Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #450739
| Path | csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 |
| Date | Sat, 24 Feb 2018 19:39:52 +0100 |
| Lines | 40 |
| Message-ID | <ffdprlFajorU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <caf52c8a-289c-424d-a567-01e901990dc5@googlegroups.com> <fett9sFn8s9U1@mid.individual.net> <p6cgpf$1k8$1@dont-email.me> <ff3gkjF18l1U1@mid.individual.net> <p6i2n2$9sm$1@dont-email.me> <ff3ikhF1n19U1@mid.individual.net> <p6i5gq$thq$1@dont-email.me> <ff5cm9Fdsc4U1@mid.individual.net> <p6kcke$920$1@dont-email.me> <ff7p2cFu5j3U1@mid.individual.net> <p6n9o4$s7l$1@dont-email.me> <p6n9sl$d3a$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| Mime-Version | 1.0 |
| Content-Type | text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding | 7bit |
| X-Trace | individual.net UurTENm26u17eAf47FbRFwL69XKx3xhzizp6X5/5tiVHb3Sva7 |
| Cancel-Lock | sha1:+hQ7CZT7KhqBQqOdYrml1QIegdw= |
| User-Agent | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 |
| In-Reply-To | <p6n9sl$d3a$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| Xref | csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:450739 |
Show key headers only | View raw
Am 22.02.2018 um 21:40 schrieb Evonne Lamarr: >>> If time would be local and 'local' equivalent to a subset of something >>> more complex, as observed from an arbitrary location, than the world we >>> observe must be 'relative' as well. >> >> Fortunately, it is not. >>> >>> IOW: if we could (and would) twist the axis of time into a >>> new/different direction, then another world must appear, while ours >>> would disappear. >>> This world would depend on that other axis of time, hence would come >>> equipped with some kind of universe, which is different than ours. >> >> Time is part of our reality model and reality does not depend on what >> model we use. > > You just hate germans, as I can translate. For whatever obscure reason. > Anti-German sentiments are not that rare among Czech people. Anyhow... That time is part of our reality, that is certainly acceptable. But this was not the question. I said, that our time is not the only time possible, hence time is not universal. The reason is a little tricky to explain. A very good book about this subject is written by Alexander Franklin Mayer and called 'Geometry of time'. Unfortunately it's pretty expensive and the free pdf-version is not available anymore (as far as I know). TH
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2018-02-17 00:07 -0800
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2018-02-17 15:27 -0800
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-18 01:21 -0800
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-18 19:00 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-18 19:31 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-20 22:01 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-20 22:07 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-20 22:35 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-20 22:55 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-21 15:06 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-21 19:09 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-21 11:19 -0800
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-22 12:49 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-22 21:38 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Evonne Lamarr <rairi@liwowa.ar> - 2018-02-22 20:40 +0000
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-22 21:43 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-24 19:39 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-25 20:27 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Eveline Hurst <rutu@rwsrnlv.ee> - 2018-02-25 21:08 +0000
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Libor 'Poutnik' Stříž <poutnik@privacy.net> - 2018-02-26 07:05 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Eveline Hurst <rutu@rwsrnlv.ee> - 2018-02-26 13:11 +0000
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-26 11:47 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Ický Bezdrátovì <ikbe@wmkfre.np> - 2018-02-28 12:47 +0000
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2018-02-22 21:23 -0800
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2018-02-26 18:40 +0100
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2018-02-18 18:57 -0600
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-19 15:21 +0000
Re: Fundamental Physics Reconciles 2+2=5 and 2+2=4 Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-03-25 23:24 +0100
csiph-web