The Instigator
WiseOne
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Yraelz
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

Special Theory of Relativity, specifically "time dilation" is a sham.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/9/2008 Category: Science
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,509 times Debate No: 3150
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (8)

 

WiseOne

Pro

Hello, I am writing a paper on the theory of relativity and am currently researching time dilation. I am having a hard time understanding the time dilation concept and thought that a debate might help my understanding.

I hope you have a base understanding of the Train and Track concept before responding.

My point of view:

The Train and Track concept always uses a third eye view to explain the situation. If an event occurs on the train, it appears to occur at a different time to an observer on the track. (Due to the fact that light has a finite speed)

This is often explained using synchronised clocks as vantage points for the event that occurred on the moving train.

My argument: The clocks are compared by a third persons 'gods eye' view. An observer who can see the Trains clock, and the tracks clock at the same instant. However, this in itself is a paradox of the time dilation explanation. If one were to move the clocks back together to compare, the act of moving the clocks back together would essentially bring them back to synchronization.

So an event that occurred on the moving train that appeared to occur at a different time to the observer on the track did in-fact occur at the same time.
Yraelz

Con

I would like to begin by thanking my opponent for making this debate. It is not very often that this site puts forward a scientific topic.

I am going to begin by stating that if you are going to require me to actually explain how time dilation works I am not opposed to doing so, it will just take me a while to reacquaint myself with said concept. Until the time when you require such from me though, I will content myself with simply debunking your point of view.

So here goes:

The idea of time dilation is rather simple, as ones speed increases time relative to an observer at any speed less than status quo slows. This point can be proven using the train and the track method, which does not require the gods eye observer at all.

Scenario in chronological order:

1. A circular train track is built.
2. A train is placed on said track.
3. A man stands at starting point "a" holding a stop watch.
4. A man boards the train at starting point "a" holding an identical stop watch.
5. Both men start their stop watches.
6. The train then accelerates around the track until it gets back to point "a", at which point it stops.
7. The man in the train jumps out and compares his stop watch to the man who was standing next to tracks. This will reveal that the man who was on the train's stopwatch will actually be running slightly behind.

This model requires no third, god's eye, and has been empirically proven. An even more drastic example can be seen when astronauts fly into space. Upon their return clocks on board ship will be behind those on earth.

I now stand open for my opponents rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 1
WiseOne

Pro

WiseOne forfeited this round.
Yraelz

Con

Not a lot to say on this one. I might spend my final round explaining how this works if my opponent chooses not to respond.
Debate Round No. 2
WiseOne

Pro

WiseOne forfeited this round.
Yraelz

Con

Actually I found a source that will explain the concept for me to anyone who is interested in how time dilation actually works: http://science.howstuffworks.com...

It also goes into some detail on the two moving objects.

However I would ask that my points that contradict my opponents reasons on why time dilation is a sham be extended. This means that my opponent has not upheld his burden of proving that time dilation is a sham as he has no points to support such premise.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by brittwaller 8 years ago
brittwaller
Can't believe I missed a time debate. :( Good job, Yraelz.
Posted by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
Absolutely not. Thermometers have some degree of accuracy when you are trying to measure temperature. Even relative temperature (even without markings, you can tell one substance of a greater temperature from another by seeing a marked rise). The instrument is based on the natural relationships between pressure, volume, and temperature.

Clocks aren't measuring devices. Clocks are just machines that are left running. Clocks don't look around their environment, and change according to what time it is, or if time changed in any way.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
I used to be able to explain it really well, I had some good teachers in high school. I might do some actual research on it later and explain it if I get a chance. Just don't have a lot of time right now, thanks for the vote Vi Veri!
Posted by Vi_Veri 8 years ago
Vi_Veri
This is the first time I've been introduced to this concept... Very interesting :) G'job, con, you won my vote.
Posted by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
Explain that comment please?

Do you agree that they measure relative time?
Posted by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
Watches don't measure time. End of story.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by qwerty15ster 8 years ago
qwerty15ster
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Crust89 8 years ago
Crust89
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by CP 8 years ago
CP
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 8 years ago
Kleptin
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 8 years ago
Vi_Veri
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Yraelz 8 years ago
Yraelz
WiseOneYraelzTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03