ken wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:07 pm
uwot wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:33 amJust to remind you Ken, I have actually written a book, which you haven't bothered to read. So it's a bit rich you telling me it's unsatisfactory.
Here's another opportunity, ken:
https://willijbouwman.blogspot.co.uk
What I have read of it, which you are unaware of, is, as I have previously said, just a repeat of what others have already written, and which you have just repeaten in your own words.
Well ken, the bits that everyone repeats are the historical claims made by Einstein, the thought experiment he proposed to demonstrate his claims, and the experimental results which show conclusively that what Einstein claimed would happen, actually happens.
But that seems to be as far as you got, because had you read the bit where it states that what is true of photons in a light clock, is true of photons involved in every exchange of electromagnetic energy on the carriage, you would not have written this:
ken wrote: ↑Mon Nov 13, 2017 4:47 amA digital clock that runs off batteries will tick away at the same rate, when it is traveling at any speed, as a clock on earth does, because it was created to function that way.
And because what is true of the exchange of electromagnetic processes in a digital clock, is also true of the electromagnetic processes involved in bodily functions, all of which contribute to ageing, you would not have followed it up with this:
ken wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:07 pmIf an observer was to go along for the ride and when they arrived they looked back towards earth, then what they would be seeing was earth four years "in the past", from their now
relative perspective. Earth would look the same as at the moment they left, so it would APPEAR that they had traveled that distance instantaneously, or as some would say in no time at all.
The Earth does not set the time for the rest of the universe; which someone who bangs on about the relativity of perception should understand.
ken wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:07 pmHowever, from prior knowledge that observer is well aware that was is being observed and feels like is real is NOT actually true. With hindsight the observer knows that what is ONLY APPEARING as being as to have taken no time at all REALLY has taken four years...
All that means is that the Earth has gone round the Sun four times. That has absolutely no influence on the electrochemical and atomic processes on board a space ship; all of which would be subject to time dilation. The microscopic determines the macroscopic, so because all the processes that create a living, thinking human being are slowed down, the perception, thinking and ageing of that human being, are all slowed by exactly the same amount. Galileo's principle of relativity is maintained, even at near light speed, because of the effects predicted in special relativity, and verified by every subsequent experiment.
ken wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:07 pm...which makes sense because for the past four years the observer as been seeing their clock tick away for four years and has slept, ate, lived just like four years has past. The face in the mirror has also aged.
Not by four Earth years. You should read a bit more of my blog.
ken wrote: ↑Sun Nov 12, 2017 2:07 pmTime does NOT dilate, nor does length contract just because a human being observer is traveling. The "scientific" evidence for this, which you are probably looking for and seeking, will come soon enough.
You might as well get it over with. I suspect it will be chewed up and spat out by four or five of us in under two paragraphs. After which, you will sulk and accuse us of not being open-minded, or indoctrinated by some quasi-religious cabal of scientific conspirators.
But then, perhaps you are the exception. Whaddya got, ken?