Total Posts:61|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Einstein's Theory of Relativity

zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 4:10:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Reading Einstein's Theory of Relativity, I'm shocked at how much of this seems like philosophy. This brings up the question: is theoretical physics really much different from metaphysics?
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/15/2015 4:24:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 4:10:36 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
Reading Einstein's Theory of Relativity, I'm shocked at how much of this seems like philosophy. This brings up the question: is theoretical physics really much different from metaphysics?
A book you might be interested in....if you haven't already read it. Lots of physics but also conveyed in layman's terms so not too difficult to follow.
Einstein's Relativity: A Criticism, by Dunlap Jamison McAdam.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 12:09:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
is theoretical physics really much different from metaphysics?
If you work out how long it takes a cannon ball dropped from 100 feet up to hit the ground using paper and pencil you are doing 'theoretical physics' - if you drop a cannon ball and measure the time taken you are doing 'experimental physics'.

So 'theoretical physics' isn't the term needed, but I get the point. Metaphysics is all about the fundamentals - things such as time, space, causality and so on. Physics has reached the point where at least some of those things can be investigated experimentally. And as we know, when those experiments were done the results were unexpected. Philosophers had pondered the nature of time and space since Plato and Aristotle, but not one of them predicted the effects of relativity before they were observed - although I'm not sure what the moral of that is!

So part of physics today is about the things that have traditionally been considered metaphysics - ie time and space etc. The great advantage of metaphysics is you can do it without learning any calculus!
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 4:08:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 12:09:54 AM, kp98 wrote:
is theoretical physics really much different from metaphysics?
If you work out how long it takes a cannon ball dropped from 100 feet up to hit the ground using paper and pencil you are doing 'theoretical physics' - if you drop a cannon ball and measure the time taken you are doing 'experimental physics'.

So 'theoretical physics' isn't the term needed, but I get the point. Metaphysics is all about the fundamentals - things such as time, space, causality and so on. Physics has reached the point where at least some of those things can be investigated experimentally. And as we know, when those experiments were done the results were unexpected. Philosophers had pondered the nature of time and space since Plato and Aristotle, but not one of them predicted the effects of relativity before they were observed - although I'm not sure what the moral of that is!

So part of physics today is about the things that have traditionally been considered metaphysics - ie time and space etc. The great advantage of metaphysics is you can do it without learning any calculus!

I like calculus though ;)
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
dylancatlow
Posts: 12,245
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 4:11:37 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Never read it, but I remember Langan saying something similar.

"By the time I was 13 or 14, I had moved on to authors requiring a bit more emotional maturity, e.g., Shakespeare, Tolstoy, and Dostoevsky, as well as philosophers like Charles Darwin, Bertrand Russell, and Albert Einstein (Einstein is widely regarded as a physicist, but his work goes so deeply into the fundamental nature of reality that he can also be read as a metaphysical philosopher). When I went away to college for nine months, I read a considerable amount of classical literature as part of the curriculum. This included Augustine, Anselm, and Aquinas, who provided me with an introduction to theology and metaphysics. Meanwhile, when I could afford it, I"d buy and pore over dense but influential works like Kant"s Critique of Pure Reason and Russell and Whitehead"s Principia Mathematica."
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:28:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

I was refering to the space being curved stuff.
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:36:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 6:28:46 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

I was refering to the space being curved stuff.

If that's the extent of your knowledge about Relativity, I'd advise you to read a book on the subject.
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 7:51:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/15/2015 4:10:36 AM, zmikecuber wrote:
Reading Einstein's Theory of Relativity, I'm shocked at how much of this seems like philosophy. This brings up the question: is theoretical physics really much different from metaphysics?

But ultimately it comes down to testability, we can come up with all sorts of "conceptions" of what ever, but until it becomes testable what is it ?...................philosophy

I was under the impression theory of reality has being tested ?
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
harrytruman
Posts: 812
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 8:03:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 7:36:02 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:28:46 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

I was refering to the space being curved stuff.

If that's the extent of your knowledge about Relativity, I'd advise you to read a book on the subject.
I did not say that that was the theory, I just said that I do not agree with that part of the theory
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 8:05:22 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 8:03:16 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/16/2015 7:36:02 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 6:28:46 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

I was refering to the space being curved stuff.

If that's the extent of your knowledge about Relativity, I'd advise you to read a book on the subject.
I did not say that that was the theory, I just said that I do not agree with that part of the theory

Reasons?
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 8:35:17 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?
Lol confusing cause and effect fallacy
Logic would dictate that a plane flying in the direction of the earths rotation would be affected differently then one flying against the forces that cause the earth to spin in a certain direction,
, show me the scientific evidence that a clock, any clock, is connected to this thing you think is time. I'll need verifiable physical evidence that just because human beings can construct a device then that means time exists or that device is "caused" by time.
Also, prove humans are capable of constructing two perfectly duplicated mechanisms, even and including all the way down to the atomic level, oh yeh, it's impossible.
Prove that electromagnetism in differing parts of the Earth cannot affect instruments, oh wait it's proven it does.
Time is a good god for you to worship apparently since you have not even a scintilla of physical evidence that it exists or that time has a causal nexus with anything in the physical world. Humans built a clock therefore a spooky special kind of 4th dimension exists, yeah that's scientific.
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 9:44:14 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 8:35:17 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?
Lol confusing cause and effect fallacy
Logic would dictate that a plane flying in the direction of the earths rotation would be affected differently then one flying against the forces that cause the earth to spin in a certain direction,
, show me the scientific evidence that a clock, any clock, is connected to this thing you think is time. I'll need verifiable physical evidence that just because human beings can construct a device then that means time exists or that device is "caused" by time.
Also, prove humans are capable of constructing two perfectly duplicated mechanisms, even and including all the way down to the atomic level, oh yeh, it's impossible.
Prove that electromagnetism in differing parts of the Earth cannot affect instruments, oh wait it's proven it does.
Time is a good god for you to worship apparently since you have not even a scintilla of physical evidence that it exists or that time has a causal nexus with anything in the physical world. Humans built a clock therefore a spooky special kind of 4th dimension exists, yeah that's scientific.

Pull your head out of your anus, and go read a book on science.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 11:15:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 9:44:14 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 8:35:17 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?
Lol confusing cause and effect fallacy
Logic would dictate that a plane flying in the direction of the earths rotation would be affected differently then one flying against the forces that cause the earth to spin in a certain direction,
, show me the scientific evidence that a clock, any clock, is connected to this thing you think is time. I'll need verifiable physical evidence that just because human beings can construct a device then that means time exists or that device is "caused" by time.
Also, prove humans are capable of constructing two perfectly duplicated mechanisms, even and including all the way down to the atomic level, oh yeh, it's impossible.
Prove that electromagnetism in differing parts of the Earth cannot affect instruments, oh wait it's proven it does.
Time is a good god for you to worship apparently since you have not even a scintilla of physical evidence that it exists or that time has a causal nexus with anything in the physical world. Humans built a clock therefore a spooky special kind of 4th dimension exists, yeah that's scientific.

Pull your head out of your anus, and go read a book on science.
Basically your argument that it just has to be in a book? Bwhahaha
So i'll take that as you don't have a clue what your talking about. First off moron. The Lorrentz Contraction Coefficieient makes relativity mathematically correct. Thing is it represents a claim to what occurs to matter while it is traveling the speed of light which is not science at all. You do know what science is right ?, yeah, didn't think you did so ill tell you. Never has been observed, never has been tested, never has been falsified. Never has been proven. You need to go read a book on being completely effing stupid, because you're the poster boy. And relativity may include ideas about time, but like your response shows, idiots like you think If one thing about a theory is true then everything is. Hint, it's not.
You got that physical evidence for the existence of time smart guy......didn't think so
You have proof time has a causal nexus with anything that exists?....yeah didn't think so
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 12:10:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

Yes, and they agree with the time values predicted by relativity out to like 6 or 7 decimal places or something.

Not to mention the fact that every time we use our phones, the satellites are based on relativity...
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 12:15:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 12:10:44 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

Yes, and they agree with the time values predicted by relativity out to like 6 or 7 decimal places or something.

Ok maybe thats a bit of an exaggeration lol


Not to mention the fact that every time we use our phones, the satellites are based on relativity...
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 12:30:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 12:15:29 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:10:44 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

Yes, and they agree with the time values predicted by relativity out to like 6 or 7 decimal places or something.

Ok maybe thats a bit of an exaggeration lol


Not to mention the fact that every time we use our phones, the satellites are based on relativity...
Satellite technology has nothing to do with relativity...what exactly are you saying?
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 5:03:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 12:30:01 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:15:29 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:10:44 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

Yes, and they agree with the time values predicted by relativity out to like 6 or 7 decimal places or something.

Ok maybe thats a bit of an exaggeration lol


Not to mention the fact that every time we use our phones, the satellites are based on relativity...
Satellite technology has nothing to do with relativity...what exactly are you saying?

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu...
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
zmikecuber
Posts: 4,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 5:06:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 12:57:05 PM, Akhenaten wrote:
Einstein's Theory of Relativity Debunked - http://debunkingrelativity.com...

Doesn't the double slit experiment apply to electrons and not water molecules? water molecules are incredibly larger than electrons.
"Delete your fvcking sig" -1hard

"primal man had the habit, when he came into contact with fire, of satisfying the infantile desire connected with it, by putting it out with a stream of his urine... Putting out the fire by micturating was therefore a kind of sexual act with a male, an enjoyment of sexual potency in a homosexual competition."
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 5:40:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:03:42 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:30:01 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:15:29 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 12:10:44 PM, zmikecuber wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:07:31 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 4:16:49 AM, harrytruman wrote:
At 11/15/2015 11:22:23 PM, SM2 wrote:
Relativity has been proven.

No it has not Mr. Cocane Bear.

So... that experiment where you put atomic clocks on two planes; fly them around the world in opposite directions; and the plane that's moving with (and thus sped up by) the Earth's rotation, has a clock that's a few fractions of a second behind the other one... you're saying that experiment was fraudulent?

Yes, and they agree with the time values predicted by relativity out to like 6 or 7 decimal places or something.

Ok maybe thats a bit of an exaggeration lol


Not to mention the fact that every time we use our phones, the satellites are based on relativity...
Satellite technology has nothing to do with relativity...what exactly are you saying?

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu...
Were you gonna offer up proof. All you did was link a site where "clocks" on satellites are affected by the forces they endure. Temperature changes, movements of the satellites, etc.. When you show me proof that these man made devices are caused by time, lemme know. Tired old stock arguments don't prove anything about relativity, that site proves clocks are affected when they are on satellites, not time. What is it about that you don't seem to understand? Clocks are man made devices, that doesn't prove they're connected to your magical little non-existent friend called time. I built a statue of Jesus because Jesus exists as a special kind of 4th dimension. The statue was thrown in my swimming pool in the back yard and it floated. Therefore it is true Jesus can walk on water. Really, Jesus exists because I built something and my claim is it is connected to the magical 4th dimension of Jesus. You're using the same reasoning.
kp98
Posts: 729
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 6:35:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The observed difference between the clock times was predicted from the theory of relativity and then confirmed by observation. It has - AFAIK - never been the case that the clocks were wrong 'the wrong way around', or by twice as much or half as much as the theory predicted.

If anyone can come up with an alternative theory that predicts not only the variation in measured times but the precise value of that variation then that theory has to be taken seriously, but a 'theory' that moving a clock disturbs its accuracy does not explain why the variation is so precisely defined and predictable.

At least it doesn't confuse relativity and qm like Ankhy did!
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 11:22:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:40:26 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
Were you gonna offer up proof. All you did was link a site where "clocks" on satellites are affected by the forces they endure. Temperature changes, movements of the satellites, etc.. When you show me proof that these man made devices are caused by time, lemme know. Tired old stock arguments don't prove anything about relativity, that site proves clocks are affected when they are on satellites, not time. What is it about that you don't seem to understand? Clocks are man made devices, that doesn't prove they're connected to your magical little non-existent friend called time. I built a statue of Jesus because Jesus exists as a special kind of 4th dimension. The statue was thrown in my swimming pool in the back yard and it floated. Therefore it is true Jesus can walk on water. Really, Jesus exists because I built something and my claim is it is connected to the magical 4th dimension of Jesus. You're using the same reasoning.

1. The experiments presumably control for the variables you mentioned.

2. Stuff changes. "Time" is a means of measuring and ordering those changes. Relativity predicts that under different velocities/gravity, those changes will be measured differently (no matter what technique you use). In extreme cases, the actual order of events can be viewed differently.

Whether the past and future co-exist with the present is irrelevant here. What matters is that we are observing a real phenomenon, and we call that phenomenon "time". If you can think of a better word for it, then by all means, share it.

3. Jesus has no relevance here, and your analogy is stupid.
Akhenaten
Posts: 854
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2015 11:36:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 5:06:11 PM, zmikecuber wrote:

Doesn't the double slit experiment apply to electrons and not water molecules? water molecules are incredibly larger than electrons.

It is just an analogy. The analogy shows the stupidity of the basic concept. Because we can't see electrons, we are forced to use larger objects to demonstrate the principles. Atomic theory and germ theory are similar, because both germs and electrons are invisible to the naked eye. Thus, scientists can get away with murder and say whatever they please about both germs and atoms.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2015 3:41:12 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/16/2015 11:22:54 PM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:40:26 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
Were you gonna offer up proof. All you did was link a site where "clocks" on satellites are affected by the forces they endure. Temperature changes, movements of the satellites, etc.. When you show me proof that these man made devices are caused by time, lemme know. Tired old stock arguments don't prove anything about relativity, that site proves clocks are affected when they are on satellites, not time. What is it about that you don't seem to understand? Clocks are man made devices, that doesn't prove they're connected to your magical little non-existent friend called time. I built a statue of Jesus because Jesus exists as a special kind of 4th dimension. The statue was thrown in my swimming pool in the back yard and it floated. Therefore it is true Jesus can walk on water. Really, Jesus exists because I built something and my claim is it is connected to the magical 4th dimension of Jesus. You're using the same reasoning.

1. The experiments presumably control for the variables you mentioned.
You presumably have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. And once again you avoid the question. Where's the evidence clocks are connected to your magical little friend in that special dimension?
2. Stuff changes. "Time" is a means of measuring and ordering those changes. Relativity predicts that under different velocities/gravity, those changes will be measured differently (no matter what technique you use). In extreme cases, the actual order of events can be viewed differently.
Actual "order of events can be viewed differently"....fallacy of ambiquity... i'll need to see proof
No, relativity claims that clocks measure time... so prove it
Lol, you're delusional. "Stuff changes" (fallacy of ambiguity) name one example of something that time changes. "Time is a way of measuring those changes"(equivocation fallacy or you have decided to make up your own definition of time). Time is a way of determining where a person is on the Earth, (it's why it's called time zone) ,where the earth is in its rotation on its axis and where the Earth is in regards to its revolution around the sun.... I'll need some actual science for your "using time to measure something", that's what kilometers and miles and inches and feet are used for, measuring.
You do know that mere utterance, which is what you think constitutes reasoned rejoinder, is a waste of my efforts. Make an actual argument instead of running in circles.
Whether the past and future co-exist with the present is irrelevant here. What matters is that we are observing a real phenomenon, and we call that phenomenon "time". If you can think of a better word for it, then by all means, share it.

Past and future coexist with present? Nice equivocation fallacy and no one said anything about that. Do you actually have anything that resembles reasoning or is argumentum ad nauseam the best you got.
3. Jesus has no relevance here, and your analogy is stupid.
My analogy is stupid. Ok Smart guy, show me why a clock was designed. I'll need some evidence, physical evidence ,which you seem to be avoiding because you know you have absolutely nothing but mere utterances. You have yet to give one example of something time has a causal effect on in the physical world.
SM2
Posts: 546
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2015 4:27:25 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/17/2015 3:41:12 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 11:22:54 PM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:40:26 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
Were you gonna offer up proof. All you did was link a site where "clocks" on satellites are affected by the forces they endure. Temperature changes, movements of the satellites, etc.. When you show me proof that these man made devices are caused by time, lemme know. Tired old stock arguments don't prove anything about relativity, that site proves clocks are affected when they are on satellites, not time. What is it about that you don't seem to understand? Clocks are man made devices, that doesn't prove they're connected to your magical little non-existent friend called time. I built a statue of Jesus because Jesus exists as a special kind of 4th dimension. The statue was thrown in my swimming pool in the back yard and it floated. Therefore it is true Jesus can walk on water. Really, Jesus exists because I built something and my claim is it is connected to the magical 4th dimension of Jesus. You're using the same reasoning.

1. The experiments presumably control for the variables you mentioned.
You presumably have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. And once again you avoid the question. Where's the evidence clocks are connected to your magical little friend in that special dimension?
2. Stuff changes. "Time" is a means of measuring and ordering those changes. Relativity predicts that under different velocities/gravity, those changes will be measured differently (no matter what technique you use). In extreme cases, the actual order of events can be viewed differently.
Actual "order of events can be viewed differently"....fallacy of ambiquity... i'll need to see proof
No, relativity claims that clocks measure time... so prove it
Lol, you're delusional. "Stuff changes" (fallacy of ambiguity) name one example of something that time changes. "Time is a way of measuring those changes"(equivocation fallacy or you have decided to make up your own definition of time). Time is a way of determining where a person is on the Earth, (it's why it's called time zone) ,where the earth is in its rotation on its axis and where the Earth is in regards to its revolution around the sun.... I'll need some actual science for your "using time to measure something", that's what kilometers and miles and inches and feet are used for, measuring.
You do know that mere utterance, which is what you think constitutes reasoned rejoinder, is a waste of my efforts. Make an actual argument instead of running in circles.
Whether the past and future co-exist with the present is irrelevant here. What matters is that we are observing a real phenomenon, and we call that phenomenon "time". If you can think of a better word for it, then by all means, share it.

Past and future coexist with present? Nice equivocation fallacy and no one said anything about that. Do you actually have anything that resembles reasoning or is argumentum ad nauseam the best you got.
3. Jesus has no relevance here, and your analogy is stupid.
My analogy is stupid. Ok Smart guy, show me why a clock was designed. I'll need some evidence, physical evidence ,which you seem to be avoiding because you know you have absolutely nothing but mere utterances. You have yet to give one example of something time has a causal effect on in the physical world.

This is my argument: Shut the _fuck up.
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,865
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2015 4:55:08 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 11/17/2015 4:27:25 AM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/17/2015 3:41:12 AM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
At 11/16/2015 11:22:54 PM, SM2 wrote:
At 11/16/2015 5:40:26 PM, skipsaweirdo wrote:
Were you gonna offer up proof. All you did was link a site where "clocks" on satellites are affected by the forces they endure. Temperature changes, movements of the satellites, etc.. When you show me proof that these man made devices are caused by time, lemme know. Tired old stock arguments don't prove anything about relativity, that site proves clocks are affected when they are on satellites, not time. What is it about that you don't seem to understand? Clocks are man made devices, that doesn't prove they're connected to your magical little non-existent friend called time. I built a statue of Jesus because Jesus exists as a special kind of 4th dimension. The statue was thrown in my swimming pool in the back yard and it floated. Therefore it is true Jesus can walk on water. Really, Jesus exists because I built something and my claim is it is connected to the magical 4th dimension of Jesus. You're using the same reasoning.

1. The experiments presumably control for the variables you mentioned.
You presumably have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. And once again you avoid the question. Where's the evidence clocks are connected to your magical little friend in that special dimension?
2. Stuff changes. "Time" is a means of measuring and ordering those changes. Relativity predicts that under different velocities/gravity, those changes will be measured differently (no matter what technique you use). In extreme cases, the actual order of events can be viewed differently.
Actual "order of events can be viewed differently"....fallacy of ambiquity... i'll need to see proof
No, relativity claims that clocks measure time... so prove it
Lol, you're delusional. "Stuff changes" (fallacy of ambiguity) name one example of something that time changes. "Time is a way of measuring those changes"(equivocation fallacy or you have decided to make up your own definition of time). Time is a way of determining where a person is on the Earth, (it's why it's called time zone) ,where the earth is in its rotation on its axis and where the Earth is in regards to its revolution around the sun.... I'll need some actual science for your "using time to measure something", that's what kilometers and miles and inches and feet are used for, measuring.
You do know that mere utterance, which is what you think constitutes reasoned rejoinder, is a waste of my efforts. Make an actual argument instead of running in circles.
Whether the past and future co-exist with the present is irrelevant here. What matters is that we are observing a real phenomenon, and we call that phenomenon "time". If you can think of a better word for it, then by all means, share it.

Past and future coexist with present? Nice equivocation fallacy and no one said anything about that. Do you actually have anything that resembles reasoning or is argumentum ad nauseam the best you got.
3. Jesus has no relevance here, and your analogy is stupid.
My analogy is stupid. Ok Smart guy, show me why a clock was designed. I'll need some evidence, physical evidence ,which you seem to be avoiding because you know you have absolutely nothing but mere utterances. You have yet to give one example of something time has a causal effect on in the physical world.

This is my argument: Shut the _fuck up.

Where's your scientific evidence douche bag. You're the one who said I could find this in a science book. You have absolutely no idea what the f-uck you even mean , do you?
Lets see some science.......oh yeh, you have nothing but illogical trains of thought. You're so confused you can't even define time.....
."how we MEASURE events"....BWHAHAHAHAHA