Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: Robcat on 15/04/2015 17:32:26
-
When we grow up with clocks everywhere and time pieces on our wrists etc we are bred to think of time in a particular way.
Equally
You know and I know, as we are equally brought up to explain that object separated are separated by space.
Even planets and galaxies
But is it daft to forget the idea of space and say the everything is separated just by time.
Sounds daft but in science history
An electron in motion produces a magnetic field..... Why not some equivelent situation when, say a photo moves thru time, it produces a factor, equivelent to magnetism with the electron.
A thought as to what this unknown factor, created by a photon moving thru time..... Could be gravitation?
Another daft idea, but why not? Perhaps not G but what... Some sort of dark energy?
To some this is described as the Higgs field as distinct from what is considered to be the "space, time, continuum "
-
But is it daft to forget the idea of space and say the everything is separated just by time.
Time and space can not be separated, they are the two constituent parts of what physics calls "space/time" And if one were to cancel out the space within which we exist, time would vanish as well.
-
Time is a device used to measure change. It is the rate of change that is important. The time component will vary at different points in space due to the influence of gravity. Also space will change due to the influence of gravity. The Lorentz factor links the changes in time to the changes in space. The time component can be treated as a 4th dimension and also be treated as a scalar value.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lorentz_factor
This applies also to the change in mass due to increasing velocity. This is the relativistic mass and not rest mass.
-
Time and space can not be separated, they are the two constituent parts of what physics calls "space/time" And if one were to cancel out the space within which we exist, time would vanish as well.
That's not what he was talking about, Ethos. He asked But is it daft to forget the idea of space and say the everything is separated just by time. The answer is that the idea is wrong of course. Objects have a spatial separation, the fact of which is independent of time. So there's no way that what he has in mind could be true.
-
" The idea is wrong of course". I accept as a view, which echos down history. Please explain , in imagineering, radio and television to Henry the XIII, which is my reason for putting forward an idea, Right or wrong.
All I know our theories are slightly wrong in the short term a la 1915 to today.
History of science which should be everyone's education, shows that in "great breakthroughs", concepts are radically turned upside down. they WILL come.
Without a major change, we are trapped in a tiny solar system in a modest Galaxy, without any communication either physical or not outside.
I can,t believe that there will not be any future major breakthrough around time, space and gravitation and mass.
We must not distain heretics whether laithwaite, Tesla, or Leonardo etc....
-
I can,t believe that there will not be any future major breakthrough around time, space and gravitation and mass.
We must not distain heretics whether laithwaite, Tesla, or Leonardo etc....
Most of the new theories since the end of the 19th century was in the way of making our predictions more exact. Those theories are still used because they're extremely accurate for most problems. For example; nobody would use quantum mechanics to describe the motion of a microscopic speck of dust. We wouldn't guide a probe to mars. In both cases we'd use Newtonian mechanics. What is new is that those theories don't work for the very small, the very fast and for very strong gravitational fields. Don't be misled in thinking that because those theories were proved wrong that they are worthless and no longer used. Far from it in fact.
-
Probably I mean the unknown unknown. Donald's words should be written in every university science dept. just waiting for it!
-
Probably I mean the unknown unknown. Donald's words should be written in every university science dept. just waiting for it!
Are we supposed to know who "Donald" is and what his words are such they should be written as such?
-
Are we supposed to know who "Donald" is and what his words are such they should be written as such?
It's possible he means the American politician, Donald Rums..something or other. Famous for mixing up what I think was his misunderstanding of the Johari Window.
In understanding ourselves there are not only things we know about ourselves, and things others know, but an area which neither we nor others know - the unknown. In self development, the idea is that we should try to minimise that unknown area and expand our self awareness.
I suspect it's something you try to do naturally, others struggle!
-
It's possible he means the American politician, Donald Rums..something or other.
Why would anybody here be expected to know that?
-
Donald Rumsfeld (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld) was US Secretary of State, whose comment about knowns & unknowns (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldrums148142.html) made world news.
But then, Donald Duck is a high-ranking cartoon character who made TVs worldwide, too ...
-
Donald Rumsfeld (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Rumsfeld) was US Secretary of State, whose comment about knowns & unknowns (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/d/donaldrums148142.html) made world news.
But then, Donald Duck is a high-ranking cartoon character who made TVs worldwide, too ...
Mmm, I seem to remember that when Donald Duck spoke he made more sense!
-
So sorry, you are just scientists , but so I was! Never mind the lack of knowledge of the real world and famous statements.
Let's me start another hare running.......
-
So sorry, you are just scientists , but so I was!
Is but so I was supposed to be English? Since you said "was" we can only take that to mean that you are no longer a scientist. What kind, you didn't say either.
Never mind the lack of knowledge of the real world and famous statements.
What nonsense. For mere curiosity I posed your comment to several highly educated physicists, some from MIT and some from Harvard. Some knew the reference while others had no clue what you meant and thought it was a meaningless comment. And they're highly intelligent physicists, too!
-
Imagination is part of the human brain, I appreciate you and others playing games with English, but the true nature of language is to convey information, and not enter into grammatical games. Yes of a retired scientist!
I ask you again, to go back in your imagination,to say 8 th April 1540 and have that imaginary conversation with Henry the eight.
Yes he was the king of england if your history does not compute!
After all the fun of telling him about history 1540 - up to date, metal ships, air forces, etc etc inc of course the civil war and the king loosing his head. You will try to tell him about what you know about "science". He is very intelligent, but after many attempts , you will enter a realm, where he refers to your words , as works of the devil and black magic. !?
I of course refer to you, trying to explain, radio and television ..... You leave this conversation rapidly as you know if this was real, you would lose your head.
This Was just 400 year plus ago.....yes, only 400 years plus.
Now, please explain to all of us readers of your writings.....of What, 400 years from 2015, would you, yes you, be shouting ! "works of the devil and black magic?"
If you can,t,...... it does not matter if you are Harvard , MIT or whoever, Don,t use the now well read phrase " of course your wrong",
-
This Was just 400 year plus ago.....yes, only 400 years plus.
Now, please explain to all of us readers of your writings.....of What, 400 years from 2015, would you, yes you, be shouting ! "works of the devil and black magic?"
If you can,t,...... it does not matter if you are Harvard , MIT or whoever, Don,t use the now well read phrase " of course your wrong",
The year is 2015 Mr. Robcat, and 400 years into the future, it will be 2415. By that time, our grasp on physical reality will undoubtable be much more accurate than it presently is. Everyone here is well aware of that accepted fact. So......are you suggesting that you have knowledge that has advanced to that point in our future?
Let's deal with the present Mr. Robcat and the evidence you have to share with us under today's circumstances. If your knowledge has come to you from 400 years "In the future", you should certainly be intelligent enough to know that we would be intellectually unprepared for our minds to grasp the essence of this information.
Let's deal with the FACTS as we understand them today,.......OK?
We can daydream and let our imaginations run wild on our time off!
-
Time and space can not be separated, they are the two constituent parts of what physics calls "space/time" And if one were to cancel out the space within which we exist, time would vanish as well.
That's not what he was talking about, Ethos. He asked But is it daft to forget the idea of space and say the everything is separated just by time. The answer is that the idea is wrong of course. Objects have a spatial separation, the fact of which is independent of time. So there's no way that what he has in mind could be true.
How can you have spatial separation independent of time? Newton may let you get away with this, but IMME relativity does not.
-
How can you have spatial separation independent of time? Newton may let you get away with this, but IMME relativity does not.
I was referring to objects in a particular frame of reference. As such the distance between them doesn't change. The distance isn't a Lorentz invariant but it most certainly is time-independent. What about that do you claim is wrong and contrary to relativity?
-
Imagination is part of the human brain, I appreciate you and others playing games with English, but the true nature of language is to convey information, and not enter into grammatical games. Yes of a retired scientist!
I ask you again, to go back in your imagination,to say 8 th April 1540 and have that imaginary conversation with Henry the eight.
Yes he was the king of england if your history does not compute!
After all the fun of telling him about history 1540 - up to date, metal ships, air forces, etc etc inc of course the civil war and the king loosing his head. You will try to tell him about what you know about "science". He is very intelligent, but after many attempts , you will enter a realm, where he refers to your words , as works of the devil and black magic. !?
I of course refer to you, trying to explain, radio and television ..... You leave this conversation rapidly as you know if this was real, you would lose your head.
This Was just 400 year plus ago.....yes, only 400 years plus.
Now, please explain to all of us readers of your writings.....of What, 400 years from 2015, would you, yes you, be shouting ! "works of the devil and black magic?"
If you can,t,...... it does not matter if you are Harvard , MIT or whoever, Don,t use the now well read phrase " of course your wrong",
What the hell are you talking about? What on Earth does all of this have to do with the subject of this thread? You were being quite rude so I pointed it out to you. And with phrases such as Yes he was the king of england if your history does not compute! it's clear that you're going to continue to be rude regardless of how often we point this out to you. You come across as smug and arrogant.
By the way. Your analogy is quite flawed. Back 400 years ago there was no science to speak of. There weren't even any physicists around and none of the branches of physics had even been defined yet. So you can't compare what someone back then would think compared to how someone thinks today. Whatever we'd observer today we'd put into the framework of natural processes, known or unknown.
And what's this crap about "I appreciate you and others playing games with English, but the true nature of language is to convey information, and not enter into grammatical games." all about? And what kind of scientist were you exactly and why haven't you said what kind so far? Are you hiding it for some reason? What level of education do you have? Bachelor? Masters? PhD?
-
If your knowledge has come to you from 400 years "In the future", you should certainly be intelligent enough to know that we would be intellectually unprepared for our minds to grasp the essence of this information.
I beg to differ, my good man. Scientific thinking didn't exist back 400 years ago for the most part. Sure. There were some geniuses around but they didn't have the tools and methodology of science to work with and see the world through. Today we do and we would interpret technology and science from 400 years from now in that light. I'm fairly sure we'd be able to learn what scientists 400 years from now would want to teach us. Especially since I don't believe the idea that the complexity of scientific knowledge will grow at a constant or increasing rate in the future. For all we know, the science of 400 years from now might just look a lot like it does today. Not that it'd be easy to learn but we'd have the ability to do so. It'd be like bringing our physics to Laplace. Could we teach it to him? Sure. Could we teach this to, say, Noah? Hmmm!
-
Imagination is part of the human brain, I appreciate you and others playing games with English, but the true nature of language is to convey information, and not enter into grammatical games. Yes of a retired scientist!
I ask you again, to go back in your imagination,to say 8 th April 1540 and have that imaginary conversation with Henry the eight.
Yes he was the king of england if your history does not compute!
After all the fun of telling him about history 1540 - up to date, metal ships, air forces, etc etc inc of course the civil war and the king loosing his head. You will try to tell him about what you know about "science". He is very intelligent, but after many attempts , you will enter a realm, where he refers to your words , as works of the devil and black magic. !?
I of course refer to you, trying to explain, radio and television ..... You leave this conversation rapidly as you know if this was real, you would lose your head.
This Was just 400 year plus ago.....yes, only 400 years plus.
Now, please explain to all of us readers of your writings.....of What, 400 years from 2015, would you, yes you, be shouting ! "works of the devil and black magic?"
If you can,t,...... it does not matter if you are Harvard , MIT or whoever, Don,t use the now well read phrase " of course your wrong",
What the hell are you talking about? What on Earth does all of this have to do with the subject of this thread? You were being quite rude so I pointed it out to you. And with phrases such as Yes he was the king of england if your history does not compute! it's clear that you're going to continue to be rude regardless of how often we point this out to you. You come across as smug and arrogant.
By the way. Your analogy is quite flawed. Back 400 years ago there was no science to speak of. There weren't even any physicists around and none of the branches of physics had even been defined yet. So you can't compare what someone back then would think compared to how someone thinks today. Whatever we'd observer today we'd put into the framework of natural processes, known or unknown.
And what's this crap about "I appreciate you and others playing games with English, but the true nature of language is to convey information, and not enter into grammatical games." all about? And what kind of scientist were you exactly and why haven't you said what kind so far? Are you hiding it for some reason? What level of education do you have? Bachelor? Masters? PhD?
On the contrary. Leonardo da Vinci lived hundreds of years ago. He didn't arise spontaneously out of nothing. He moved forward the ideas of his day. The arab nations had translated the works thought lost at Alexandria. These were in fact the founders of modern sciuence.
-
On the contrary. Leonardo da Vinci lived hundreds of years ago. He didn't arise spontaneously out of nothing. He moved forward the ideas of his day. The arab nations had translated the works thought lost at Alexandria. These were in fact the founders of modern sciuence.
You misunderstood me. Recall what I said, i.e.
Scientific thinking didn't exist back 400 years ago for the most part.
Which means that I did not say that scientific thinking didn't exist at all. I also didn't say that there were no scientists either.
What I meant, but perhaps explained it poorly, was that the people who were scientists did not have the methodology that we do today. I.e. the philosophy of science was a great deal different then as it is now. E.g. back in da Vinci's day the concept of repeatability had yet to be added to the scientific method. In fact the falsifiability as a criterion for evaluating new hypotheses hadn't existed until 1934 when Karl Popper published the idea in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery. There was no peer review in da Vinci's day. Experimental evidence wasn't established as the arbiter of truth until 1650. Isaac Newton is accepted to be the first physicist. Today there are over 3/4 million scientists worldwide. There was no where near as many scientists in da Vinci's day. I'd even wager that in those days the number of scientific books that were in print could be read by one person in their life time at a leisurely pace.
Get the idea?
-
Sad
Real sadness resides in the facility with which even the cognoscenti can be seduced into waxing pusillanimous.
BTW, Donald Duck was just a quack! [:)]
-
Sad
Real sadness resides in the facility with which even the cognoscenti can be seduced into waxing pusillanimous.
BTW, Donald Duck was just a quack! [:)]
I couldn't agree with you more. You sure do have a way of making a good point my friend! :)
-
yes with all that said this would mean that dark matter is really just the effect of time on our limited perceptions. The only thing holding everything in place is just the amount of time relative to us for it to happen
-
yes with all that said this would mean that dark matter is really just the effect of time on our limited perceptions. The only thing holding everything in place is just the amount of time relative to us for it to happen
First things first; Welcome to the forum. [:D]
Second, nope. Not at all. In fact what you just said has nothing to do with dark matter.