Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Lostinspace, Jul 5, 2018.
Ask again when you can write the analogy in better English , your post is really 'messy' .
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
A lightning followed by a thunderclap after 4 seconds, gives a good estimate that the thunder storm is 4 miles from your position. Simple and effective example. If the next sequenc comes one minute later and the time between lightning and thunder is 3 second then the storm is moving at 1 mile p/s towards you and is now 3 miles away. Time to shut down.
Should read p/m (per minute).
Since we're both being respectful and all, I look forward to your precise explanation of where I am wrong. I have a few questions below. I thank you in advance for respectfully answering them.
Okay. I have no particular problem with that. Spacetime is a theory, in the same way that space is a theory.
Sure. Spacetime is space plus time. The reason it makes sense to combine these two things is, of course, more complicated.
Thank you for saying "please". It's so respectful of you.
Sorry, but I'm afraid that the phrase "mechanism of time of space" is meaningless gibberish to me. Can you please google a definition for me?
The relative value of that statement depends entirely on what follows from it, if anything.
It's not self-evident to me, so I hope you can explain.
My main questions at this stage are:
How fast is the Earth travelling relative to your absolute standard of rest ("space")?
How is this be measured, in practice?
This is quite wrong.
Sound travels a mile in about 5 secs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunder
Ah I see.
Funnily enough I saw the same idea recently on another forum. Look at post 26 here:
I will answer your question with a question that precedes your questions, how can we measure time without it being directly related and dependent to the speed of something else ?
Thank you for sharing that interesting read, quite clearly that is somebody with a messiah complex who ignores scientific principles.
You mean like a light year?
I am referring to a chronological record of change , measured compared to the speed of something else. i.e 24 hours is equal to one period of rotation.
If we consider things can change at any rate , position for example, then we have problems with time.
Why don't you try answering the questions I asked you?
In answer to your question, time is typically measured using a clock of some kind.
I am answering the questions you asked by pointing out the difficulties. Time is typically measured by a clock, the ''speed'' of the mechanics of the clock , defining the ''speed'' of time. Consider what we have done wrong...we have equated time to equal a speed of something else.
Do you dispute that the speed of light is a constant?
Unfortunately, we will never know.
Lostinspace, being the sock puppet of a previously-banned user, won't be with us any more.
Haha...(I hear that light is constant by the way) Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You mean, that is what the theorists say? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Heh heh. Bye.
Science says that but my clock doesn't slow down and I'm not older than my brother. My theory is that the rubbersheetedness of space is really a cottonsheetedness of nothing which is fixed in space but not time.
Clearly some sort of sheet involved.
So whether or not it's infinite depends on the thread count?
Separate names with a comma.