Do we see objects in their past?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by absolute-space, Feb 24, 2016.

  1. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    At least some progress has been made, the shifting of such nonsense to pseudoscience. That it took so long is sad.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    Firstly, I have not claimed to be an expert or claimed anything, what makes me qualified to discuss the subject ? a rather stupid question, what makes anyone qualified to discuss a subject is the same thing, we are human and can think and read.

    ''Now you're just being ridiculous:
    1) "vector analysis and the velocity of light" aren't needed to know that the time taken for two journeys of equal length at equal speeds is the same. But,
    2) this doesn't prove (or even support) your contention.''

    Now you are being ridiculous, if I sore you 1 second ago and you sore me 1 second ago, when did we see each other? we both sore each other at the same time.

    It can be seen by doing two simple measurements


    A=11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
    B=11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

    +ve(A)=1

    +ve(B)=1

    -ve(A)=1

    -ve(B)=1

    1=1



    A=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
    B=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

    0=0


    A=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
    B=111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

    0=1


    1-1=0

    0-0=0


    {1-1}={0-0}
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2016
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    You have not got a clue have you?


    You have a laser and I have a laser, we aim the laser at each other and simultaneously turn on the power to the laser. What is the net difference in time of the journey of the tip of the laser to the receiver?

    May I remind you accounting for only a one way trip is Godel's incompleteness.

    Clearly a mistake to have had this put in Psuedo-science.

    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/goedel-incompleteness/#Out
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2016
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Whatever

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Not interested in your nonsensical claims as I informed you before:
    If you have anything of substance, you know what to do, don't you?
    Last time I looked time dilation, length contraction and the scenario we look at stars as they were [in the case of the Sun 8.23 minutes ago: Alpha Centauri 4.3 years ago] is still totally and conclusively validated.
    Nothing changed as yet...keep trying, and I'll check tomorrow morning OK?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    If you saw me 1 second ago, and I saw you 1 second ago, we both see each other as we were in the past albeit only 1 second.
    Nothing changed as yet...keep trying.
     
  9. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    I have had a think about how to explain the ''rods'', imagine we are directly looking into each others eyes a length apart, between our eyes was ''invisible rods'', the ''invisible rods'' are continuous in length , we each see the tip of the ''rod'' simultaneously, we always see the tip of the ''rod'' simultaneously because the tip is continuous.

    All observers observe the tip of the ''rod'' simultaneously and constant.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2016
  10. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    And if there is a continuation of you seeing me 1 second ago and me seeing you one second ago, a continuous, invariant, obviously we see each other simultaneously. I really do suggest you read what an incompleteness is , you really have not got a clue have you?
     
  11. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    Take your pick of syntactic ambiguity.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387564/

    Maybe we stick to the word seeing or observed.
     
  12. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,252
    Then - at best - you're simply being hypocritical when you call others "self-proclaimed experts".
    At worst you're engaging in a discussion - and topic - which you're not qualified to discuss - while berating others and science for coming up with answers you don't like.

    Unfortunately that doesn't make you qualified and it certainly doesn't mean your opinion is either valid or worthy of serious consideration.

    Correct.
    We see each other at the same - but as we when the light left us - in the past.

    Absolute crap.
     
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2016
    Kristoffer likes this.
  13. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    Clearly this is beyond your abilities of thinking, you have nothing more in your armoury than what you can quote from present information. Clearly you are beneath my level of understanding.
     
  14. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,364
    Let's all ignore this troll.
     
  15. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    With nothing better to say than that, we are all sure we know who the ''troll'' really is.
     
  16. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    Unfortunately, he may be saying the best thing here. So far, you are demonstrating not merely a poor grasp of science and the English language, you are also demonstrating that you have no interest in learning and an interest in insulting those who not merely disagree with you, but with who agree with the consensus positions in science. This is not a good combination.
     
    Kristoffer likes this.
  17. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    It is the responsibility of the elders to make sure our children are educated and have virtue, what we teach our children today is the future of tomorrow. It is also important that we learn to deal with and accept reality, to not teach our children illusions of reality that give a sense of hope and belief not according to truth or fact. History has provided illusions in the past, once mankind thought the Earth was flat, civilisation feared falling off the horizon into an abyss. This was later to be discovered a myth and the realisation that the world was ''round''. Another belief from our past, was the belief of a Firmament, a said solid dome like structure that covered the flat Earth. We this day and age simply call it the sky, knowingly we have accomplished the ability to leave our atmosphere by the mechanical ingenuity of mankind, the only Firmament that existed was the inability of thought and technology that was needed to allow this Firmament to be reached and explored.

    Imagine you are standing and observing the sky , in our past before the concept of flight and space travel. There is certainly an impression and perceived mental image of the comparison to being within a dome like structure, a feeling of containment to almost claustrophobic proportions. With that said, I am sure you will now understand the Firmament of the minds illusion.....

    Whenever there is a boundary that can not be reached, whether it be by physical means or mental means, this is the solid boundary of the firmament of the mind. A boundary that is seemingly unreachable, a boundary that can only allow imagination and not that of facts or truths. There can lye no truths beyond the firmament of the mind. These firmaments of the minds, create illusions in the mind, one of the most famous illusion being that of religion, denoted by thinking civilisation was inside of this Firmament. We however went beyond this Firmament but the illusion created was strong in belief and persists today.

    You clearly have no idea.
     
  18. PhysBang Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,422
    RiiiiIIIIiiight. But you, who can't do the math of modern science, somehow knows better than all the scientists out there?
     
    krash661 likes this.
  19. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    I have never said that, I am glad you come over to this section because we can be a bit more blunt. Let us not argue in the main forum, that is just wrong and puts new members off joining in the discussion.

    For your information probably about 90% of the scientists out there do mediocre jobs and roles, not everyone can create hypothesis or theory or be an influence on science.

    Firstly where do you see I am claiming any theory is wrong?

    My theory, hypothesis or idea or opinion is just that, when and if I complete my theory and send it off to be peer viewed , even if it were the best thing since sliced bread, it would still only be a theory.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    We seem to have a rash of this type on the forum at present. And I also believe in certain circumstances, we have some fraudulent behaviour in progress.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Yes, I hang my head in shame. Like the rest of our pseudoscience and crank posters, you all hold that position of superiority while the whole world out there is wrong.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    You do know that delusions of grandeur is a medical condition, do you not?
     
  22. absolute-space Registered Member

    Messages:
    280
    Have you ev
    I know it is a medical condition, I am glad I am not a sufferer.
     
  23. krash661 [MK6] transitioning scifi to reality Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,973
    except you have--repeatedly.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    (shakes head)
    so far you have three topics doing so.
     

Share This Page