Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #384343
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: Questions for SRians |
| Date | 2016-05-26 16:54 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <ni7rb8$ec0$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <ni7843$l20$4@pcls7.std.com> <ni79u0$1jp9$2@gioia.aioe.org> <57473228$0$48304$c3e8da3$88b277c5@news.astraweb.com> <ni7fh7$1sh7$2@gioia.aioe.org> <4e1810ed-a47f-4ea5-ad3f-172a610630c6@googlegroups.com> |
On 5/26/2016 4:16 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 2:33:15 PM UTC-4, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/26/2016 12:28 PM, benj wrote: >>> On 05/26/2016 12:57 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 5/26/2016 11:26 AM, Michael Moroney wrote: >>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, May 26, 2016 at 10:44:05 AM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote: >>>>>>> kenseto <setoken@att.net> writes: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, May 25, 2016 at 6:46:23 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We have one car following a certain path at 20 mph. When it >>>>>>>>> reaches its >>>>>>>>> destination, its odometer has a certain value. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We have another car that follows the exact same path as the first >>>>>>>>> car, >>>>>>>>> except it travels at 100 mph. When it reaches its destination, >>>>>>>>> will its >>>>>>>>> odometer measure the same as that of the first car? Why or why not? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We have a bunch more cars following the exact same path, all with >>>>>>>>> different >>>>>>>>> speeds. When they reach the destination, will their odometers >>>>>>>>> measure the >>>>>>>>> same as that of the first car? Why or why not? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You claim "The different odometer readings would be due to the >>>>>>>>> different >>>>>>>>> speeds." Here we have many different cars all following the same >>>>>>>>> path at >>>>>>>>> different speeds. Do you actually claim the odometer values will be >>>>>>>>> different due to the different speeds? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sigh....if the cars travel different paths the different odometer >>>>>>>> readings >>>>>>>> when they meet again is due to their different speeds. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Can't you read, Ken? I just got through describing how a bunch of >>>>>>> cars all >>>>>>> followed the exact same path but at different speeds and asked about >>>>>>> their >>>>>>> odometer readings, and you go off talking about cars taking >>>>>>> different paths! >>>>> >>>>>> Idiot.....we were talking above two car going from Chicago to NY via >>>>>> different paths. Gee you are stupid. >>>>> >>>>> No, we are talking about different cars following the _same_ path from >>>>> Chicago to New York. We are trying to resolve that kooky claim of yours >>>>> "The different odometer readings would be due to the different speeds." >>>>> by showing you how odometers measure distance, not speed, with two >>>>> thought experiments. Thought experiment 1: Multiple cars take the exact >>>>> same path from Chicago to NY but at different speeds, we compare the >>>>> odometer readings. 2: Multiple cars take different paths from >>>>> Chicago to >>>>> NY, but all go at the same speed. Two experiments, each with only one >>>>> parameter being varied in each. From the results of these >>>>> experiments, we >>>>> will know whether odometer readings depend on distance or speed. >>>>> >>>>>>> Again: Do cars all taking the exact same path but at different >>>>>>> speeds record >>>>>>> the same odometer reading, which would mean the odometer reading >>>>>>> doesn't >>>>>>> depend on speed? Why or why not? >>>>> >>>>> Why won't you answer this? >>>>> >>>> >>>> He is clearly being nonresponsive. Therefore you have won the argument. >>>> >>>> Ken HATES losing an argument. Makes him sick to the stomach. >>> >>> Odd ALWAYS "wins" the argument no matter which side he takes in a >>> debate. Lawyers are like that. He just changes the meaning of words >>> until he "wins". >> >> I haven't changed the meaning of any words. > > Yes you did or at least physicists did. Right, in the 1800s, when fields were first described and defined. So if you DID NOT PROPERLY LEARN the meaning of "field" when you studied it in the 1950s, that not the fault of physicists, it's YOUR fault. > You said that a field is not a medium > but it can have properties like a medium. And nobody has EVER said that the only thing that has properties is a medium. A chair can have legs like a table. This doesn't mean anything that has legs is a table, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean a chair is a table. Likewise, a field can have properties like a material medium. This doesn't mean that anything that has properties is a material medium, and it CERTAINLY doesn't mean that a field is a material medium. > > What I have related is the >> meaning of words as used by physicists. If you have a problem with the >> meaning of words as used by physicists, then don't blame me for that. > > If physicists are infallible then why they were not able to come up with > a viable theory of gravity? Because science is not dead, Ken. There are still open questions to answer. This doesn't mean that what is known so far is WRONG. It just means that not everything still to go is known. It is perfectly possible that everything known to date is RIGHT, and still we don't have all the answers about the stuff that ISN'T known. I know you want a piece of the attention pie. You don't do yourself any favors by claiming physicists are WRONG when you don't even know what the words mean that they use. >> >>> >>> What you don't get Kenseto is that the cars seem to be traveling the >>> same paths but they aren't. Because they change speed, the car length >>> changes and since the road is a moving frame to people in the car the >>> road length is changing too. Time also changes. Since time measurements >>> are part of velocity (speed) those readings are wrong too. The end >>> result is that nothing reads what you think it would but is in perfect >>> agreement with SR. It's all so simple. Ask anyone here, especially Odd >>> Boinker. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-21 14:38 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-21 20:56 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2016-05-22 10:54 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-23 09:35 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-24 08:40 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-24 07:21 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 09:30 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-24 07:28 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 09:54 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-24 16:55 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 13:55 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-24 14:59 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 09:19 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-24 12:14 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 14:18 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 06:50 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 09:40 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 13:00 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 06:40 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:46 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 07:06 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-25 14:51 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 13:44 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 14:05 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 04:51 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 07:29 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 08:33 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 08:53 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 09:23 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 11:56 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 13:01 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 16:12 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 05:14 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 09:00 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-25 22:45 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 06:16 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 09:23 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 08:19 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 10:25 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 09:19 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 12:59 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 14:40 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:59 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-26 14:43 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 08:10 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 08:21 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-26 16:26 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-05-26 09:42 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 11:57 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-05-26 13:28 -0400
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 13:33 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 14:16 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 16:54 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-26 17:36 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 10:50 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 14:48 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-27 14:51 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-27 17:03 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 13:53 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-26 14:06 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 14:57 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-05-27 02:46 +0000
Re: Questions for SRians RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-26 10:11 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-27 11:17 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2016-05-28 16:11 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 08:22 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 08:46 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 09:15 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 13:35 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 14:02 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 11:35 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 11:41 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-25 08:59 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2016-05-25 09:20 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-25 21:48 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-26 06:09 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2016-05-25 00:04 +0200
Re: Questions for SRians Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-05-24 16:47 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-27 12:03 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 14:34 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-05-29 22:04 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2016-05-29 22:26 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2016-06-03 10:42 -0500
Re: Questions for SRians Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-05-22 14:20 +0200
Re: Questions for SRians kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-05-23 08:37 -0700
Re: Questions for SRians Dirk Van de moortel <dirkvandemoortel@hotspam.not> - 2016-05-23 18:20 +0200
csiph-web