Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #616592 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-08-02 00:49 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-08-04 12:26 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 107 — 15 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 00:49 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-02 13:56 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-02 15:03 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-02 15:08 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-02 15:17 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-02 16:16 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 billv <billv@nowhere.void.net> - 2023-08-02 19:12 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 23:29 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 06:05 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 06:46 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 08:17 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:39 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 11:21 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 11:28 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 12:37 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 12:45 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:15 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:20 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:44 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 13:46 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:20 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-03 17:57 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:21 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 20:51 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 13:27 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 21:18 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 23:17 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 23:48 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 11:05 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-04 11:47 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 10:06 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 10:59 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 15:53 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 12:56 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 13:07 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 22:54 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-04 22:46 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 10:28 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Vidal Barabashev <dlva@vvhivdbs.ab> - 2023-08-05 17:50 +0000
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 10:53 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-04 11:54 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 13:01 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 22:59 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 13:43 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 11:12 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 15:41 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 12:52 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-04 13:03 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 23:28 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 21:42 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 15:02 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-05 12:58 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 19:20 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-05 16:54 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 18:14 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 23:24 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 21:42 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-06 21:22 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 22:35 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Dillan Novoselitsky <doik@olokkeol.la> - 2023-08-07 09:04 +0000
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 11:14 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-06 16:55 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 15:05 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-06 17:51 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 16:23 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-06 19:17 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 17:20 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-06 19:52 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-06 22:02 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-06 11:45 +0200
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 10:35 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-05 21:41 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-06 11:45 +0200
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-05 10:51 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Murel Bah <ulhm@eaamemaa.ml> - 2023-08-05 18:10 +0000
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Liod Shakhtmeister <adlh@emlhsdha.os> - 2023-08-07 08:10 +0000
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-05 14:50 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-04 22:32 +0200
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 13:53 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 14:40 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 15:24 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 15:28 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-06 15:30 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 11:53 -0400
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 10:54 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 16:21 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 16:44 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-06 16:48 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 12:37 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 13:11 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:40 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:48 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> - 2023-08-03 11:24 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 12:37 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 billv <billv@nowhere.void.net> - 2023-08-02 18:20 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 17:54 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 billv <billv@nowhere.void.net> - 2023-08-02 22:23 -0500
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-03 10:34 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 23:31 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-02 23:27 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-02 14:26 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2023-08-03 07:54 +0200
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 04:18 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 05:08 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 07:11 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-04 08:32 -0700
Re: Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-04 12:26 -0400
Page 1 of 6 [1] 2 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 00:49 -0700 |
| Subject | Time as "what clocks indicate" - part 2 |
| Message-ID | <c4476fcd-d3a4-4915-8f86-1d16e1cf26c1n@googlegroups.com> |
On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] knows what it is. UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of your tale. The culture is responsible for it.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 13:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6d53eb39-fbcf-4ea0-a77a-989827779a67n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616592 |
On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. > > And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries > of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] > knows what it is. > UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. > That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of > your tale. The culture is responsible for it. Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 15:03 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <593e7af1-56eb-46f3-a1ac-530125114486n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616620 |
El miércoles, 2 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:56:24 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. > > > > And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries > > of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] > > knows what it is. > > UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. > > That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of > > your tale. The culture is responsible for it. > Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change. Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 15:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <2cbc1c7e-1de3-4115-97be-718355e7075bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616627 |
On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 3:03:29 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > El miércoles, 2 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:56:24 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. > > > > > > And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries > > > of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] > > > knows what it is. > > > UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. > > > That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of > > > your tale. The culture is responsible for it. > > Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change. > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? If you haven't changed no time has passed! :)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 15:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <923922d5-e72c-4a67-b44c-2dd71e2ea67bn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616627 |
On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 3:03:29 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > El miércoles, 2 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:56:24 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. > > > > > > And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries > > > of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] > > > knows what it is. > > > UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. > > > That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of > > > your tale. The culture is responsible for it. > > Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change. > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? Will you cease aging if you sit still? Time= Change/Rate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 16:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c7ea26a3-d170-4667-a6f2-6bf80df3a471n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616627 |
On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 3:03:29 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > El miércoles, 2 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:56:24 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. > > > > > > And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries > > > of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] > > > knows what it is. > > > UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. > > > That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of > > > your tale. The culture is responsible for it. > > Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change. > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? We can infer from the fact that time= distance/speed that time = change/ rate for other processes aside from speed.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | billv <billv@nowhere.void.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 19:12 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kj09nlF5qb3U6@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #616631 |
On 8/2/2023 6:16 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 3:03:29 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: >> El miércoles, 2 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:56:24 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: >>> On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 12:49:07 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: >>>> On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 17:04:36 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: >>>> >>>>> It is clear that you do not know what "time" is. Actually nobody knows what time is. >>>> >>>> And that's the point of your magnificient discoveries >>>> of its violating common sense properties: nobody [of you] >>>> knows what it is. >>>> UT[ime]C, T[ime]AI, zone times - that's what [a] time is. >>>> That's "what clocks indicate". Time is from outside of >>>> your tale. The culture is responsible for it. >>> Everyone, even Augustine, knows what time is, but he had trouble defining it as do the relativists. We have available a perfectly good mathematical and physics definition of time: Time = Distance/Speed. From this we can understand time is a comparison of rates of change. >> Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > We can infer from the fact that time= distance/speed that time = change/ rate for other processes aside from speed. inferences... No thanks.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-02 23:29 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f827e923-dab5-4d12-bdeb-108981fa12c9n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616627 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us about it, poor halfbrain.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 06:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5236b0d1-bf1e-40a3-a2fb-552b71a4e965n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616651 |
El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > about it, poor halfbrain. Sure: Time is what a clock reads. In every possible physical experiment you have to use 1) clocks and 2) measuring rods.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 06:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e98f4292-777b-4ba0-8a6b-3f8150977709n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616671 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > about it, poor halfbrain. > Sure: > > Time is what a clock reads. Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, what clocks read doesn't match them at all. > In every possible physical experiment you have to use 1) clocks and 2) measuring rods. What is, BTW the longest measuring rod you've ever seen, poor halfbrain?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 08:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fcafe4ba-5ea8-421f-a6ac-9329ec1824a6n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616674 |
El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 9:46:09 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > > about it, poor halfbrain. > > Sure: > > > > Time is what a clock reads. > Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, > what clocks read doesn't match them at all. You totally ignore what the people, which runs the GPS system, use: See https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200M.pdf "The carrier frequencies for the L1 and L2 signals shall be coherently derived from a common frequency source within the SV. The nominal frequency of this source -- as it appears to an observer on the ground -- is 10.23 MHz. The SV carrier frequency and clock rates -- as they would appear to an observer located in the SV -- are offset to compensate for relativistic effects. The clock rates are offset by deltaf/f = -4.4647E-10, equivalent to a change in the P-code chipping rate of 10.23 MHz offset by a deltaf = -4.5674E-3 Hz. This is equal to 10.2299999954326 MHz". Again, the satellite clock ticks at 10.2299999954326 MHz. That clock signal is received on the ground at 10.23 MHz. > > In every possible physical experiment you have to use 1) clocks and 2) measuring rods. > What is, BTW the longest measuring rod you've ever seen, poor > halfbrain? "The meter; symbol: m, is the base unit of length in the International System of Units (SI). The meter was originally defined in 1791 as one ten-millionth of the distance from the equator to the North Pole along a great circle, so the Earth's circumference is approximately 40000 km. In 1799, the metre was redefined in terms of a PROTOTYPE METER BAR. The actual bar used was changed in 1889. In 1960, the meter was redefined in terms of a certain number of wavelengths of a certain emission line of krypton-86. The current definition was adopted in 1983 and modified slightly in 2002 to clarify that the meter is a measure of proper length. From 1983 until 2019, the metre was formally defined as the length of the path travelled by light in a vacuum in 1/299792458 of a second. After the 2019 redefinition of the SI base units, this definition was rephrased to include the definition of a second in terms of the caesium frequency ΔνCs".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 10:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1416605e-d103-4101-a21f-a2766b2a0b12n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616678 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 17:17:51 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 9:46:09 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > > > about it, poor halfbrain. > > > Sure: > > > > > > Time is what a clock reads. > > Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, > > what clocks read doesn't match them at all. > You totally ignore what the people, which runs the GPS system, use: Oppositely - you do. https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/what-is-gps-time/ This is what GPS clocks read, poor halfbrain. Too bad.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 11:21 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f933aa0f-7427-483e-8b05-67832b66d3ecn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616692 |
El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 13:39:48 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 17:17:51 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 9:46:09 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > > > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > > > > about it, poor halfbrain. > > > > Sure: > > > > > > > > Time is what a clock reads. > > > Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, > > > what clocks read doesn't match them at all. > > You totally ignore what the people, which runs the GPS system, use: > Oppositely - you do. > https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/what-is-gps-time/ > This is what GPS clocks read, poor halfbrain. Too bad. For sure that is not an official page about GPS. All those aspects are covered in the official document, which anyone can read: https://www.gps.gov/technical/icwg/IS-GPS-200M.pdf
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <036343b5-65b5-4bb5-8a5c-24fb29211adfn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616700 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 13:39:48 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 17:17:51 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 9:46:09 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > > > > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > > > > > about it, poor halfbrain. > > > > > Sure: > > > > > > > > > > Time is what a clock reads. > > > > Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, > > > > what clocks read doesn't match them at all. > > > You totally ignore what the people, which runs the GPS system, use: > > Oppositely - you do. > > https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/what-is-gps-time/ > > This is what GPS clocks read, poor halfbrain. Too bad. > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation between them. But you're free to enchant the reality.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 12:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d8aeee62-9445-458f-8340-7102aab745can@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616703 |
On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 13:39:48 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 17:17:51 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 9:46:09 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 15:05:35 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 2:29:39 UTC-4, Maciej Wozniak escribió: > > > > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 00:03:29 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Great definition. It means that if I sit in a coach, my speed is 0 and my distance is 0, so my time is undefined? > > > > > > > Do you have another opinion? Is it defined? Tell us > > > > > > > about it, poor halfbrain. > > > > > > Sure: > > > > > > > > > > > > Time is what a clock reads. > > > > > Not in your physics idiocies, sorry. Anyone can check GPS, > > > > > what clocks read doesn't match them at all. > > > > You totally ignore what the people, which runs the GPS system, use: > > > Oppositely - you do. > > > https://timetoolsltd.com/gps/what-is-gps-time/ > > > This is what GPS clocks read, poor halfbrain. Too bad. > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 12:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c33dfe06-096c-4ba1-9b42-4277ef151da4n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616716 |
El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 15:37:02 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. > GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do. You are talking nonsense. When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were not sure of the relativistic effects occurring at the satellite orbit. So they programmed the GPS satellite clock with two operational frequencies (10.23 MHz and 10.2299999954326 MHz) which they were able to change from the ground. Initially, the tests were carried by using the 10.23 MHz frequency (assuming no relativity was involved). They run the system for 20 days and found that the system did no worked as intended. They changed the frequency to 10.2299999954326 MHz and the system worked as intended. The 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is calculated by using General Relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <a051a4b3-3e5b-4301-90fa-1ebdd8d7ef44n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616721 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 21:45:52 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 15:37:02 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > > > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > > > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > > > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > > > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. > > > GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do. > You are talking nonsense. > When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were not sure of the relativistic effects occurring at the satellite orbit You're talking nonsenses . When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were believing your bunch of idiots that your idiotic ISO clocks are really close to perfection and don't need any corrections. Of course, a mistake, And after some easy corrections clocks of GPS are "impossibly" synchronized and read t'=t, just like all serious clocks always did.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1ce0ea05-0e5a-46e7-a053-f4cd7d262f20n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616721 |
On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:45:52 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 15:37:02 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > > > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > > > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > > > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > > > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. > > > GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do. > You are talking nonsense. > When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were not sure of the relativistic effects occurring at the satellite orbit. So they programmed the GPS satellite clock with two operational frequencies (10.23 MHz and 10.2299999954326 MHz) > which they were able to change from the ground. Initially, the tests were carried by using the 10.23 MHz frequency (assuming no relativity was involved). They run the system for 20 days and found that the system did no worked as intended. They changed the frequency to 10.2299999954326 MHz and the system worked as intended. > The 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is calculated by using General Relativity. If you conflate the different functioning of the clocks in orbit with a prediction from relativity of a specific amount, you are mistaken. Relativity did not predict the specific amount.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:44 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fc2c3c94-b4f4-45ee-ad6b-28fc7102c34dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616731 |
On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 22:20:33 UTC+2, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:45:52 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 15:37:02 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > > > > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > > > > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > > > > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > > > > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. > > > > > GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do. > > You are talking nonsense. > > When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were not sure of the relativistic effects occurring at the satellite orbit. So they programmed the GPS satellite clock with two operational frequencies (10.23 MHz and 10.2299999954326 MHz) > > which they were able to change from the ground. Initially, the tests were carried by using the 10.23 MHz frequency (assuming no relativity was involved). They run the system for 20 days and found that the system did no worked as intended. They changed the frequency to 10.2299999954326 MHz and the system worked as intended. > > The 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is calculated by using General Relativity. > If you conflate the different functioning of the clocks in orbit with a prediction from relativity of a specific amount, you are mistaken. Relativity did not predict the specific amount. According to The Holiest Postulate clocks are to function identically. Everywhere. And that's why relativistic priests are keeping babbling that GPS clocks are "improper" or "broken". Poor idiots.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Paparios <mrios@ing.puc.cl> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-03 13:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <008beaf2-155c-4439-b1be-e96bf0976206n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616731 |
El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 16:20:33 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 12:45:52 PM UTC-7, Paparios wrote: > > El jueves, 3 de agosto de 2023 a las 15:37:02 UTC-4, Laurence Clark Crossen escribió: > > > On Thursday, August 3, 2023 at 11:28:58 AM UTC-7, Maciej Wozniak wrote: > > > > On Thursday, 3 August 2023 at 20:22:02 UTC+2, Paparios wrote: > > > > > > > For sure that is not an official page about GPS. > > > > And for sure there is nothing about "what clocks read" > > > > in your quoting. All the clocks of GPS read the same time > > > > scale, some seconds different from TAI. No moronic dilation > > > > between them. But you're free to enchant the reality. > > > > > GPS would work perfectly even if relativity were unknown because they would merely adjust the clocks for the empirically determined difference. That is really what they already do. > > You are talking nonsense. > > When they developed the GPS system around 1970, some of the engineers were not sure of the relativistic effects occurring at the satellite orbit. So they programmed the GPS satellite clock with two operational frequencies (10.23 MHz and 10.2299999954326 MHz) > > which they were able to change from the ground. Initially, the tests were carried by using the 10.23 MHz frequency (assuming no relativity was involved). They run the system for 20 days and found that the system did no worked as intended. They changed the frequency to 10.2299999954326 MHz and the system worked as intended. > > The 10.2299999954326 MHz frequency is calculated by using General Relativity. > If you conflate the different functioning of the clocks in orbit with a prediction from relativity of a specific amount, you are mistaken. Relativity did not predict the specific amount. Of course you are wrong. You can read a quite readable derivation in Paul Andersen page: https://paulba.no/pdf/GPS_clock_rate.pdf
[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