Speed of time ?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Obvious Leo »

Starfall wrote: I do not understand why (and how) Hobbes is arguing with this.
I must admit I was rather surprised to see such a strident argument being presented in a philosophy of science forum. This is a simple question which any high school physics student would be expected to be able to answer correctly. Hobbes may be alarmed to learn that his head his aging faster than his feet but he ought to be grateful that it is. it is this fact which is holding him to the surface of the planet.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Cerveny wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Sorry to disappoint you, but it has been proven to be true. Two jets; synchronised clocks, one flies east, the other west. As each are effectively travelling a X speed, one travels against the rotation of the earth, the other with it, they are doing different speeds. With the earth it speed into the future at a greater rate, against the earth at a slower rate. When they meet the clocks are out of sync.
You tell me why that is the case!
That, you have measured/seen (macroscopically) any value, does not mean that the subject has been affected, belive me. Jet, very speed muons flying around you do not slow down your life. :)
The situation is (of course) different in quantum mechanics: measurement (interaction) fixes the subject into the history...
I am not disappointed at all, I am only always rather sad from a lack of common sense :(
I not going to "believe" you. Why should I? You are obviously crazy.
I'd ask you again to explain how the clocks get out of sync, but I think it would be a waste of time.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Cerveny wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Sorry to disappoint you, but it has been proven to be true. Two jets; synchronised clocks, one flies east, the other west. As each are effectively travelling a X speed, one travels against the rotation of the earth, the other with it, they are doing different speeds. With the earth it speed into the future at a greater rate, against the earth at a slower rate. When they meet the clocks are out of sync.
You tell me why that is the case!
That, you have measured/seen (macroscopically) any value, does not mean that the subject has been affected, belive me. Jet, very speed muons flying around you do not slow down your life. :)
The situation is (of course) different in quantum mechanics: measurement (interaction) fixes the subject into the history...
I am not disappointed at all, I am only always rather sad from a lack of common sense :(
I not going to "believe" you. Why should I? You are obviously crazy.
I'd ask you again to explain how the clocks get out of sync, but I think it would be a waste of time.
How can I trust obscure synchronization when your faith misses 70 percent of the matter?
Why do you not sychronize against the sun, galagy?
Why a quantization of your faith fails for eighty years?
Enjoy your obscure faith :)
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Cerveny wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Cerveny wrote:
That, you have measured/seen (macroscopically) any value, does not mean that the subject has been affected, belive me. Jet, very speed muons flying around you do not slow down your life. :)
The situation is (of course) different in quantum mechanics: measurement (interaction) fixes the subject into the history...
I am not disappointed at all, I am only always rather sad from a lack of common sense :(
I not going to "believe" you. Why should I? You are obviously crazy.
I'd ask you again to explain how the clocks get out of sync, but I think it would be a waste of time.
How can I trust obscure synchronization when your faith misses 70 percent of the matter?
Why do you not sychronize against the sun, galagy?
Why a quantization of your faith fails for eighty years?
Enjoy your obscure faith :)
Please refer to the answer I made above.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny »

It's so easy to prove that the real contraction or dilation declared by special relativity are nonsense. Just swap the subject (observer) to an object and you have got just opposite results. Of course, we can measure/see some differences, but these results are caused by different delay of signals and do not affect observed objects in any case...
Last edited by Cerveny on Sun Dec 27, 2015 7:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Cerveny wrote:It's so easy to prove that the real contraction or dilation declared by special relativity are nonsense. Just swap the subject (observer) to an object and you have got the opposite results. Of course, we can measure/see the differences, but these incorrect results are caused by the delay signals.
Please refer to the answer I made above.
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Obvious Leo »

Cerveny wrote:It's so easy to prove that the real contraction or dilation declared by special relativity are nonsense. Just swap the subject (observer) to an object and you have got the opposite results. Of course, we can measure/see the differences, but these incorrect results are caused by the delay signals.
Quite so. The co-ordinate time of SR is a mathematical construct, not a physical one, so in the case of relativistic inertial motion there is no preferred referential frame for the observer. The earth is moving away from the spaceship at the same speed as the spaceship is moving away from the earth.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Cerveny wrote:It's so easy to prove that the real contraction or dilation declared by special relativity are nonsense. Just swap the subject (observer) to an object and you have got the opposite results. Of course, we can measure/see the differences, but these incorrect results are caused by the delay signals.
Please refer to the answer I made above.
Dear boy, apparently it was an inaccuracy of measuring apparatus or mistaken method or misinterpretation. Or all together :(
In addition, here is an important "law" of physics: If someone really wants to measure up the specific value, it is measured. The finer and not-reproducible experiment is, the more likely he got it. You can apply it at finding of Higgs boson...
Last edited by Cerveny on Mon May 18, 2015 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Obvious Leo
Posts: 4007
Joined: Wed May 13, 2015 1:05 am
Location: Australia

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Obvious Leo »

Cerveny wrote: If someone really wants to measure up the specific value, it is measured.
"It is the theory which determines what the observer will observe".....Albert Einstein

If we design our models of physics specifically to predict what the observer will observe we can claim only a Pyrrhic victory when the observer duly goes ahead and observes what our models have predicted. The Higgs boson is an excellent example. Most of the deeper thinkers in the world of particle physics would have been a hell of a lot more excited if this missing boson had NOT been discovered in the predicted mass range.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny »

Cerveny wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Cerveny wrote:It's so easy to prove that the real contraction or dilation declared by special relativity are nonsense. Just swap the subject (observer) to an object and you have got the opposite results. Of course, we can measure/see the differences, but these incorrect results are caused by the delay signals.
Please refer to the answer I made above.
Dear boy, apparently it was an inaccuracy of measuring apparatus or mistaken method or misinterpretation. Or all together :(
In addition, here is an important "law" of physics: If someone really wants to measure up the specific value, it is measured. The finer and not-reproducible experiment is, the more likely he got it. You can apply it at finding of Higgs boson...
http://www.techtimes.com/articles/19802 ... er-all.htm :(
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Not relevant.

If a car does not work, does not mean that a horse can't walk.
User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 603
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Not relevant.

If a car does not work, does not mean that a horse can't walk.
It only means that you should rely on common sense, if there is any...
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

Cerveny wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Not relevant.

If a car does not work, does not mean that a horse can't walk.
It only means that you should rely on common sense, if there is any...
No it does not.
petm1
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:13 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by petm1 »

My common sense says that it is the present moment as counted by a clock that increases in duration causing our counts to slow down. The person ahead of me while falling into a black hole spends more time in his present moment than I, hence his clock ticks slower. The more space you occupy per unit of time the longer your present, hence the faster you go the longer you duration in space/time. If the light I am receiving now Is the leading edge of my present moment then my consciousness lags behind with my actions even farther back, I am centered within my one second frame of reference held in place by my mass as my mind moves along with the photons. Time like space is what I exist within both are needed, one just as real as the other and if you look at it like me you realise that every direction you can see in space is the same direction in time, I think of it as space is the present moment we all share. GPS to me proves that there is one present moment for all of matter we just can not see it because the present is not an observable just past events are. Think about it looking out into space is looking back into time opposites yet the same, Space/time. Dilation is the comoving frame of existence we see it all the time while moving two separate observers together, that sign on the side of the road dilates the closers you come to it until you share the same moment, and as you move away it retreats to the past. Everything dilates in time think of 9.8 meters per second per second of acceleration as real motion in time, us dilating into the future, and the illusion is a static Earth.
duszek
Posts: 2271
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: Thin Air

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by duszek »

How can a present moment have duration at all ?
Is it three seconds of the closest future and three second of the closest past ?

We experience the passing of time differently, yes. If we suffer a terrible pain (on a dentist´s chair for instance) then the time passes too slowly for us.
But this personal experience does not influence the time measured by a clock.
Post Reply