Censoring the truth

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by wellwisher, Sep 17, 2015.

  1. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    In the physics section I pointed out that space clocks gain time and show a permanent increment of time change, but don't show any permanent change in distance/space/size. I was censored and suspended from posting in the science section for pointing out this fact. Maybe the staff can explain this openly rather than sneak behind everyone back to censor the truth.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Kristoffer Giant Hyrax Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,233
    Maybe it was because you kept posting pseudoscience in the science section?

    Nah, surely it was a liberal conspiracy to hide the troof.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2015
    joepistole likes this.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Is it true or false that clocks in space gain time, relative to earth surface, but don't gain any size? According to the physics, space-time is integrated so why is only the time parameter changing in a permanent way?

    Does the forum have access to a third neutral party to settle this? I appear to have a reputation that is clouding judgment, such that a good science inference is being ignore and penalized due to pure emotional bias.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Is it not true that clocks in space gain time with respect to the earth but don't gain size? Space-time is assumed to be integrated, so why is only the time parameter showing any permanent change? Space-time is a foundation premise which is flawed, by this, which is why I don't repeat the traditions.

    Explain to me why only time change is permanent when two or more space-time references meet to compare? This is a valid question.

    In the twin paradox, which uses special relativity instead of GR, one twin ages, but he does not come back shorter. Distance is reversible.

    All I did was extrapolate this and say since only time shows a permanent change between space-time references; space clocks and twin paradox, then is the universal red shift we see on the earth reference, connected to permanent changes of frequency, that leads a change in wavelength, so the product is proportional to C?

    If this is true, this creates a different universe. This spooked people.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2015
  8. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,670
    No.

    First, you weren't censored in any way. Your posts on this matter are available for everybody to view. Nothing you wrote has been deleted or moved.

    Second, you were suspended from posting in the Science subforums because you have a history of posting pseudoscience in the Science sections, which is against our site policies. Previously, you served a 1 month suspension for this. You were then allowed to post again in the Science sections on the understanding that you would not continue in a similar vein to your previous posting habits there. Unfortunately, your behaviour did not change. You were given a number of polite warnings that you might again be excluded from posting in the Science sections, but these made no difference. So, now you are banned for 6 months from posting in those forums.

    Your pseudoscience posts about relativity were only part of the reason for your exclusion from the Science sections. You have many recent posts on other scientific topics that are similarly misleading.

    Your exclusion was publically announced in the sticky "Action Notes" thread in the Astronomy forum, where your most recent posts appear.

    If you require further public explanation of your exclusion, let me know and I will try to answer your questions here.
     
    Last edited: Sep 17, 2015
  9. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,670
    Clocks measure time by ticking at a certain rate. An observer watching a clock that is in motion relative to him/her sees the clock ticking at a different rate while that motion continues.

    If two clocks keep a record of elapsed time, as in the classic "twin paradox" of relativity, then it is possible that when they come back together those records will show different elapsed times.

    Rulers measure distances. An observer watching an object that is in motion relative to him/her measures (with his/her rulers) a different length (size) of the object while that motion continues.

    If two rulers are used and keep a record of measured lengths, for example in the classic "twin paradox" of relativity, then it is possible that when they come back together those records will show different measured lengths.

    I have no idea what you mean by the time parameter changing in a permanent way. If you are referring to the record of elapsed time kept by a clock, the record of measured distances kept by rulers similarly changes in a permanent way.

    Perhaps you can suggest an appropriate poll question and we'll put it to the membership for a vote, for a start.

    Or, you have a deserved reputation for bad science and you are being penalised because you refuse to change your ways.

    You have never demonstrated any flaws in the concept of space-time. Perhaps if you post the relevant mathematics that backs up your argument...

    The twin's ages are the record of their personal time histories. You simply choose to ignore the record of their length histories.

    I don't even know what this means. Please post the mathematics.
     
  10. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    Say two clocks are exactly the same and are using the very same battery type. The battery in both supplies the energy needed to drive each tick. If they show different elapsed time, when brought together, their batteries should show different amounts of energy left in storage, since each tick uses x energy.

    With the ruler, the potential energy will be the same, even if it appeared one ruler was longer or shorter from a distance when apart. Only time leaves a permanent trace apart from human documentation.

    Once you see this, then this will extrapolate to other things.
     
  11. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,670
    wellwisher:

    You're looking at the "record" from too narrow a perspective. Relativity doesn't deal with separate space and time; it deals with space-time. In the relativistic space-time, there is nothing special about the moment you call "now". All events in time and space are laid out on a static 4-dimensional grid. Using this picture, time and space are on an equal footing. Time is just one of four space-time coordinates.

    Yes. That is because the two batteries have followed different world lines in the 4D spacetime.

    Which potential energy?

    The longer or shorter thing happened because the rulers followed different world lines in the 4D spacetime.

    No. All the traces are there in the fixed 4D space time. It is just that you, sitting at "now", decided to keep a record of the clock histories, but you decided to ignore the length histories.
     
  12. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    This was connected to only time showing a permanent self documenting change. The ruler does not show anything permanent when the references meet, unless humans doctor it.

    This suggests that with photons and the red shift, maybe here too only the time change is permanent when the energy reaches the earth to be measured. This means frequency change comes first.

    The idea of a red shift unconsciously implies wavelength first. If you call this a frequency shift this makes the mind think in terms of time first.
     
  13. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    I sort of understand how the math models this, but the experiments with space clocks show permanent changes only along the time axis of 4-D space.

    If we used the ISS as the ground reference and brought clocks from earth these will only show a permanent increment of loss time, but nothing permanent in x,y,z. In fact, we can use hundreds of different references and you can't tell one from the other, based on x,y,z, when they come in contact. But you can tell who is who, by time.

    It almost appears when references are apart they exist in 4-D space, but once you bring them together, they line up along the time axis.
     
  14. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Thats because clocks do not measure the x,y,and z, they only measure t. If there were two identical measuring rods with a recording device which periodically recorded their length, i.e. a marker attached to the end of the rods and a continuous roll of paper, then when the rods were brought back into the same frame, and the recordings of length compared, there would be the difference in length.
     
  15. wellwisher Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,160
    This is not necessarily true because the size of the paper will parallel the rod. If the rod gets longer, so will the paper. When the paper and rod returns back to normal, the tick marks will shrink.


    Say we had 100 frames of reference in space-time, which are all different due to GR and/or SR. Say after a few months, we have a conference and representatives from all 100 reference bring their clocks, to the single conference location. What we will notice is some of the clocks are ahead and some are behind, relative to the home reference.

    The interesting thing is, if we brought all the clocks to any of the 100 references for the conference, they will always align in the same relative order in terms of time loss or gain. The slowest clock will always the slowest and the fastest will always the fastest. Relative to 4-D space-time, the lag and lead times of the clocks at a point in space; conference center, will follow the time axis in 1-D from that point; plus and/or minus.

    All 100 clocks will appear to have difference sizes, if we keep them apart in their own references and view them from another reference. But if we bring them together in position, they all now appear the same size. This reflects the opposite in the sense that in a point of time, the size of the clocks will be difference and align along the space axis.

    The way I interpret this is there is no preferred reference in terms of space, since all reference clocks will appear the same size if we compare them in one reference, thereby not preserving any preferred state. However, there is a preferred reference in time, since all the references will show a lag or lead that stays the same no matter what space reference they converge on.

    We can trace the universe back in time to a center, but can't locate that position in space. This is consistent with the space clock in time and space.
     
  16. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    So that design for length recording won't work. The point is still that clocks don't show length contraction because that's not what they record.
     
  17. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,583
    Wellwisher, your understanding of time, time dilation and clocks needs work. Hopefully, this scenario will help clear up some of your confusion.

    Lets assume a spaceship travels to Alpha Centuri at a speed of .9c.
    Someone on earth or Alpha Centuri would say the distance is 4.4 ly and at .9c the trip takes about 4.9 years.

    So when you leave earth you note the time and date and sure enough when you reach Alpha Centuri you say only 2.13 years have passed.
    But wait you also have your odometer and you zeroed it before you left earth.
    So when you get to Alpha Centuri you check the odometer and the distance traveled is 1.92 ly!

    So when you land you have a record that the time slowed (the difference in the elapsed time you saw versus Alpha Centuri) and you have a record that the distance contracted (the difference between what you say you flew versus Alpha Centuri).

    So in your curious terms both the time change and the distance change is 'permanent' therefore your argument does not hold water.

    edited to add: that also means no truth was censored.
     
    joepistole and James R like this.
  18. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,314
    I don't know what you're on about.

    If you wanted to talk about GPS satellites I'm sure you'd have a footing.
     
  19. Bowser Right Here, Right Now Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,600
    I've read that atomic clocks have been used to show time dilation during air travel. Is that close to what you were trying to say?
     
  20. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,583
    Actually, he doesn't know what he was trying to say.
     
  21. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,583
    I find Wellwisher's MO rather annoying. He was shown to be wrong and instead of admitting he was wrong he disappears. There is almost no doubt that he will return after a while and start spouting the same incorrect statements simply ignoring that he was shown to be wrong.
     
    joepistole likes this.
  22. Kittamaru Suppose it makes sense. Wearing a bit thin. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,938
    Can/should we consider that kind of behavior to be dishonest?
     
  23. origin In a democracy you deserve the leaders you elect. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,583
    oh, yeah....
     

Share This Page