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

Groups > sci.physics > #692355

Re: The problem with Time

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/24/2018 4:53 AM, Keith Stein wrote:
> On 22/06/2018 22:08, benj wrote:
>> On 6/22/2018 1:58 PM, Keith Stein wrote:
>>> On 22/06/2018 01:24, The Starmaker wrote:
>>>> The problem with Time is...
>>>> the science guys messed up Time.
>>>>
>>>> The first mistake they made was trying to measure time...
>>>
>>> Philosophers talk about time,
>>> Science guys measure time, with clocks eh!
>>>
>>> The mistake they made was to believe that
>>> clocks are in any way affected by walking
>>> towards or away from them.
>>>
>>> Note that if clocks are not affected
>>> by walking towards them, then the velocity
>>> of light relative to you when you walk
>>> towards the light must be c+v, not c eh!
>>>
>>> keith stein
>>
>> Obviously you are no more a philosopher than Starfaker.
>>
>> The question is not are clocks affected by your motion with respect to
>> them but rather is your PERCEPTIOIN of their readings affected.
> 
> Of course clocks APPEAR to run slower if you move away from them,
> and the APPEAR to run faster when you move towards them. This is
> the well understood DOPPLER EFFECT, and if you account for it correctly
> then of course you do not require any relativistic time dilation.
> 
> 
> 
>> There is no aether drift
> 
> Agreed.
> 
>> so c+v Is ALWAYS totally stupid and wrong, wrong, wrong.
> 
> No! If clocks are not affected by walking towards them, then
> c+v is INEVITABLE eh!
> 
>                 A<-------- L m ------------->B
>                 TA                           TB
> 
> As viewed from stationary (laboratory) frame:
>                 Speed of light = L / (TB-TA) = c
> 
> As viewed from frame of reference in which laboratory is moving to the
> right at v m/s.
> Light must travel an extra distance               = v*(TB-TA)
> This being the distance B moves as the light travels from A to B.
> 
> Therefore speed of light as viewed from frame of reference in which
> laboratory is moving to the right at v m/s = c + v
> 
> keith stein
> 


if you see a clock 20 feet away,  you are 20 nanoseconds behind the time
it shows, as it takes about a nanosecond for light to travel 1 foot.

if the clock is atomic, with lighted numerics, and your 100 feet away,
then you are 100 nanoseconds late.

If you have 4 clocks around you 10 ft,  25 ft, 50 ft, 100 ft   which
clock is right ?

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

The problem with Time The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-21 17:24 -0700
  Re: The problem with Time benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-21 21:30 -0400
    Re: The problem with Time The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-21 22:22 -0700
      Re: The problem with Time mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-22 00:26 -0700
        Re: The problem with Time The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-22 00:54 -0700
          Re: The problem with Time benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-22 11:46 -0400
          Re: The problem with Time poraty6@gmail.com - 2018-06-28 15:07 -0700
      Re: The problem with Time benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-22 11:45 -0400
        Re: The problem with Time The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-06-22 11:25 -0700
    Re: The problem with Time Zprávn Udoucih <zpnvn@nwinst.ce> - 2018-06-22 11:47 +0000
    Re: The problem with Time "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-25 20:02 -0700
      Re: The problem with Time "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-25 21:07 -0700
      Re: The problem with Time Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-26 14:51 -0700
      Re: The problem with Time "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-26 20:12 -0700
        Re: The problem with Time "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-26 21:59 -0700
        Re: The problem with Time Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-28 14:01 -0700
          Re: The problem with Time "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-28 14:45 -0700
            Re: The problem with Time "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-28 19:18 -0700
            Re: The problem with Time Double-A <double-a3@hush.com> - 2018-06-29 13:16 -0700
              Re: The problem with Time "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-29 14:01 -0700
                Re: The problem with Time "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-30 14:41 -0700
  Re: The problem with Time mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-21 18:36 -0700
    Re: The problem with Time benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-21 21:50 -0400
      Re: The problem with Time mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-06-21 20:34 -0700
  Re: The problem with Time poraty149@gmail.com - 2018-06-21 21:02 -0700
  Re: The problem with Time Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-06-22 18:58 +0100
    Re: The problem with Time benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2018-06-22 17:08 -0400
      Re: The problem with Time Keith Stein <keithstein111@gmail.com> - 2018-06-24 10:53 +0100
        Re: The problem with Time Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-07-01 14:18 -0500
          Re: The problem with Time mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-07-01 16:55 -0700
  Re: The problem with Time "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-06-30 15:04 -0700
    Re: The problem with Time "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2018-06-30 15:36 -0700

csiph-web