A curious, serious question

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Thu Jul 23, 2015 12:36 am

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:Well I can only program for 10 hours a day.
If the computer runs at half the speed, I can
only program half the code.

I take time to be the one immutable physical truth.
All matter and energy can change, the laws of physics
vary depending on context. But as I have proven
to those who care to consider logic:

Time dilation is medieval sophistry.
It is based on faulty math.

Even God has chosen to be bound by the rule of
The Ultimate Immutability of Time.
Jonathan,
Your perspective on time appears to be determined by subjective factors.

If time is immutable, why are clock rates a function of gravitational field strength?

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Wed Jul 22, 2015 3:32 pm

Well I can only program for 10 hours a day.
If the computer runs at half the speed, I can
only program half the code.

I take time to be the one immutable physical truth.
All matter and energy can change, the laws of physics
vary depending on context. But as I have proven
to those who care to consider logic:

Time dilation is medieval sophistry.
It is based on faulty math.

Even God has chosen to be bound by the rule of
The Ultimate Immutability of Time.
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Wed Jul 22, 2015 1:49 am

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:By posting a comment, AFTER mine and BEFORE the next,
you have already accepted time inherently as a premise.
Jonathan,

Are you certain of that?  The terms "after" and "before" do not specify a certain number of clock ticks.  They merely place events in a sequence.  

This is the nature of state machines that you make your living programming.  Within the code you write, events must occur in a sequence that you determine.  If the computer's clock runs faster or slower in the process should make no difference to your logic, which is dependent upon a sequence of calculations but not their timing.  

This is tricky shit.  That's why Seymour Cray's 16-word look-ahead logic was such an effective breakthrough in supercomputer engineering.  He knew that sequence ruled, that time was extraneous.

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Tue Jul 21, 2015 5:29 pm

By posting a comment, AFTER mine and BEFORE the next,
you have already accepted time inherently as a premise.
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Mon Jul 20, 2015 4:12 pm

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:Have you considered that the answer to the 'dilation of time dilemma' is that time dilation is a self-contradictory notion? - it fails the test of internal logical consistency.

The question is rather a simple one.
Jonathan,

It is indeed self-contradictory, as you propose.  Of course, if time is not real, as I propose, the dilation of a mathematical contrivance is a meaningless concept.  (This is the same result as yours, different pathway.)

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Mon Jul 20, 2015 12:54 pm

Have you considered that the answer to the 'dilation of time dilemma' is that time dilation is a self-contradictory notion? - it fails the test of internal logical consistency.

The question is rather a simple one.
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Sat Jul 18, 2015 3:40 pm

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:Please consider this question:

http://rgphiloscience.forumotion.com/t42-the-dilation-of-time-dilemma

(The dilation of time dilemma)
I'd looked at that post earlier and concluded that either I am incapable of understanding it, or that the question is not properly posed.  I have a busy day job, and am on php to propose and examine non-conventional solutions to old but still-unresolved problems rather than take exams.  Am I interested in figuring out whether the problem is well-posed or if I'm unqualified to resolve it?  Not really. Could be both.

I've learned that it is a good idea to take a measure of various forum denizens early on, and so answered your easy questions to determine if the "forum physicist" actually understands physics.  Seems like he does, and that I can take him seriously.  This is good.  Smile

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:45 pm

Please consider this question:

http://rgphiloscience.forumotion.com/t42-the-dilation-of-time-dilemma

(The dilation of time dilemma)
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:20 pm

Wow.
4 correct answers on the same forum!

On the second question, everyone else just said the answer is 'c' (not 2c) because
nothing can have a relative velocity greater than 'c'.


Last edited by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Sat Jul 18, 2015 2:46 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Fri Jul 17, 2015 6:58 pm

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:
It must be less than c.

I agree, but you are the first person I have spoken to that gets this answer.

The ramification that is out of the ordinary, is that most people just default to:
It must be c.
Given that most people posting on science related forums seem to have obtained their physics knowledge from Dr. Caca on documentary TV, you might have set your expectations a tad high.  Nothing is more ordinary than ignorance, so "c" would have been my prediction.

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by greylorn on Fri Jul 17, 2015 6:44 pm

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:

The photons p1 & p2 are emitted from a light bulb in
opposite directions at the velocity of light.

What is the velocity of p1 in relation to p2?

Again, you are really talking about the velocity of wavelets rather than photons.  

The relative velocity is 2c, as Mayflow correctly guessed.

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Mayflow on Fri Jul 17, 2015 3:57 pm

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:

The photons p1 & p2 are emitted from a light bulb in
opposite directions at the velocity of light.

What is the velocity of p1 in relation to p2?

I woud guess 2C.
avatar
Mayflow
Admin

Posts : 131
Join date : 2015-05-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Fri Jul 17, 2015 11:38 am



The photons p1 & p2 are emitted from a light bulb in
opposite directions at the velocity of light.

What is the velocity of p1 in relation to p2?
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Fri Jul 17, 2015 11:36 am

It must be less than c.

I agree, but you are the first person I have spoken to that gets this answer.

The ramification that is out of the ordinary, is that most people just default to:
It must be c.
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Not measurable

Post by greylorn on Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:25 am

@Jonathan Ainsley Bain wrote:On another forum I got this answer:

The photon always moves away at c.

I am curious to what extent this is the answer most scientists would offer.
It is the answer I expect most scientists to give.
The ramifications are extraordinary.

Photons do not exist until they impact a detector, i.e. an atom.  Only then can we make a measurement.  Between the points of emission and detection there is only an e/m wavelet.   Theory tells us that its velocity is c, as measured along its path.  

You can calculate the velocity of that wavelet from the hypothetical perspective of a line or plane at 45 (or x) degrees with respect to the wavelet's path, in the same manner you would calculate the velocity of an ordinary object, using trigonometry.  It must be less than c.  

However, the question is moot because you cannot measure the velocity of the wavelet from that oblique perspective.  There are no extraordinary ramifications.

_________________
Greylorn
avatar
greylorn

Posts : 100
Join date : 2015-07-11
Location : Arizona

View user profile http://beon-cpt.com

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Thu Jun 04, 2015 8:57 am

So if the Photon moves horizontal to the observer, then V would be the velocity of light?

Would it be away or towards the observer??
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jilan1 on Tue Jun 02, 2015 1:50 pm

Yes it does and they are. The special theory of relativity derives from this. It's an amazing thing, time and distance are oberver related quantities. Now what is a better term for that?

Jilan1

Posts : 11
Join date : 2015-05-26

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Sun May 24, 2015 3:25 pm

On another forum I got this answer:

The photon always moves away at c.

I am curious to what extent this is the answer most scientists would offer.
It is the answer I expect most scientists to give.
The ramifications are extraordinary.
avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

A curious, serious question

Post by Jonathan Ainsley Bain on Sun May 24, 2015 3:22 pm

avatar
Jonathan Ainsley Bain
forum physicist

Posts : 185
Join date : 2015-05-24
Age : 47
Location : Africa

View user profile http://www.flight-light-and-spin.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: A curious, serious question

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum