STRENGTHS and WEAKNESSES of the THEORY OF RELATIVITY
- Thread starter Asexperia
- Start date
haha
Asexperia
Registered Senior Member
According to our conceptual thinking the Newton's absolute time agrees with the regular becoming and the relative time agrees with the quantitative measurement of time (clocks). Newton didn’t refer himself to the irregular becoming.
DURATION = DUALITY BECOMING-TIME (ABSOLUTE-RELATIVE)
The answer to my last post's question was "No" then. If you could at least have the decency to say it clearly rather than running around the houses that'd help discussion.
Asexperia
Registered Senior Member
GPS CLOCKS
d = Δgt, x. The duration is equal to the gradual increase of time "t" since the moment x. x is the time to start to count the duration.
If t is uniform, then d is periodic and precise. (clocks, Newton).
If t is variable, then d is imprecise. (Einstein's Relativity).
The relative time is not convenient to do measurements.
d = Δgt, x. The duration is equal to the gradual increase of time "t" since the moment x. x is the time to start to count the duration.
If t is uniform, then d is periodic and precise. (clocks, Newton).
If t is variable, then d is imprecise. (Einstein's Relativity).
The relative time is not convenient to do measurements.
:wtf:
Asexperia
Registered Senior Member
THEORIES THAT COMPLEMENT TRUTH
1 - Isaac Newton referred to a uniform rhythm time and never thought that this could vary, because
in measuring the pattern should remain unchanged.
2 - For Henri Bergson becoming, that he understood as duration, it is only subjective.
3 - The Albert Einstein's Relativity focuses on the variable rhythm time, which many observers
get different measures. Before time is the absolute becoming. Without the property of becoming no time.
It follows that:
DURATION = BECOMING-TIME DUALITY (ABSOLUTE-RELATIVE)
1 - Isaac Newton referred to a uniform rhythm time and never thought that this could vary, because
in measuring the pattern should remain unchanged.
2 - For Henri Bergson becoming, that he understood as duration, it is only subjective.
3 - The Albert Einstein's Relativity focuses on the variable rhythm time, which many observers
get different measures. Before time is the absolute becoming. Without the property of becoming no time.
It follows that:
DURATION = BECOMING-TIME DUALITY (ABSOLUTE-RELATIVE)
Last edited by a moderator:
You've now descended into incoherence. At least try to form cogent sentences.
No, Einstein says nothing about time having rhythm. It's simply relative from one inertial frame to another, to the degree set forth in the Lorentz transformation. GPS does not synchronize clocks in the manner you seem to think. The time dilation of a particular satellite is calibrated into the measurements, however. Geolocation is done by time difference of arrival (TDOA), which is in itself a relative measurement of a sort. George Washington, a surveyor, knew how to do this, by having two observers posted at different map coordinates with synchronized stop watches. They were to record the time at which any canon shots were heard. He knew he could draw a hyperbola on the map from their data (one parabola of which was discarded because it went inland and the canons were on board British ships).
The key to getting accurate TDOA is (normally) to have perfectly synchronized clocks. Under the relativistic scenarios of the various satellite trajectories this is not physically possible. By accounting for the calculated time dilation during the differencing (subtraction) of one time of arrival from another, the hyperbola can be more accurately "drawn". A third satellite that emits a timestamped pulse - which is also corrected for relativity - is compared to either of the first two and a second hyperbola is "drawn. Where the hyperbolas intersect is where you are. A fourth fix clarifies it and refines it.
You can't get anywhere denying relativity (if that is your intent) without claiming that GPS doesn't work. But that would be absurd. You know it works. Therefore, Einstein was correct.
All of your rhetoric could be cut down to a few simple statements simply by restating the idea directly from Einstein, without the gloss and bluster. Or else simply explain GPS. In either case, we converge to the truth quicker, and much, much more reliably.
The key to getting accurate TDOA is (normally) to have perfectly synchronized clocks. Under the relativistic scenarios of the various satellite trajectories this is not physically possible. By accounting for the calculated time dilation during the differencing (subtraction) of one time of arrival from another, the hyperbola can be more accurately "drawn". A third satellite that emits a timestamped pulse - which is also corrected for relativity - is compared to either of the first two and a second hyperbola is "drawn. Where the hyperbolas intersect is where you are. A fourth fix clarifies it and refines it.
You can't get anywhere denying relativity (if that is your intent) without claiming that GPS doesn't work. But that would be absurd. You know it works. Therefore, Einstein was correct.
All of your rhetoric could be cut down to a few simple statements simply by restating the idea directly from Einstein, without the gloss and bluster. Or else simply explain GPS. In either case, we converge to the truth quicker, and much, much more reliably.
Case in point....