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 4:09 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:42 am

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.
Can you clarify your latest drivel?

If "BOTH are traveling at the same speed from the same frame of reference" then they will continue to be in sync.

And? :?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:10 am

ken wrote:
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.
What does the above drivel mean?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:16 am

If you say that only humans have points of view, then why do you keep asking what point of view humans would have traveling at c, which is impossible for humans to do? :?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:16 am

Also, lots of animals apart from humans have points of view.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:22 am

davidm wrote:
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)
When others look back through this post they will see, if you do not delete it first, that it was you who writes things like "it is a known fact", "it is an actual fact", and "really and truly".
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:06 am
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.
If what I write is incomprehensible, to you, then there IS absolutely NO use in you reading anymore of what I write, is there?

Also, all this is not getting us any closer to you answering My very straightforward simple questions.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:25 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:09 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:42 am

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.
Can you clarify your latest drivel?

If "BOTH are traveling at the same speed from the same frame of reference" then they will continue to be in sync.

And? :?
Are you absolutely positive of this? Is it a fact that could never be changed?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:27 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:22 am
davidm wrote:
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)
When others look back through this post they will see, if you do not delete it first, that it was you who writes things like "it is a known fact", "it is an actual fact", and "really and truly".
"if you do not delete it first." :lol:

Your confusion here (among many others) is that you do not understand the difference between a FACT and a THEORY. But I explained that above. Did you read it?


Also, all this is not getting us any closer to you answering My very straightforward simple questions.
uwot and I have answered all your questions, repeatedly.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:28 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:10 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:06 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:23 am


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.
What does the above drivel mean?
It means when I ask a question regarding what is the mathematical answer to a question, people like you keep giving Me answers from people's different perspectives.

Please try and keep up with what I am actually asking and NOT with what you think I am asking.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:25 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:09 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 3:42 am

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.
Can you clarify your latest drivel?

If "BOTH are traveling at the same speed from the same frame of reference" then they will continue to be in sync.

And? :?
Are you absolutely positive of this? Is it a fact that could never be changed?
What are you babbling about now? :?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:16 am
Also, lots of animals apart from humans have points of view.
Yes My mistake.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:28 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:10 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:06 am


So, why do you not tell the person who said that that they are wrong.



It is another person who says lightvtakes no time to travel, NOT Me.



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.
What does the above drivel mean?
It means when I ask a question regarding what is the mathematical answer to a question, people like you keep giving Me answers from people's different perspectives.

Please try and keep up with what I am actually asking and NOT with what you think I am asking.
This babble means nothing. Can you clarify?

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:32 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:25 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:09 am


Can you clarify your latest drivel?

If "BOTH are traveling at the same speed from the same frame of reference" then they will continue to be in sync.

And? :?
Are you absolutely positive of this? Is it a fact that could never be changed?
What are you babbling about now? :?
If just asking a clarifying question to you is drivel, then so be it. If you can not answer questions, then just carry on the way you are.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by ken » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:34 am

davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:28 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:10 am


What does the above drivel mean?
It means when I ask a question regarding what is the mathematical answer to a question, people like you keep giving Me answers from people's different perspectives.

Please try and keep up with what I am actually asking and NOT with what you think I am asking.
This babble means nothing. Can you clarify?
Your attempts at deflecting away from your inability to answer very simple questions is not helping you.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:42 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:32 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:25 am


Are you absolutely positive of this? Is it a fact that could never be changed?


What are you babbling about now? :?
If just asking a clarifying question to you is drivel, then so be it. If you can not answer questions, then just carry on the way you are.
It's drivel because your question makes no sense. What are you actually asking?

Fact: evolution is observed to occur. Theory: the theory of evolution explains how and why it occurs, and allows scientists to make predictions and retrodictions. If it should happen that the predictions and retrodictions don't pan out, then the theory would have to be revised or discarded in favor of something that is more predictive or retrodictive. A theory is map of the territory, but not THE territory. Maps are often revised. So are theories.

Fact: time dilation and length contraction are observed to occur. Theory: relativity.

If you have a better theory to explain observed facts (muon decay, gravitational lensing, GPS devices, etc. etc. etc.) then spill it and you'll win the Nobel Prize in physics!
Last edited by davidm on Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Relativity?

Post by davidm » Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:43 am

ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:34 am
davidm wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:29 am
ken wrote:
Thu Oct 19, 2017 4:28 am


It means when I ask a question regarding what is the mathematical answer to a question, people like you keep giving Me answers from people's different perspectives.

Please try and keep up with what I am actually asking and NOT with what you think I am asking.
This babble means nothing. Can you clarify?
Your attempts at deflecting away from your inability to answer very simple questions is not helping you.
Only you are deluded enough to imagine this. Uwot and I have answered all your questions, repeatedly.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests