Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #400670 > unrolled thread

Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-03 02:08 -0800
    Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-12-03 10:35 -0800
    Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-04 00:38 -0800
      Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Pentcho Valev <pvalev@yahoo.com> - 2016-12-07 06:18 -0800
        Re: Past and Future Chantell Dillingham <intlii@dtilnignii.org> - 2016-12-07 14:31 +0000
          Re: Past and Future "David (Lord Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-12-07 06:40 -0800
          Re: Past and Future KronosPrime@outlook.com - 2016-12-07 06:43 -0800
    Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Yuette Sommerfield <fodedd@fodeddmmlemuole.org> - 2016-12-05 00:21 +0000
      Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2016-12-05 02:37 +0100
        Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-12-05 00:10 -0800
          Re: Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World Estrella Batey <yeaetl@sryeaet.org> - 2016-12-08 22:02 +0000

#400670 — Past and Future Are Happening RIGHT NOW in Einstein Schizophrenic World

"Time is NOT real: Physicists show EVERYTHING happens at the same time. The concept of time is simply an illusion made up of human memories, everything that has ever been and ever will be is happening RIGHT NOW. That is the theory according to a group of esteemed physicists who aim to solve one of the universe's mysteries. (...) They argue that there is a 'block-universe' where time and space are connected, otherwise known as spacetime. The theory, which is backed up Einstein's theory of relativity, states that space and time are part of a four dimensional structure where everything thing that has happened has its own co-ordinates in spacetime. This would allow everything to be 'real' in the sense that the past, and even the future, are still there in spacetime - making everything equally important as the present. Massachusetts Institute of Technology physicist Max Tegmark, told space.com: "We can portray our reality as either a three-dimensional place where stuff happens over time, or as a four-dimensional place where nothing happens ['block universe'] - and if it really is the second picture, then change really is an illusion, because there's nothing that's changing; it's all just there - past, present, future. "We have the illusion, at any given moment, that the past already happened and the future doesn't yet exist, and that things are changing. But all I'm ever aware of is my brain state right now. The only reason I feel like I have a past is that my brain contains memories."  http://www.express.co.uk/news/science/738387/Time-NOT-real-EVERYTHING-happens-same-time-einstein

"In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it. Not merely the validity of experience, but the very existence of external reality, was tacitly denied by their philosophy. The heresy of heresies was common sense. And what was terrifying was not that they would kill you for thinking otherwise, but that they might be right. For, after all, how do we know that two and two make four? Or that the force of gravity works? Or that the past is unchangeable? If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable what then?"  http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/o/orwell/george/o79n/chapter1.7.html

Time to sing hymns and contemplate sculptures:

http://www.everythingimportant.org/Einstein_worship/DivineEinstein.jpg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lE-I2I4i00 
 "No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel - He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive!" 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ 
 Max Tegmark: "We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxFXHircaI 
 Michio Kaku, Brian Cox, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, Lisa Randall: "Now, listen carefully. The faster you move, the heavier you get. Light travels at the same speed no matter how you look at it. No matter how I move relative to you light travels at the same speed. No matter who is doing the measurement and no matter what direction you are moving the speed of light is the same. The speed of light is the same no matter what direction or how fast... As you travel faster time slows down. Everything slows down. Everything slows down. Time slows down when you move. Time passes at a different rate. Clocks run slow. It's a monumental shift in how we see the world. It's a beautiful piece of science. It's a beautifully elegant theory. It's a beautiful piece of science. It's a beautiful piece..."

http://www.krugozormagazine.com/main/content/9-2009_Enshtein-3.jpg 
 "The Riverside Church in New York, west portal - upper line, second of right. In 1930, during a stay in New York, Albert Einstein and his wife visited the Riverside Church, too. During the detailed guided tour through the church Einstein was also shown the sculptures at the west portal. He was told that only one of the sculptures there represented a living person, and that was he himself. What Einstein is supposed to have thought in that moment when he heard that information and saw himself immortalized in stone? Contemporaries reported that he looked at the sculpture calmly and thoughtfully."

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#400703

Pentcho Valev wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Time to sing hymns and contemplate sculptures:
> 
> http://www.everythingimportant.org/Einstein_worship/DivineEinstein.jpg
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lE-I2I4i00
>  "No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein not Maxwell, Curie, or Bohr! His fame went glo-bell, he won the Nobel - He should have been given four! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor with brains galore! No-one could outshine Professor Einstein! He gave us special relativity, That's always made him a hero to me! No-one's as dee-vine as Albert Einstein, Professor in overdrive!"
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PkLLXhONvQ
>  Max Tegmark: "We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Everything is relative, even simultaneity, and soon Einstein's become a de facto physics deity. 'cos we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. We all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity. Yes we all believe in relativity, relativity, relativity."
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxFXHircaI
> 
> 
> http://www.krugozormagazine.com/main/content/9-2009_Enshtein-3.jpg
>  "The Riverside Church in New York, west portal - upper line, second of right. In 1930, during a stay in New York, Albert Einstein and his wife visited the Riverside Church, too. During the detailed guided tour through the church Einstein was also shown the sculptures at the west portal. He was told that only one of the sculptures there represented a living person, and that was he himself. What Einstein is supposed to have thought in that moment when he heard that information and saw himself imm
> 
> Pentcho Valev



What does "Happening" mean?


Doesn't it mean it ain't happen yet? 


It's Happening! Where? Look! Where?? It's Happening NOW!!!" Where?? Look
stupid!!


It's not happening. 
wait a minute, it'll happen..

I'm not going to fuckin wait, you wait..

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#400744

In Einstein's schizophrenic world past, present and future coexist because there is a cosmic conspiracy of the highest order:

https://www.amazon.com/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-Quandaries/dp/039335038X 
 Neil deGrasse Tyson, Death by Black Hole: And Other Cosmic Quandaries, pp. 123-124: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your imaginary spacecraft, a number of things have to happen. First of all, as the speed of your spacecraft increases, the length of everything - you, your measuring devices, your spacecraft - shortens in the direction of motion, as seen by everyone else. Furthermore, your own time slows down exactly enough so that when you haul out your newly shortened yardstick, you are guaranteed to be duped into measuring the same old constant value for the speed of light. What we have here is a cosmic conspiracy of the highest order."

http://www.redorbit.com/news/space/1113378923/cosmic-yarns-science-fiction-and-the-cosmic-speed-limit-042715/ 
 Robert Scherrer: "In fact, the laws for adding and subtracting speeds have to conspire to keep the speed of the light the same no matter how fast or in what direction an observer is moving. The only way to make this happen is for space and time to expand or contact as objects move."

https://plus.maths.org/content/einstein-relativity 
 David Tong: "Special relativity is where the famous equation E=mc^2 comes from. The central idea of the theory is that there is a speed limit in our Universe. The laws of physics conspire so that nothing can ever travel faster than the speed of light." 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc3-29dguFs 
 Brian Greene: "Einstein proposed a truly stunning idea - that space and time could work together, constantly adjusting by exactly the right amount so that no matter how fast you might be moving, when you measure the speed of light it always comes out to be 671000000 miles per hour." 

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/physics/special-relativity-nutshell.html 
 Brian Greene: "If space and time did not behave this way, the speed of light would not be constant and would depend on the observer's state of motion. But it is constant; space and time do behave this way. Space and time adjust themselves in an exactly compensating manner so that observations of light's speed yield the same result, regardless of the observer's velocity."

http://www.drboblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ethan-siegel-startswithabang1.jpeg

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#401010

Einsteinians brainwash the gullible world:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxFXHircaI 
 Michio Kaku, Brian Cox, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, Lisa Randall: "As you travel faster time slows down. Everything slows down. Everything slows down. Time slows down when you move. Time passes at a different rate. Clocks run slow. It's a monumental shift in how we see the world. It's a beautiful piece of science. It's a beautifully elegant theory. It's a beautiful piece of science. It's a beautiful piece..." 

https://cosmosmagazine.com/physical-sciences/five-ways-travel-through-time 
 "This is the easiest and most practical way to get to the far future - go really fast. According to Einstein's theory of special relativity, when you travel at speeds approaching the speed of light, time slows down for you relative to the outside world." 

http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/back-future-30th-anniversary-neil-degrasse-tyson-talks/story?id=32191481 
 Neil deGrasse Tyson: "We have ways of moving into the future. That is to have time tick more slowly for you than others, who you return to later on. We've known that since 1905, Einstein's special theory of relativity, which gives the precise prescription for how time would slow down for you if you are set into motion."

http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf 
 Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect practicalities such as the technology needed for reaching velocities comparable to the velocity of light, the cost of the fuel and the capacity of the traveller to sustain high accelerations), it shows that a sentient being can jump, "within a minute" (of his experienced time) arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, and see, and be part of, what (will) happen then on Earth. This is a clear way of realizing that the future "already exists" (as we can experience it "in a minute")."

Can a sentient being jump, within a minute of his experienced time, arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead?

If a sentient being CAN jump, within a minute of his experienced time, arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, then time is Einsteinian, relative, not real.

If a sentient being CANNOT jump, within a minute of his experienced time, arbitrarily far in the future, say sixty million years ahead, then time is Newtonian, absolute, real.

Note that the sentient being CANNOT jump arbitrarily far in the future if Einstein's 1905 constant-speed-of-light postulate is false. Curiously, even if the postulate were true (it is not), the sentient being still CANNOT jump arbitrarily far in the future (the deduction of time travel from Einstein's 1905 postulates is invalid).

Pentcho Valev

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#401012 — Re: Past and Future

Pentcho Valev wrote:

> http://www.bourbaphy.fr/damourtemps.pdf
>  Thibault Damour: "The paradigm of the special relativistic upheaval of
>  the usual concept of time is the twin paradox. Let us emphasize that
>  this striking example of time dilation proves that time travel (towards
>  the future) is possible. As a gedanken experiment (if we neglect

No, it is not and it cannot be possibly possible. Never had been and never 
will be. Why? Since the issue's substrate is pure NONSENSICAL. Hence, all 
there is, is my Divergent Matter theory, and a gazillion of others 
misunderstood false theories. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#401014 — Re: Past and Future

There is only the Now
The past is an artifact of the geometry 
The future is unused remaining Kinetic Energy 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#401016 — Re: Past and Future

There is only the Now
The Past is an artifact of geometry 
The Future is unused remaining Kinetic Energy 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#400799

Pentcho Valev wrote:

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxFXHircaI
>  Michio Kaku, Brian Cox, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, Lisa
>  Randall:
>  "Now, listen carefully. The faster you move, the heavier you get. Light
>  travels at the same speed no matter how you look at it.

Wishful thinking. For whatever reason. They simply can't prove the above. 
Required instruments are not available. Theorists.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#400806

The ’nym-shifting troll trolled as "Yuette Sommerfield":

> Pentcho Valev wrote:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BuxFXHircaI
>>  Michio Kaku, Brian Cox, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Greene, Lisa
>>  Randall:
>>  "Now, listen carefully. The faster you move, the heavier you get. Light
>>  travels at the same speed no matter how you look at it.
> 
> Wishful thinking.

No, the first one is just typical of the inaccuracy in *popular*-scientific 
statements combined with them being arranged as sound bites, for effect.

The concept of a “relativistic mass” that grows with relative speed that had 
been introduced by others, had been deprecated by Einstein, and has been 
abandoned in teaching long ago (why some scientists would continue to 
disseminate this more confusing, outdated concept is hard for me to 
understand).  Instead, mass is independent of the 3-momentum, therefore of 
the frame of reference and of relative velocity:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_in_special_relativity#Relativistic_mass>

So you do not “get heavier”, but you gain momentum relative to a frame of 
reference:

  p = γ m v = m v∕√(1 − v²∕c²)

where m is your mass, p is your (relative) momentum, and v is your 
(relative) speed.  Another way to look at it is your total energy

  E = γ m c² = m c²∕√(1 − v²∕c²).

Your total energy relative to something else increases as you are getting 
faster *relative to that something*, i.e. as v increases (assuming v > 0).

There are two interpretations of this, depending on the set of theories you 
employ:

In classical mechanics, if your total energy increases, your ability 
increases to impart momentum and to do work on a system; so the forces 
between you and other things increase (F = ∂p∕∂t).

In general relativity (GR), your increased total energy is a component of 
the energy–momentum tensor which corresponds to the curvature of spacetime 
around you (G^µν ≡ R_µν − ½ R g_µν = 8πG∕c⁴ T_µν, T⁰⁰ = ρ = ∂(E∕c²)∕∂V).
An increased curvature of spacetime around you makes you travel less 3-space 
in the same time – it looks like it is harder for you to move; also, objects 
around you are increasingly forced to move towards you, following ever more-
curved geodesics of spacetime, making it appear as if a force of gravitation 
between you and them is growing stronger.

As for the second statement, it has been experimentally confirmed
a thousandfold, if not more.  And there are practical applications.

> For whatever reason. They simply can't prove the above.

When will you *ever* learn?  Natural sciences like physics are not about 
proof, but about confirming or refuting theories that are models of the 
world, by experiments.  Which *has been done*, and the two theories of 
relativity have been confirmed in every single experiment so far.

> Required instruments are not available.

Utter nonsense, as you well know.  Just *this year* one of the instruments 
required (LIGO) spectacularly confirmed GR’s prediction of gravitational 
waves.  *One year ago*, an instrument (Planck spacecraft) enabled scientists 
to determine the age of the universe using GR.  *Two years ago*, another 
instrument (the LHC) that works based on special relativity (see “total 
energy” above) enabled scientists to find the elusive Higgs boson, 
confirming our models of the constituents of matter (QED and QCD) which
also would give wrong predictions without special relativity.  And so on.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_special_relativity>
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_general_relativity>

> Theorists.

Idiot.  *PLONK*

-- 
PointedEars

Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#400830

W dniu poniedziałek, 5 grudnia 2016 02:37:04 UTC+1 użytkownik Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn napisał:
> No, the first one is just typical of the inaccuracy in *popular*-scientific 
> statements combined with them being arranged as sound bites, for effect.
> 
> The concept of a “relativistic mass” that grows with relative speed that had 
> been introduced by others, had been deprecated by Einstein, and has been 
> abandoned in teaching long ago (why some scientists would continue to 
> disseminate this more confusing, outdated concept is hard for me to 
> understand).

Being a scientist doesn't necessarily make you wise. 
Quite simple, but you'll never understand it, because
being a scientist doesn't make you wise. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#401130

mlwozniak wrote:

>> The concept of a “relativistic mass” that grows with relative speed
>> that had been introduced by others, had been deprecated by Einstein,
>> and has been abandoned in teaching long ago (why some scientists would
>> continue to disseminate this more confusing, outdated concept is hard
>> for me to understand).
> 
> Being a scientist doesn't necessarily make you wise.
> Quite simple, but you'll never understand it, because being a scientist
> doesn't make you wise.

You are not going to call a half-engineer a scientist, would you. Please 
stop doing this mistake.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web