock. > >NO!!! > >The shadow moves at the sun-clock, because the Earth rotates (not the Sun). > >This is why a sun-clock measures actually Earth' rotation (in respect to >the Sun).> Isn't the earth a cogwheel? Otherwise, What makes the earth...rotate? What machine gives the earth's it's motion? This...clock machine? >> All time on earth is determined by the Sun. >> >> So, if the sun is up there... >> >> or over there.. >> >> or on the otherside.. >> >> Why do you confuse an earth clock with Time? Sun time?? >> >> >> A earth clock is just a highly sophiscated sundial... >> >> I'm not even sure the sun is trying to tell you what time it is. > >???? Welcome to the machine... You're too close to the clock to see the machinery.... > > >TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-12 08:55 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mg06knFglg4U6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #665470 |
Am Montag000011, 11.08.2025 um 08:34 schrieb The Starmaker: >>>>>>> Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>>>> is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> TH >>>>>> >>>>>> I forgot about rotate time. >>>>> >>>>> But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>>>> something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>>>> earth to keep solar time. >>>> >>>> But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >>>> ...spins. >>> >>> Let me put it this way.. >>> >>> a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. >>> >>> It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. >>> >>> Not an earth clock. >> >> NO!!! >> >> The shadow moves at the sun-clock, because the Earth rotates (not the Sun). >> >> This is why a sun-clock measures actually Earth' rotation (in respect to >> the Sun).> > > Isn't the earth a cogwheel? Otherwise, What makes the earth...rotate? This is a VERY good question. My own guess was, that we have kind of 'background field', which I assume to be spacetime of GR. Matter is now (in my own and selfinvented model) a 'timelike stable pattern. This 'background field' behaves, as if the 'elements' are actually bi-quaternions, which interact with their direct neigbors, as if they would multiply with them according to an equation, which is used with quaternions to describe rotations. The equation goes like this: p' = q * p * q^-1 The net result for a huge massive body is then a certain rotation of that huge body. (see also my 'book' called 'structured spacetime': https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing ) ... TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Marcelino Valchikovsky <vch@kosiea.ru> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-12 08:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <107etee$34tug$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #665474 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > My own guess was, that we have kind of 'background field', which I > assume to be spacetime of GR. > > Matter is now (in my own and selfinvented model) a 'timelike stable > pattern. > > This 'background field' behaves, as if the 'elements' are actually > bi-quaternions, which interact with their direct neigbors, as if they > would multiply with them according to an equation, which is used with > quaternions to describe rotations. > > The equation goes like this: p' = q * p * q^-1 not sure, the relativists would say it rotates since the bigbang, which is a long time to rotate. That's definitely related to the Entropy and quantum fluctuation, probability distribution and so on. Every war, every genocide and every terrorist event is directly tied to the Anglo Saxon Zionist NAZI Talmudic Minority! JUST FOLLOW the fiat currency that funds all those events!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-15 10:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d5ru9khd9gbiu9n0q1ier7oeug9slcsgdq@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #665474 |
On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 08:55:42 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> wrote: >Am Montag000011, 11.08.2025 um 08:34 schrieb The Starmaker: > >>>>>>>> Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>>>>> is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> TH >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I forgot about rotate time. >>>>>> >>>>>> But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>>>>> something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>>>>> earth to keep solar time. >>>>> >>>>> But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >>>>> ...spins. >>>> >>>> Let me put it this way.. >>>> >>>> a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. >>>> >>>> It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. >>>> >>>> Not an earth clock. >>> >>> NO!!! >>> >>> The shadow moves at the sun-clock, because the Earth rotates (not the Sun). >>> >>> This is why a sun-clock measures actually Earth' rotation (in respect to >>> the Sun).> >> >> Isn't the earth a cogwheel? Otherwise, What makes the earth...rotate? > >This is a VERY good question. > >My own guess was, that we have kind of 'background field', which I >assume to be spacetime of GR. > >Matter is now (in my own and selfinvented model) a 'timelike stable pattern. > >This 'background field' behaves, as if the 'elements' are actually >bi-quaternions, which interact with their direct neigbors, as if they >would multiply with them according to an equation, which is used with >quaternions to describe rotations. > >The equation goes like this: > >p' = q * p * q^-1 > >The net result for a huge massive body is then a certain rotation of >that huge body. > >(see also my 'book' called 'structured spacetime': > >https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing >) > > >... > >TH BUT i already answered the question..the Sun rotates the Earth. The Sun IS the 'structured spacetime! Without the Sun, tomorrow would never come! What is tomorrow? Without the sun...it will always be nighttime. Tomorrow is the NEXT night. (not the next day) There is no NEXT night when it is always...night. Earth rotation has no bearing on time...without a sun to bear it's time.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-16 07:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mgain7F8vhtU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #665493 |
Am Freitag000015, 15.08.2025 um 19:29 schrieb The Starmaker: > On Tue, 12 Aug 2025 08:55:42 +0200, Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> > wrote: > >> Am Montag000011, 11.08.2025 um 08:34 schrieb The Starmaker: >> >>>>>>>>> Actually wrong, because the apparent movement of the Sun across the sky >>>>>>>>> is caused by Earth' rotation. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So: sun dials use the Earth' rotation, too. >>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> TH >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I forgot about rotate time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But the earth has no force of it's own to rotate around the sun...so >>>>>>> something else is happening here...it is the sun that rotates the >>>>>>> earth to keep solar time. >>>>>> >>>>>> But you are probaly using the wrong word, you must mean the earth >>>>>> ...spins. >>>>> >>>>> Let me put it this way.. >>>>> >>>>> a sundial is not a earth clock, it's a sun clock. >>>>> >>>>> It measures the shadow of the sun...a solar solar clock. >>>>> >>>>> Not an earth clock. >>>> >>>> NO!!! >>>> >>>> The shadow moves at the sun-clock, because the Earth rotates (not the Sun). >>>> >>>> This is why a sun-clock measures actually Earth' rotation (in respect to >>>> the Sun).> >>> >>> Isn't the earth a cogwheel? Otherwise, What makes the earth...rotate? >> >> This is a VERY good question. >> >> My own guess was, that we have kind of 'background field', which I >> assume to be spacetime of GR. >> >> Matter is now (in my own and selfinvented model) a 'timelike stable pattern. >> >> This 'background field' behaves, as if the 'elements' are actually >> bi-quaternions, which interact with their direct neigbors, as if they >> would multiply with them according to an equation, which is used with >> quaternions to describe rotations. >> >> The equation goes like this: >> >> p' = q * p * q^-1 >> >> The net result for a huge massive body is then a certain rotation of >> that huge body. >> >> (see also my 'book' called 'structured spacetime': >> >> https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Ur3_giuk2l439fxUa8QHX4wTDxBEaM6lOlgVUa0cFU4/edit?usp=sharing >> ) >> >> >> ... >> >> TH > > BUT i already answered the question..the Sun rotates the Earth. The > Sun IS the 'structured spacetime! > > Without the Sun, tomorrow would never come! > > What is tomorrow? > > Without the sun...it will always be nighttime. > > Tomorrow is the NEXT night. (not the next day) > > There is no NEXT night when it is always...night. > > > Earth rotation has no bearing on time...without a sun to bear it's > time. I meant, that 'Sun' is actually a vortex in spacetime. The real thing is a 'background', which is assumed to be spacetime of GR. This is real and composed out of pointlike 'elements'. But it is also invisible and 'dark'. But you could 'tilt' these elements (a little bit) and one way to do this is gravity. Now these 'pointlike elements' are interconnected in a certain way, which allows 'sideways' rotation. This aspect is called 'spacelike' in relativity lingo. In the perpendicular direction this is an axis and called 'timelike'. If an object is subject to gravity, the environment pulls on the object and tends to make the worldlines bend a little more from timelike to spacelike. Hence if an object is subject to gravity, the formerly unseen aspect of rotation becomes visible. IoW: things start to glow, if there is a very huge material object with large gravity. This is now the case for the Sun, which therefore shines, because the Sun has such a large mass. But the energy doesn't come from the mass, but from spacetime itself. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bubba Kalimahi <mkiu@miiibak.ru> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-16 10:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <107pmr2$1l93s$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #665494 |
Thomas Heger wrote: > But you could 'tilt' these elements (a little bit) and one way to do > this is gravity. > > Now these 'pointlike elements' are interconnected in a certain way, > which allows 'sideways' rotation. how would you know the side, this is nonsense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2025-08-17 10:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mgdi21Fo6kgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #665496 |
Am Samstag000016, 16.08.2025 um 12:34 schrieb Bubba Kalimahi: > Thomas Heger wrote: > >> But you could 'tilt' these elements (a little bit) and one way to do >> this is gravity. >> >> Now these 'pointlike elements' are interconnected in a certain way, >> which allows 'sideways' rotation. > > how would you know the side, this is nonsense. There is one requirement for stability: that is stability. If something timelike stable emerges, then we call this this pattern 'matter' (otherwise we call that 'radiation'). Timelike is a direction, which a material object would regard as timelike, because under that condition the object remains stable. Now 'timelike' has an inverse we call 'spacelike'. Therefore, it is a matter of the point of view, what we call 'spacelike' and that depends actually on the local axis of time. 'spacelike' is kind of 'sideways', while 'timelike' behaves more like an axis. What is 'timelike' is simply demanded by the requirement of a material object, like e.g. the observer, to remain an object. This direction has also in impact upon what the observer could possibly see and also, what the observe calls 'universe' (= 'everything the observer could see'). (This is quite ok, but has the disadvantage, that such a universe is not universal.) A main different to usual understanding is, that matter could occasionally pop out of nowhere or disappear into thin air. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web