The Theory of Inexorability

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by Asexperia, Feb 26, 2015.

  1. Daecon Kiwi fruit Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,133
    Actually the tracks are attached to the planet Earth, so you should be asking: "What moves, the train or the planet Earth?"
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    You quoted my question, so I can only conclude you believe this post answers my question. It doesn't....unless, of course, you are trying to say that you have just made a new name for a basic physics principle that has been known for hundreds of years, so you haven't really done anything useful. If that's what you are trying to say, then I agree.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    What's that basic physics principle?

    I have understood that according to Relativity, considering the train as a reference system are the tracks that move.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    Completely misunderstanding special relativity does not give you the tools to demonstrate your conjectures are superior.
     
  8. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    The principle of relativity.
     
  9. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    Why not?, Einstein started from the Newton's ideas. Parmenides started form the Heraclitus' ideas. Aristotle started from the Plato's ideas.

    With all due respect to Einstein.
     
  10. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Because if you don't know Relativity, there is no way you could possibly know if your ideas are superior or not.
     
  11. rpenner Fully Wired Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    Newton understood Aristotle. Einstein understood Newton. You don't understand Einstein. Therefore because you don't work on the bleeding edge of human knowledge about the behavior of phenomena of the universe, you cannot make progress AND you cannot fairly judge what you post is superior to Einstein.
     
  12. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    Let's watch this image again.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    1- The Relativity focuses on the trajectory, which is different for both reference systems. But the two observers are correct. (I agree)

    2- The Inexorability focuses on the destination of the thrown body. There is only one (inexorable) destination.

    3- Time is relative with respect to the speed. (both theories)

    4- Time es independent with respect to the distance (space). (Me)

    5- Time is inexorable in despite of the reference frame. (Me)
     
  13. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Yeah, you. BFD.
     
  14. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    SPACE-TIME DIAGRAMS

    The sequence 1-2-1 is inexorable regardless of the reference frame.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    The lines O1 (blue) and O2 (green) correspond to the trajectory of the observers. The brown triangle represents the light cone and the small circles represent the signals from the detectors (events) when the light arrive to them.
    For the O1 one of the detectors of O2 turns on first, later the both his turn on simultaneously and finally the other one of O2 turns on.
    For the O2 one of the detectors of O1 turns on first, later the both his turn on simultaneously and finally the other one of O1 turns on.
    In the graph 2 we see the drawing that makes the O2 where his timeline would be vertical and the line of O1 would be inclined.

    In conclusion, both observers watch the same sequence 1-2-1 of events. This sequence is inexorable.

    For more information see the video: Length Contraction and Space-Time animation



    Elvis Sibilia of America (ESA)
     
  15. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    No content: no response required. It remains nothing.
     
    origin likes this.
  16. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    THE SUCCESSION 1-2-1

    Man has always thought of the relation between space and time, from the point of view of the placement of an object or an event. Einstein was able to visualize the result of putting together two observers in different reference systems. Time is not a dimension of space. The sequence 1-2-1 is the link between a quiet observer and another that is moving at nearly the speed of light.
     
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,888
    There is no way to tell which is the 'quiet observer' and the other moving at nearly the speed of light.
     
  18. Ophiolite Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,232
    Hint: It's called the Theory of Relativity for a reason.
     
  19. Dr_Toad It's green! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,527
    Totally OT, pardon, please.

    Ophiolite, I know what your handle means, but every time I see it, I think "snake-bearing mineral".

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Back to y'all...
     
  20. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    IS THE SPACE STRAIGHT OR CURVED?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    In the space-time graph O1 jumps. Following the principle of relativity the O1 sees that he describes a straight line (up and down). The still O2 sees the O1 describes a parabola. Why the Theory of Relativity does not take into account the straight trajectory of O1? Because its interest is to say that space is curved, so they can explain erroneously gravity.

    Hasta luego.
     
  21. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Still nothing, so still no response needed.
     
  22. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    THE BECOMING-TIME DUALITY

    The becoming is the inherent property of matter and bodies to undergo changes continuously. The duration is the continuity or term of beings and phenomena in reality: the world and the universe. Time is the interval occurred between two fixed moments. The becoming-time is the continuous succession of ordered moments from start to finish. No becoming no duration, and no duration no time. Time is the dimension of becoming, not space.
     
  23. Asexperia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,724
    THE PHILOCHRONY

    The Philochrony (from the Greek philo: friend and khronos: time) is the formal science that studies the properties of time and space, and classifies things according to their duration. It also exposes the Theory of Inexorability. The Philochrony is independent of any belief, dogma or organization of knowledge.

    In accordance with their duration things are classified in: Eternal, durable, perishable, ephemeral, fleeting and nonexistent.

    a) The eternal things don't have beginning neither ending; like the matter. For believers, God and the Paradise are eternal.

    b) The durable things last a lot of time. They are divided in:
    - Centennial, if they last among 100 to 999 years. For example, the fir tree and the saguaro cactus.
    - Millennial, among 1,000 to 999,000 years. The secuoya tree.
    - Millionaire, more than a million years. The geologic eras, the life of the planets and stars.

    c) Perishable things have a little duration; they last among one day to 99 years. The human being’s life.

    d) Ephemeral things have a short duration, some hours.

    e) The fleeting things have a very short duration, some seconds or fractions of second. The wink, the rhythm of the heart.

    f) The nonexistence is the lack of existence, no duration. The planet X between Mars and Jupiter. All things possess existence and essence.

    Sibilia
     

Share This Page