Relativity?

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

Moderators: AMod, iMod

davidm
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:53 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:22 am
davidm wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:36 pm
ken wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:03 pm


I really do have to be absolutely precise. What about the clock in a phone? If the power source stays the same, then what would supposedly change that rate of change when traveling, and, and how exactly would 'the thing that supposedly changes the rate of change' actually be able to do it?
This has already been explained to you, several times, by uwot and me. Seriously, can you not comprehend what you read?
You only said light clock and a pendulum swing clock was also used for examples. They measure differently.

Whu? No they don't. This has been explained to you. I showed you how a light clock and a tick-tock clock are synchronized.

What is wrong with you? Did your momma drop you on your head when you were a wee one? :?

thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by thedoc » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:54 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:28 am
Observing what IS true and right in the first instance is very easily and simply done, once you know how to do it.

The issue with the way people called "scientists" are observing things is that they use other people's models, beliefs, and/or views prior to looking.
And doing it right does not always happen the first time something is observed.

In the 2nd line you are describing what a creationist does, come to a conclusion then find the evidence to support it, or make up the evidence, usually the latter.
Scientists gather the evidence and devise an explanation to fit the available evidence, understanding that if different evidence is found later, the theory may need to be changed.

thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by thedoc » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:57 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:53 am
What is wrong with you? Did your momma drop you on your head when you were a wee one? :?
More likely she dropped him on his butt, it would have more effect on his brain, there is nothing in his head that a good dropping would hurt.

thedoc
Posts: 6473
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by thedoc » Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:59 am

Ken seems to believe that everything is perfectly knowable right now, and would probably argue that we should stop all scientific inquiry, because there is nothing further to learn.

davidm
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:08 am

A light clock, a tick-tock clock, a pendulum clock and any other clock can be synchronized in the same frame. It is when they are in different frames that they will get out of sync. But this has been demonstrated to you over and over.

davidm
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:23 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:38 am
You say light takes no time to travel, if this is so, then nothing happened previously. It ALL happens NOW.
Wrong. Light travels at velocity c in a vacuum.

What is evidently confounding you is the idea that light takes no time to travel from its own point of view.

But light does not have a "point of view."

You're welcome. 8)

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:25 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:40 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 12:49 am
The mathematical description of physics, of what was once seen to happen, was the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth. Obviously when human beings look at things differently the mathematical description of physics changes. If you are under some sort of belief that the mathematical description of physics, in this day and age, is, ultimately, absolutely accurate and thus will not change, then you have another thing coming.
:lol:

I feel wholly confident in saying that uwot is NOT under this belief.
Then it would be better to NOT pose what is currently held as the mathematical description of physics as being what is actual fact and really and truly true, which is the very opposite of what you actually do.
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:40 am
Do you actually COMPREHEND what you READ?
Some times. Some times not. i am no different as you in this regard. For example, you do NOT yet actually comprehend what you read of what I write.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:28 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:49 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:32 am
davidm wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 7:51 pm


Theories are not the same as facts.

Example: evolution is a fact. The theory of evolution describes and explains the facts, while enabling scientists to make predictions and retrodictions based on their model of the facts -- their theory.
A very cumbersome and long drawn out way of what is inevitably just being able to look at and observe what the actual truth IS.
Would you care to clarify this latest nonsense of yours into a coherent statement?
WHY use a 'model' that then needs changing as people's views change?

Why not just look at what IS actually true from the beginning?

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:36 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:50 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:28 am
thedoc wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:12 am


Scientific models are based on what scientists actually observe, not on what they might observe in the future. Yes scientific models are constantly changing as scientists find better ways to observe things. If you think that scientists can observe something and always get it right the first time, you're living in a fantasy world.
Observing what IS true and right in the first instance is very easily and simply done, once you know how to do it.

The issue with the way people called "scientists" are observing things is that they use other people's models, beliefs, and/or views prior to looking.
Also, can you clarify this drivel?
Human beings tend to look at things based from previous assumptions.

For example, the assumption that there was a beginning, in regards to the Universe, is still, to this very day, an underlying assumption some people have and hold. This assumption, along with all other assumptions, helps to distort a person's ability to observe and see what IS the actual truth, almost immediately.

A person with this disability is unable to notice that they, them self, have it because of the very way that it disables the person.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:42 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:53 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:22 am
davidm wrote:
Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:36 pm


This has already been explained to you, several times, by uwot and me. Seriously, can you not comprehend what you read?
You only said light clock and a pendulum swing clock was also used for examples. They measure differently.

Whu? No they don't. This has been explained to you. I showed you how a light clock and a tick-tock clock are synchronized.

What is wrong with you? Did your momma drop you on your head when you were a wee one? :?
Do you really think your attempt at personal attacks really shows the brilliance that you are trying to portray, to others, that you have?

Yes of course you showed how both clocks can be synchronized at the beginning. But I asked you to clarify if they stay the same and how when BOTH are traveling at the same speed from the same frame of reference. Are you able to do that?

I have already explained HOW there could be discrepancy in that situation. You have NOT shown any thing yet in this regard.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:48 am

thedoc wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:54 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:28 am
Observing what IS true and right in the first instance is very easily and simply done, once you know how to do it.

The issue with the way people called "scientists" are observing things is that they use other people's models, beliefs, and/or views prior to looking.
And doing it right does not always happen the first time something is observed.
Obviously.
thedoc wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:54 am
In the 2nd line you are describing what a creationist does, come to a conclusion then find the evidence to support it, or make up the evidence, usually the latter.
People called "scientists" do the exact same thing also. Although people believe they may not do it, it will soon be realized just how much they all, subliminally, do it.
thedoc wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:54 am
Scientists gather the evidence and devise an explanation to fit the available evidence, understanding that if different evidence is found later, the theory may need to be changed.
People who call themselves scientists may like to think and/or believe they do that, but the actual truth is more revealing.

And gain the process you describe is an extremely very cumbersome and very long drawn out process, especially compared to the much easier, simpler, and quicker way to find and discover what the actual truth IS.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:53 am

thedoc wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:59 am
Ken seems to believe that everything is perfectly knowable right now, and would probably argue that we should stop all scientific inquiry, because there is nothing further to learn.
Two things wrong here, I neither believe or disbelieve any thing, and, and what seems to be the case here is absolutely wrong.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:00 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:08 am
A light clock, a tick-tock clock, a pendulum clock and any other clock can be synchronized in the same frame. It is when they are in different frames that they will get out of sync. But this has been demonstrated to you over and over.
What you have said, and NOT actually demonstrated, was that clocks can get synchronized, no dispute here.

You have said light clocks get out of sync when traveling at different speeds, no dispute here.

What you have not done is say that battery powered clocks stay in sync with light clocks when in the same frame, when traveling at speed. If you say these two clocks will stay in sync, then just explain HOW this could happen.

davidm
Posts: 1155
Joined: Sat May 27, 2017 7:30 pm

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:06 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:25 am
Then it would be better to NOT pose what is currently held as the mathematical description of physics as being what is actual fact and really and truly true, which is the very opposite of what you actually do.
But that is not what uwot does and not what I do. U R dumb. 8)
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:40 am
Do you actually COMPREHEND what you READ?
Some times. Some times not. i am no different as you in this regard. For example, you do NOT yet actually comprehend what you read of what I write.
That's because what you write is incomprehensible.

ken
Posts: 2075
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 4:14 am

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:06 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:23 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 1:38 am
You say light takes no time to travel, if this is so, then nothing happened previously. It ALL happens NOW.
Wrong. Light travels at velocity c in a vacuum.
So, why do you not tell the person who said that that they are wrong.
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:23 am
What is evidently confounding you is the idea that light takes no time to travel from its own point of view.
It is another person who says lightvtakes no time to travel, NOT Me.
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:23 am
But light does not have a "point of view."

You're welcome. 8)
Have you been following what I have been writing? I am the One who has been saying that only human beings have points of view.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest