Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #558850 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2021-07-29 07:27 +0200 |
| Last post | 2021-08-02 11:02 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 117 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-07-29 07:27 +0200
Re: local time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2021-07-29 06:29 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 06:33 -0700
Re: local time Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2021-07-29 08:02 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 08:10 -0700
Re: local time Uetake Matsumura <uetma@unijap2.jp> - 2021-07-29 19:04 +0000
Re: local time Uetake Matsumura <uetma@unijap2.jp> - 2021-07-29 19:35 +0000
Re: local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-07-30 09:14 +0200
Re: local time Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2021-07-30 03:08 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 03:13 -0700
Re: local time Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2021-07-30 03:21 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 05:00 -0700
Re: local time Gabriella Bouttier <gabbo@nncastr2.au> - 2021-07-30 16:03 +0000
Re: local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-08-01 08:34 +0200
Re: local time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2021-07-30 09:19 -0700
Re: local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-08-01 08:26 +0200
Re: local time Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2021-08-01 06:52 -0700
Re: local time Buck Ehler <buke@unicwta.pa> - 2021-08-01 14:29 +0000
Re: local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-08-02 08:50 +0200
Re: local time Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2021-07-29 06:41 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-07-29 07:38 -0700
Re: local time Emmett Bradshaw <emmbs@nntunic.ki> - 2021-07-29 14:43 +0000
Re: local time Emmett Bradshaw <emmbs@nntunic.ki> - 2021-07-29 14:07 +0000
Re: local time Emmett Bradshaw <emmbs@nntunic.ki> - 2021-07-29 14:21 +0000
Re: local time Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2021-07-29 07:30 -0700
Re: local time Emmett Bradshaw <emmbs@nntunic.ki> - 2021-07-29 14:40 +0000
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-07-30 10:44 -0700
Re: local time Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2021-08-01 08:32 +0200
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-07-31 04:07 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-01 10:45 -0400
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 06:02 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 13:08 +0000
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 06:12 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 06:26 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 14:31 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 08:28 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 15:37 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 10:04 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 17:36 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 12:50 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 20:01 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 14:06 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 21:34 +0000
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 15:38 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 04:57 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 13:04 +0000
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 13:35 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 07:48 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 15:46 +0000
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-08-03 11:47 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 07:28 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 14:54 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 08:46 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 17:31 +0000
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 11:03 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 13:20 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-04 21:15 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 05:30 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 14:45 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 08:59 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 16:17 +0000
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 09:48 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 17:09 +0000
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 10:20 -0700
Re: local time Python <python@python.invalid> - 2021-08-05 19:29 +0200
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-05 12:15 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-06 07:13 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-06 14:49 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 05:22 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 12:58 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 06:58 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 14:10 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 08:22 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 15:41 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 12:27 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 20:24 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-10 05:32 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-10 13:12 +0000
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-10 13:24 -0400
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-10 17:37 +0000
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-10 15:06 -0400
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-10 23:24 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-10 23:24 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 06:58 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 14:01 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 07:27 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 15:06 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 08:15 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-11 11:33 -0400
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 15:50 +0000
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 10:40 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 13:51 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-11 21:21 +0000
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-18 10:23 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-19 01:53 -0400
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-19 16:46 +0000
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-11 11:26 -0400
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-09 11:45 -0400
Re: local time "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 10:48 -0700
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-09 23:06 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 05:41 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 12:58 +0000
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-06 11:47 -0400
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 05:30 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-06 11:41 -0400
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 05:33 -0700
Re: local time Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2021-08-07 12:58 +0000
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-06 11:39 -0400
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-02 17:15 -0400
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-02 11:47 -0400
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 09:02 -0700
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 09:36 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-02 13:17 -0400
Re: local time Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 09:45 -0700
Re: local time Michael Moroney <moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com> - 2021-08-02 13:31 -0400
Re: local time Thanh Walters <hwnta@uucnstv.cr> - 2021-08-02 18:00 +0000
Re: local time Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2021-08-02 11:02 -0700
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 07:27 +0200 |
| Subject | local time |
| Message-ID | <imesinFdsmbU1@mid.individual.net> |
Hi NG 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. It goes like this: take an arbitrary point in space an place an object there. Then you place an observer on that object (like the little prince on his little planet). The observer will regard himself as at rest and the time there as a local phenomenon. Anything else is moving, while the little prince stands upright on his small planet. Now he experiences certain changes in the environment and with himself. This is called 'time' and measured with his clock. Now this time goes always into a positive direction and stays on the little planet. Seen from another little planet, that is not necessarily the case, because seen from there, the clocks of the little prince could run backwards or very fast or very slow. TH
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 06:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b2ee5fec-8a22-41a8-8c4d-9c25092e91cdn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558850 |
El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > Hi NG > > 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > It goes like this: > > take an arbitrary point in space an place an object there. > > Then you place an observer on that object (like the little prince on his > little planet). > > The observer will regard himself as at rest and the time there as a > local phenomenon. > > Anything else is moving, while the little prince stands upright on his > small planet. > > Now he experiences certain changes in the environment and with himself. > > This is called 'time' and measured with his clock. > > > Now this time goes always into a positive direction and stays on the > little planet. > True, as every possible physics experiment uses clocks (to measure the passing of time and rulers to measure the locations of bodies). > Seen from another little planet, that is not necessarily the case, > because seen from there, the clocks of the little prince could run > backwards or very fast or very slow. > Clocks do not run backwards. The observation of the prince will always be of our clock to run slow and our observation of his clock will always be his clock is running slow.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 06:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10728e0e-bb42-40c8-8c60-bb9ae6e8a9b9n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558862 |
On Thursday, 29 July 2021 at 15:29:39 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > True, as every possible physics experiment uses clocks (to measure the passing of time and rulers to measure the locations of bodies). Sure, everyone is using rulers to measure planets and their locations. And what is the longest tuler you've ever seen, poor halfbrain?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 08:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <441db2e8-d835-450d-b145-d39d0faf2245n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558862 |
On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 7:29:39 AM UTC-6, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > > > > Hi NG > > > > 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > > parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about > what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). Well. maybe we know Something about why time is anisotropic/asymmetrical. We have entropy and statistical physics. Quantum time seems to be isotropic, but it gets lost at the classical level. See J. A. Vacarro, "The quantum theory of time, the block universe and human experience" https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.05177
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 08:10 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ef5f8739-3853-43b4-890f-f4c48169caa2n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558876 |
> On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 7:29:39 AM UTC-6, Paparios wrote: > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. Not quite; anyone can check that what a clock reads in GPS is t'=t; it's rather that for a physicist time is what his idiot guru said a clock reads.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Uetake Matsumura <uetma@unijap2.jp> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 19:04 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sduu3q$1ncm$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #558876 |
On 29.Jul.2021, Gary Harnagel wrote: >> For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know >> about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to >> future). > > Well. maybe we know Something about why time is > anisotropic/asymmetrical. > We have entropy and statistical physics. Quantum time seems to be > isotropic, > but it gets lost at the classical level. See J. A. Vacarro, "The > quantum theory of time, the block universe and human experience" > https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.05177 You may certainly want to reconsider. If the "dynamics" is predictable, then you go back in time, making them rich with the lottery numbers. There's no time nor entropy quantum level.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Uetake Matsumura <uetma@unijap2.jp> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 19:35 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <sduvtb$93r$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #558889 |
On 29.Jul.2021, Uetake Matsumura wrote: > On 29.Jul.2021, Gary Harnagel wrote: > >>> For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know >>> about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to >>> future). >> >> Well. maybe we know Something about why time is >> anisotropic/asymmetrical. >> We have entropy and statistical physics. Quantum time seems to be >> isotropic, >> but it gets lost at the classical level. See J. A. Vacarro, "The >> quantum theory of time, the block universe and human experience" >> https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.05177 > > You may certainly want to reconsider. If the "dynamics" is predictable, > then you go back in time, making them rich with the lottery numbers. > There's no time nor entropy quantum level. I don't have to speculate why there is no time nor space in quantum, but once again it suggests that SIZE matters in this universe.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 09:14 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <imhn6nF15ugU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #558862 |
Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: >> Hi NG >> >> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform >> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. >> > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). OK But any clock must be somewhere by definition. This is actually the same idea as 'local time', because time is what clocks measure, this time is valid, where also the clock is located. Now we allow an observer to construct clocks and to measure local time with them. This does not say, that other observers at other locations would measure the same time, because at other locations they would be somewhere else. >> It goes like this: >> >> take an arbitrary point in space an place an object there. >> >> Then you place an observer on that object (like the little prince on his >> little planet). >> >> The observer will regard himself as at rest and the time there as a >> local phenomenon. >> >> Anything else is moving, while the little prince stands upright on his >> small planet. >> >> Now he experiences certain changes in the environment and with himself. >> >> This is called 'time' and measured with his clock. >> >> >> Now this time goes always into a positive direction and stays on the >> little planet. >> > > True, as every possible physics experiment uses clocks (to measure the passing of time and rulers to measure the locations of bodies). Sure, but 'possible physics experiment' would require an experimenter, which could be called 'observer', too. This observer and his/her experiments need a location and that a local time. What happens at other places is not really known, unless some kind of contact is established to such an invisible realm. >> Seen from another little planet, that is not necessarily the case, >> because seen from there, the clocks of the little prince could run >> backwards or very fast or very slow. >> > > Clocks do not run backwards. The observation of the prince will always be of our clock to run slow and our observation of his clock will always be his clock is running slow. Local clocks do not run backwards (by definition), if seen by a local observer. But other clocks at other locations could look like they would run backwards, because 'other location' means also 'other local time'.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 03:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7f3ed991-6dd2-46f9-9fd5-15ee82d74aafn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558927 |
On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > >> Hi NG > >> > >> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > >> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > >> > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > OK OK?? You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction... *Plonk* Julio
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 03:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <35d444d3-71ae-41c1-813b-33c776f92784n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558929 |
On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:08:54 UTC+2, ju...@diegidio.name wrote: > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > > Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > > > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > > >> Hi NG > > >> > > >> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > > >> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > > >> > > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > > OK > OK?? > > You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction... > > *Plonk* Time is a coordinate. Some abstract human constructed. No way any fucken avatar of any fucken Great Mystical Mystery. Sorry, Julio, your plonks are not going to change anything.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 03:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dfd480c8-80b4-4ecd-b4c7-c210f5eeed19n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558930 |
On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:13:46 UTC+2, maluw...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:08:54 UTC+2, ju...@diegidio.name wrote: > > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > > > > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > > > >> Hi NG > > > >> > > > >> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > > > >> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > > > >> > > > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > > > OK > > OK?? > > > > You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction... > > > Time is a coordinate. Some abstract human constructed. No way > any fucken avatar of any fucken Great Mystical Mystery. Sorry, > Julio, your plonks are not going to change anything. You other resident retarded agent of the enemy: *everything * we conceive is a human construct, you fucking retarded cunts are just too retarded to even make up a story... Eat shit and die. *Plonk* Julio
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 05:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e3af9157-cc15-4529-be20-4bb2ea1df94fn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558931 |
On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:21:56 UTC+2, ju...@diegidio.name wrote: > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:13:46 UTC+2, maluw...@gmail.com wrote: > > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 12:08:54 UTC+2, ju...@diegidio.name wrote: > > > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > > > > Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > > > > > El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > > > > >> Hi NG > > > > >> > > > > >> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > > > > >> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. > > > > >> > > > > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > > > > OK > > > OK?? > > > > > > You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction... > > > > > Time is a coordinate. Some abstract human constructed. No way > > any fucken avatar of any fucken Great Mystical Mystery. Sorry, > > Julio, your plonks are not going to change anything. > You other resident retarded agent of the enemy: *everything * we conceive is a human construct And tales of "laws of nature" allegedly FORCING us to follow the path of Giant Guru are just some pure bullshit. Still, clocks are constructed as information devices generating numbers matching some abstract, human invented schema. And this schema is - time. As it is constructed by us it can have whatever properties we want, if we want to change them we simply adjust clocks differently. That's the trick of your idiot guru: persuading those like you that they obviously should be adjusted how HE wants.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gabriella Bouttier <gabbo@nncastr2.au> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 16:03 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <se17sj$14ih$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #558929 |
Julio Di Egidio wrote: >> > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know >> > about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to >> > future). >> OK > > OK?? You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction.. *Plonk* you come on usenet to plonk each and everybody?? Can you become more stupid than that? A man without a horse is a pussy. That's why they want you brainwashed with homo, tranny and male sangers with women voice crap. Never ever turn on your radio. They want you weak. That's why they "vaccinate" children with damaging for life poison. They want them weak, so they preserve they wealth and privileges. Look around you, my friend. Me casa e tu casa, me friend. Kiss my ass.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-01 08:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <immtk5F38p1U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #558929 |
Am 30.07.2021 um 12:08 schrieb Julio Di Egidio: > On Friday, 30 July 2021 at 09:14:35 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: >> Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: >>> El jueves, 29 de julio de 2021 a las 1:27:55 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: >>>> Hi NG >>>> >>>> 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform >>>> parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. >>>> >>> For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). >> OK > > OK?? > > You shameless pieces of shit deserve your own extinction... > This was a rather rude reply to a statement, which isn't particularily controversial. Actually you freaked out, because I wrote 'ok'. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-30 09:19 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cd1317e1-2613-4ed8-af89-e05f5c8778bcn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558927 |
El viernes, 30 de julio de 2021 a las 3:14:35 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > > For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). > OK > > But any clock must be somewhere by definition. > > This is actually the same idea as 'local time', because time is what > clocks measure, this time is valid, where also the clock is located. > Absolutely. The observer (or instrument) measures the readings of the clock at its location. Usually, the elapsed time is measured (ie, the time between two events). > Now we allow an observer to construct clocks and to measure local time > with them. > > This does not say, that other observers at other locations would measure > the same time, because at other locations they would be somewhere else. Distant observers (or instruments) can only measure the clock ticking or the elapsed time through the reception of signals, informing the observer HERE of the clock reading THERE. > > True, as every possible physics experiment uses clocks (to measure the passing of time and rulers to measure the locations of bodies). > Sure, but 'possible physics experiment' would require an experimenter, > which could be called 'observer', too. > As I said, the word observer implies the use of instruments at the location of the experiment. > This observer and his/her experiments need a location and that a local time. > > What happens at other places is not really known, unless some kind of > contact is established to such an invisible realm. Not really. The only thing needed is the reception from signals, informing the observer HERE of the clock readings THERE. Astronomical observatories, for instance, use electromagnetic signals, like light, radio, X-rays, gamma rays, etc. to determine the physics of distant objects. > > > > Clocks do not run backwards. The observation of the prince will always be of our clock to run slow and our observation of his clock will always be his clock is running slow. > Local clocks do not run backwards (by definition), if seen by a local > observer. > > But other clocks at other locations could look like they would run > backwards, because 'other location' means also 'other local time'. Wrong, as every clock, at a given location, just ticks in the positive direction at 1 second/second. The most extreme case would be that of a spacecraft approaching a black hole event horizon. In that case, an observer here on Earth would receive signals from the spacecraft clocks, which are severely time dilated with respect to our clocks. In the limit, when the spacecraft reaches the event horizon, the spacecraft clocks would be seen to completely stop, while the astronauts there would see no time dilation (ie their clocks would continue to tick at 1 second/second). The movie Interstellar shows this effect.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-01 08:26 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <immt4qF36plU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #558946 |
Am 30.07.2021 um 18:19 schrieb Paparios: > El viernes, 30 de julio de 2021 a las 3:14:35 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: >> Am 29.07.2021 um 15:29 schrieb Paparios: > >>> For physicists, time is what a clock reads. There is nothing we know about what time is and why it runs in one direction (from passed to future). >> OK >> >> But any clock must be somewhere by definition. >> >> This is actually the same idea as 'local time', because time is what >> clocks measure, this time is valid, where also the clock is located. >> > > Absolutely. The observer (or instrument) measures the readings of the clock at its location. Usually, the elapsed time is measured (ie, the time between two events). > > >> Now we allow an observer to construct clocks and to measure local time >> with them. >> >> This does not say, that other observers at other locations would measure >> the same time, because at other locations they would be somewhere else. > > Distant observers (or instruments) can only measure the clock ticking or the elapsed time through the reception of signals, informing the observer HERE of the clock reading THERE. > > >>> True, as every possible physics experiment uses clocks (to measure the passing of time and rulers to measure the locations of bodies). > >> Sure, but 'possible physics experiment' would require an experimenter, >> which could be called 'observer', too. >> > > As I said, the word observer implies the use of instruments at the location of the experiment. > >> This observer and his/her experiments need a location and that a local time. >> >> What happens at other places is not really known, unless some kind of >> contact is established to such an invisible realm. > > Not really. The only thing needed is the reception from signals, informing the observer HERE of the clock readings THERE. Astronomical observatories, for instance, use electromagnetic signals, like light, radio, X-rays, gamma rays, etc. to determine the physics of distant objects. > >>> >>> Clocks do not run backwards. The observation of the prince will always be of our clock to run slow and our observation of his clock will always be his clock is running slow. > >> Local clocks do not run backwards (by definition), if seen by a local >> observer. >> >> But other clocks at other locations could look like they would run >> backwards, because 'other location' means also 'other local time'. > > Wrong, as every clock, at a given location, just ticks in the positive direction at 1 second/second. The most extreme case would be that of a spacecraft approaching a black hole event horizon. In that case, an observer here on Earth would receive signals from the spacecraft clocks, which are severely time dilated with respect to our clocks. In the limit, when the spacecraft reaches the event horizon, the spacecraft clocks would be seen to completely stop, while the astronauts there would see no time dilation (ie their clocks would continue to tick at 1 second/second). The movie Interstellar shows this effect. 'Positive' is a relative measure. We all advance into the positive direction in time, whereever we are. But we cannot be everywhere. If we are somewhere, we advance into the positive direction in time. But this direction is positive only there and not necessarily everywhere else. Relativity uses Lorentz transformation. and a Lorentz transform could be imagined as complex rotation of the axis of time. Now every location has such an axis, because every location has a local time. Because two locations can have an axis of time in an angle, the angle could eventually exceed 180 °, what is actually a rotation into the opposite direction. This direction is still positive, because time is a local measure and only the time of an observed system could run backwards. > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-01 06:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d1e8b1eb-dc4b-490a-84ba-b3d2ee3cb795n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #559000 |
El domingo, 1 de agosto de 2021 a las 2:26:38 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: > Am 30.07.2021 um 18:19 schrieb Paparios: > >> But other clocks at other locations could look like they would run > >> backwards, because 'other location' means also 'other local time'. > > > > Wrong, as every clock, at a given location, just ticks in the positive direction at 1 second/second. The most extreme case would be that of a spacecraft approaching a black hole event horizon. In that case, an observer here on Earth would receive signals from the spacecraft clocks, which are severely time dilated with respect to our clocks. In the limit, when the spacecraft reaches the event horizon, the spacecraft clocks would be seen to completely stop, while the astronauts there would see no time dilation (ie their clocks would continue to tick at 1 second/second). The movie Interstellar shows this effect. > 'Positive' is a relative measure. > No it is not. In spacetime, the time coordinate goes from t=-∞ to t=+∞. But time only flows unidirectional from yesterday to tomorrow. > We all advance into the positive direction in time, whereever we are. > But we cannot be everywhere. > > If we are somewhere, we advance into the positive direction in time. But > this direction is positive only there and not necessarily everywhere else. > > Relativity uses Lorentz transformation. and a Lorentz transform could be > imagined as complex rotation of the axis of time. > > Now every location has such an axis, because every location has a local > time. Because two locations can have an axis of time in an angle, the > angle could eventually exceed 180 °, what is actually a rotation into > the opposite direction. > But it is not. A basic spacetime diagram uses coordinates (ct,x), where x is horizontal and ct is vertical. Usually c is taken to be 1, so x and t are in the same distance units (light years). A moving body will have coordinates (t',x') related to (t,x) through the LTE. The higher the speed v of the body is, both coordinates t' and x' are closer to the line t=x (which is the speed of light). Those t' and x' lines look as a rotation but that rotation can not exceed the limit of t=x. Therefore, within those constraints, the coordinate t' is still moving from yesterday to tomorrow. > This direction is still positive, because time is a local measure and > only the time of an observed system could run backwards. > > > > TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Buck Ehler <buke@unicwta.pa> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-01 14:29 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <se6b48$1u86$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #559010 |
Paparios wrote: >> 'Positive' is a relative measure. >> > No it is not. In spacetime, the time coordinate goes from t=-∞ to t=+∞. > But time only flows unidirectional from yesterday to tomorrow. Think again, the existence even of the smallest minus would imply causality violation. This will never happen. You can't send anything back in time, nor travel.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-08-02 08:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <impitrFk3apU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #559010 |
Am 01.08.2021 um 15:52 schrieb Paparios: > El domingo, 1 de agosto de 2021 a las 2:26:38 UTC-4, Thomas Heger escribió: >> Am 30.07.2021 um 18:19 schrieb Paparios: > >>>> But other clocks at other locations could look like they would run >>>> backwards, because 'other location' means also 'other local time'. >>> >>> Wrong, as every clock, at a given location, just ticks in the positive direction at 1 second/second. The most extreme case would be that of a spacecraft approaching a black hole event horizon. In that case, an observer here on Earth would receive signals from the spacecraft clocks, which are severely time dilated with respect to our clocks. In the limit, when the spacecraft reaches the event horizon, the spacecraft clocks would be seen to completely stop, while the astronauts there would see no time dilation (ie their clocks would continue to tick at 1 second/second). The movie Interstellar shows this effect. >> 'Positive' is a relative measure. >> > > No it is not. In spacetime, the time coordinate goes from t=-∞ to t=+∞. But time only flows unidirectional from yesterday to tomorrow. I compare a spacetime diagram with an Argand diagram, hence assume, that spacetime has properties of complex numbers. The axis of time is essentially a count of something and gets real numbers, while the inverse gets imaginary units i, j and k. Now we could also revert the picture and make time imaginary and the spacelike axes real. Then we could also let time 'move sideways'. Now we can place an observer there and that observer would see time like we see time, even if his entire world is rotated 'sideways'. This idea is a difficult tricky to understand, but I have written kind of 'book': https://docs.google.com/present/view?id=dd8jz2tx_3gfzvqgd6 In this picture time is not just a universal parameter, but a local measure. And that time can be 'rotated sideways', which would cause several unusual effects. >> We all advance into the positive direction in time, whereever we are. >> But we cannot be everywhere. >> >> If we are somewhere, we advance into the positive direction in time. But >> this direction is positive only there and not necessarily everywhere else. >> >> Relativity uses Lorentz transformation. and a Lorentz transform could be >> imagined as complex rotation of the axis of time. >> >> Now every location has such an axis, because every location has a local >> time. Because two locations can have an axis of time in an angle, the >> angle could eventually exceed 180 °, what is actually a rotation into >> the opposite direction. >> > > But it is not. A basic spacetime diagram uses coordinates (ct,x), where x is horizontal and ct is vertical. Usually c is taken to be 1, so x and t are in the same distance units (light years). A moving body will have coordinates (t',x') related to (t,x) through the LTE. The higher the speed v of the body is, both coordinates t' and x' are closer to the line t=x (which is the speed of light). Those t' and x' lines look as a rotation but that rotation can not exceed the limit of t=x. Therefore, within those constraints, the coordinate t' is still moving from yesterday to tomorrow. This is still based on a single parameter for time, which must therefore be universally valid. I want time to be a local measure and that local time goes uniformly from minus to plus. >> This direction is still positive, because time is a local measure and >> only the time of an observed system could run backwards. Whereever you are, your local time runs forward at the same rate of 1s per s. But these seconds are not always the same and they don't necessarily run in the same direction. TH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2021-07-29 06:41 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0ad066cc-99fc-4d66-89fe-86f4ac8f3020n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #558850 |
On Thursday, 29 July 2021 at 07:27:55 UTC+2, Thomas Heger wrote: > Hi NG > > 'local time' is the idea, that time is not a universal uniform > parameter, which a cosmic clock provides, but strictly local. No, that's not it. The distinction that matters is *proper* time vs *coordinate* time. The former is what *every* (working) clock ticks, whether the clock's frame of reference is inertial or not (!): it's absolute and universal, every clock ticks the one and only universal time (or we just violate relativity). Coordinate-time instead is a dimension of reference frames, and it matches proper time only for the clocks that are at rest in that specific frame: in that sense it is *local*, as a reference frame is a local projection of spacetime from the point of view of the observer at the origin of that frame: put simply, e.g. time dilation and length contraction are distortion effects introduced by the projection (then more should be said here about the distinction real/measured/seen...(*)). Time in physics is a *primitive* notion (at least up to and including QM), the time parameter of the system, aka the parameter of evolution: and with (Einstein's) relativity it is of course *proper* time that we mean. (Again, see the study I have linked if that sounds exotic, it's utterly trivial in fact.) That said, I have to warn the innocent reader that misunderstanding the notion of time, messing it up as in "clocks define time" (plain circular indeed), and in fact forgetting about proper time altogether, is unfortunately a mainstream plague that affects 99%+ of what's published and said all over the place, and is in fact the fundamental source of a misunderstanding of "time" and what that even means, up to the present search for a putative missing link between classical and quantum where no such link is even needed... (*) SR 101, inertial twins: <https://jp-diegidio.github.io/STUDY.Physics.SpecialRelativity/InertialFrames/App/index.html> (Notice, it is not even true that we cannot draw a diagram for light...) More could be said, but it's only up to you to understand. HTH, Julio
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web