I need someone who knows the math

Principals ?? Nothing escapes from me.
and by the way, what is that principle ??

PS: writing principal for principle is not typo, this is fundamental mistake.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Most on this forum see it differently and for what it is.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Just another error on your part upon error, upon error and upon many past errors.

Time dilation certainly is time travel as recognised by professional experts that know far more than amateurs like you and me.
https://plus.maths.org/content/time-travel-allowed
In brief: The laws of physics allow members of an exceedingly advanced civilisation to travel forward in time as fast as they might wish. Backward time travel is another matter; we do not know whether it is allowed by the laws of physics, and the answer is likely controlled by a set of physical laws that we do not yet understand at all well: the laws of quantum gravity. In order for humans to travel forward in time very rapidly, or backward (if allowed at all), we would need technology far far beyond anything we are capable of today.

rpenner in essence finally after much patience and ado, dragged you into line.
I don't want to overstate the importance of that, but it is a start for you.
Build upon it my boy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Of course nothing escapes you! Damn!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The whole forum knows that.....Just you take it easy OK?
These confirmations I keep harping on will lead to great revelations and knowledge in the years to come....so get on board!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But what is the principle of SR which you understood from rpenner posts ?

 

First there never was a paradox as I and others have informed you early in the piece: I think you have claimed that nonsense a t leat a dozen times in your mission to invalidate SR:
Oh, failure at that too, obviously.
Adding to what you claimed in post 109:

 

Total crap picked from poo-science stuff....

See the highlighted above....don't you realise the folly of such nonsense.

My dear friend do not take what poo-science says literary, this preposterous universe, physorg etc are taking a heavy toll on your rationality. That is the crude representation of science.

 

I have always been maintaining that Einstein's time in his math, is different from actual philosophical representation of time. Do you understand this or do you agree with this ? As soon as you do, you will not claim time dilation is same as time travel..

 

Your credentials be what may I ask? Don't bother answering, we all know!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Kip of course was the driving force behind the aLIGO experiment.
Pop science? poo science? Like GP-B is a fraud?Like LIGO is a fraud?
Let me explain it to you again:
While you have the right to claim any nonsense about reputable mainstream science that you like: Your expectations that you are convincing anyone is zero, zilch, nada.

 

You have reduced pop to poo..

You do not understand the value of inner conviction. If I say that there is no curved spacetime in reality, then it is not there.

Give you an idea: Space yes spatial space itself is a reality which bends....we do not need any spacetime absurdity to explain all the observations. There is nothing like curvature of spacetime, all mathematical artifacts, in reality there would be curvature of the spatial space, a distinctly different concept away from GR...wait and watch.

 

You keep claiming that. but have nothing to support it.More talk, more claims, more agenda laden nonsense........
https://www.quora.com/Is-spacetime-a-real-thing-or-just-a-mere-concept
https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/q411.html
What is a space time continuum?
In 1906, soon after Albert Einstein announced his special theory of relativity, his former college teacher in mathematics, Hermann Minkowski, developed a new scheme for thinking about space and time that emphasized its geometric qualities. In his famous quotation delivered at a public lecture on relativity, he announced that,

"The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. henceforth, space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality."

This new reality was that space and time, as physical constructs, have to be combined into a new mathematical/physical entity called 'space-time', because the equations of relativity show that both the space and time coordinates of any event must get mixed together by the mathematics, in order to accurately describe what we see. Because space consists of 3 dimensions, and time is 1-dimensional, space-time must, therefore, be a 4-dimensional object. It is believed to be a 'continuum' because so far as we know, there are no missing points in space or instants in time, and both can be subdivided without any apparent limit in size or duration. So, physicists now routinely consider our world to be embedded in this 4-dimensional Space-Time continuum, and all events, places, moments in history, actions and so on are described in terms of their location in Space-Time.

Space-time does not evolve, it simply exists. When we examine a particular object from the stand point of its space-time representation, every particle is located along its world-line. This is a spaghetti-like line that stretches from the past to the future showing the spatial location of the particle at every instant in time. This world-line exists as a complete object which may be sliced here and there so that you can see where the particle is located in space at a particular instant. Once you determine the complete world line of a particle from the forces acting upon it, you have 'solved' for its complete history. This world-line does not change with time, but simply exists as a timeless object. Similarly, in general relativity, when you solve equations for the shape of space-time, this shape does not change in time, but exists as a complete timeless object. You can slice it here and there to examine what the geometry of space looks like at a particular instant. Examining consecutive slices in time will let you see whether, for example, the universe is expanding or not.

 

http://www.twogag.com/archives/3646

Dramatis Personae
Wayne: Underemployed low-achiever who has never accomplished anything of merit.
Guy: Harsh, often sarcastic, always angry girl who barely tolerates Wayne's continued existence.
Frank: Low affect, sociopathic mad scientist. (Not pictured.)

Wayne: God I hate people who can't distinguish between your and you're!
Guy: Nice. You should use your superior knowledge of the language and say something interesting.
Wayne: Come on. It must bother you too.
Guy: It does.
Guy: It really irks me that people who complain about grammar think they're as clever as I know I am.

 

Which time do you mean? The coordinate time which is established by choosing a standard of rest and an arbitrary origin point? Or the elapsed proper-time which is particular to a certain history of a trajectory through space-time, independent of coordinate systems? Both have their uses.

Wouldn't a language or philosophy not informed of the observations which daily confirm Einstein's model of space-time be particular sterile in application if it used a model of time which was categorically disfavored relative to Einstein's model?

Thus the only "actual philosophical representation[‍s‍‍‍] of time" that should matter are those that are at least as good replicating the behavior of reality as Einstein's.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I should have reminded him of his "per say" comment a while back, instead of "per se": Same error funnily enough that rajesh also use to make.
Just saying.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Please stop posting pseudoscience in the science section.

 

Likewise, we are all grateful to rpenner for his detailed mathematical insights on the subject.

Be that as it may, the universal gravitational constant was never actually derived by science. No big deal, you say; neither was Schrödinger's wave equation, and look how useful that is. True enough, but things like quantum loop gravity and other attempts to push science forward are not going to succeed with guys like Edward Witten (Princeton) pushing the papers associated with his project Euclid and rhapsodizing about geometry of an absolute space and time the way he does in "The Topological Properties of the Sigma Field". The Sigma Field, the Higgs Field, or ANY quantum field is inertialess. Since 1905, this still means: NO absolute space, and NO absolute time. Yet people continue to do math exactly the way they did before 1905, absolute space and absolute time and ancient greek geometry did not skip a beat. It lived on in the form Minkowski's and Hilbert's calculations, and even some aspects of Newton's calculus. Einstein's version of relativity is largely ignored. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that if Einstein had ever learned about the discovery of the Higgs boson, we wouldn't all still be scratching our heads trying to noodle out the derivation of the cause of gravity using ancient greek geometry to do so. Geometry is a side effect of gravity; not the other way round.

Geometry applied to a study of inertialess space, like the "fixed" stars and the connect-the-dots imaginary pictures of the constellations in astrology are a similar fixation, and have about as much basis in reality (OR SCIENCE) as something like quantum loop gravity and Witten's static geometry applied to high energy interactions of matter and plasmas with quantum fields. The hierarchy problem (differences in relative magnitudes of EM, gravitational forces) SHOULD BE about as subtle as getting hit in the head by an apple, or even a falling brick. Photons emitted and absorbed by electrons bound in the shells of atoms is nowhere near the magnitude of the forces exerted on atomic structure by something as massive (and important) as the discovery of the Higgs boson. As far as I am concerned, the hierarchy problem has already been solved.

And rpenner is more than just a footnote in the process that eventually discovered that. If anyone can see a flaw in the math that we use (and that is the subject of OP of this thread), it is him.

'nuff said. Thank you again, rpenner. 'No, thank you' to Euclid et al.

 

To The God:

Your posts are sterling compared to whomever you seem to be arguing with. Since ignoring paddoboy, brucep, and PhysBang, my experience here has greatly improved, and I have learned more, even if they have not. It's funny that I don't need to see their posts to see the result of their trolling. No more likes for them from me.

I wonder if we will follow Facebook's lead and tally dislikes? That would be interesting. Make it retroactive, so we can all go back and skewer them on the threads they trashed.

You (and perhaps a few others) might wish to try ignoring them also. It seems to be a real timesaver.

 

Thanks...
Paddoboy is ok, he has to just reduce his efforted abusiveness. Guy is really interested in subject and worships mainstream, trying really hard to keep up to dated...pass.

Physbang is puerile, not worthy of any dialogue;...fail.

while to me it appears that Brucep in real life got heavily bumped by someone. Not able to cope with frustration after that...my empathy.

 

You really are an arrogant prat. You encourage right-wing notions of suppression or worse.

 

It applies to two cranks in actual fact.

 

I'm, I'm I'm mortified!!!!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

The pain of it all!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!