Do we see objects in their past?

The universal now is 0, anything after zero is history. simultaneity is based on history so fails.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What does that mean? Why does simultaneity fail?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The rate of time is 0 for all observers, and you need to ask why simultaneity fails? I think this subject may be beyond your ability in thinking sorry.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Well you tried, I guess I will have to be in dumb class with the other dummies like Einstein and every physicist on the planet.

 

I did not say you was dummy or insinuate that, I am sorry if you felt that way, I said I think this may be beyond your thinking based on your first question.

Let me try to explain, I will give you as many attempts as you like or anyone in the world for that matter, I will allow you any direction, any geometrical point or anything you can think of at all, I want you to measure time, the point you will find is that you can never exceed 0 without it being instant history. 0 moves forward never overtaking 0.

 

Simple inference is that there is no present....don't make it difficult.

 

There is a present and anyone can synchronise themselves to the present by a live feed and recording themselves with a camcorder, which records their history, frame for frame in real time of 0=0

 

You contradict yourself....0+ and present becomes history....

 

So relativity would say one observer could see 2 events as simultaneous but another observer in a different frame would say the events were not simultaneous. Do you think that is incorrect?

 

I do not understand any contradiction in my post, maybe you read it wrongly?


Imagine a camcorder pointing at you recording, you are at 0 and the camera and empty hard drive is also at 0. We start a recording, 0 moves forward on the drive and the space at the beginning of the hard drive is filled with history. At any given ''time'' we stop the video, you are at still at 0 and never changed from 0, the hard drive is also now at 0 and the space left remains 0.

 

No I do no think that is correct, the third persons time is also 0, it is impossible to pass 0 without it being instant history.

All observers experience a rate of time of 0, 0 always remains 0 and never alters, it is physically impossible to alter 0 without being history, 0 is a constant and applies universal to the values of space.

I know you will look in disgust and this maths may be beyond some of you,

0=1

0+0=1

0+0+ 0∞=1

example

01010101010101010101011010000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000
01010101010101010101011010000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000
01010101010101010101011010000000000000
0000000000000000000000000000000000

 

Yes I am afraid your math is not of my world.

 

It is not a hidden thing in science that scientists have tried to understand the meaning of 0, it is in your world.


Maybe you may understand this

1-1=0

0-0=0

(1-1)=(0-0)


(4/3 pi r³) - (4/3 pi r³)=0

(4/3 pi r³) ²^∞=0 ∞

(x1-x1-y1-z1)=0

 

Can this be theorist back again, I wonder?

 

You seem to do a lot of wondering on this forum and very little thinking of your own merit, distraction is a form of being stuck for an answer to give, do you have any importance to shed on this thread that could disprove the rate of time is 0?

 

Most people would consider wondering (= to ask yourself questions or express a wish to know about something) to be a form of thinking that is rather important in science. I do not think you have any idea of how to assess my contributions to this forum. In fact on your last thread I was one of those who tried to engage with your issue without acrimony - doing some thinking, in fact, about your scenario of the trains.

But now you have started posting bits of irrelevant and trivial arithmetic I find myself questioning your motives and your psychological state.

I also notice you have not denied being theorist.

 

I appreciate your comments in the last thread, you are passing this thread without consideration that anything after 0 is history,

''But now you have started posting bits of irrelevant and trivial arithmetic I find myself questioning your motives and your psychological state.''

Again accusations with no justification, if you do not understand the easy maths , why not just ask?

''I also notice you have not denied being theorist''

Of course I am not a theorist, I have already told you that I am not an expert or claim to know everything.

 

OK. You said that 0=1
That would directly lead to the following.

0 + 1 = 0
and
0 + 1 = 2
and
0 + 0 = 2
and
0 + 0 = 0
and so on.

Do you see why stating 0 = 1 doesn't make very much sense.
If you see an error in my logic (based on your idea of 0=1) please point it out.

 

Why this crap ? You were asking questions which bother many, but you lost out with this..

 

Yeah, this one isn't just dumb, it's crazy.