0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I read relativity , of course I don't know how to do a paper correctly. I haven't a clue how to present it. I could present it in demonstration but explaining it in words as in a paper is not easy.
Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 20:06:52Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:50:16Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 19:33:17Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity. You have never read an academic paper have you. You really dont have a clue. I read relativity , of course I don't know how to do a paper correctly. I haven't a clue how to present it. I could present it in demonstration but explaining it in words as in a paper is not easy. You read relativity? Where? General or special relativity?
Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:50:16Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 19:33:17Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity. You have never read an academic paper have you. You really dont have a clue. I read relativity , of course I don't know how to do a paper correctly. I haven't a clue how to present it. I could present it in demonstration but explaining it in words as in a paper is not easy.
Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 19:33:17Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity. You have never read an academic paper have you. You really dont have a clue.
Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity.
Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written?
Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects.
Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 20:08:53Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 20:06:52Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:50:16Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 19:33:17Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity. You have never read an academic paper have you. You really dont have a clue. I read relativity , of course I don't know how to do a paper correctly. I haven't a clue how to present it. I could present it in demonstration but explaining it in words as in a paper is not easy. You read relativity? Where? General or special relativity? http://www.bartleby.com/173/
Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 21:14:42Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 20:08:53Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 20:06:52Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:50:16Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 19:33:17Quote from: The Spoon on 09/10/2017 19:27:33Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 18:56:31Darn it, seem to have writers block and not know where to begin. so far.....Abstract - This paper is intended to show by objectivity of observation and logical conclusions, that darkness (The absence of light), is actually the property and natural state of appearance of any object. Thus leading to a conclusion(s) that darkness is the visible darkness of objects and light is the visible illumination of objects. You also have to write a paper before you right an abstract. An abstract is a summary of the paper and the data contained therein. How can you summarise something you have not written? I already have all the physics involved and the observations in my mind. I already know my own notion so it is easy to write the abstract firstly . Then I have to make sure in the paper I cover what the abstract says. However my abstract seems rather boring and is not very elegant. It does not explain the space being transparent etc. It is not easy to just write a paper, I have to be int he right frame of mind which I will be sooner than later. It just comes to me... I was thinking of starting with clarifying what we mean by light and explaining the various ambiguities of the word. Directing the reader to the intended version to remove ambiguity. You have never read an academic paper have you. You really dont have a clue. I read relativity , of course I don't know how to do a paper correctly. I haven't a clue how to present it. I could present it in demonstration but explaining it in words as in a paper is not easy. You read relativity? Where? General or special relativity? http://www.bartleby.com/173/So you read all of it? How long did it take you to find that after I asked you the question? How does that relate to this post and what you are postulating?
How does that relate to this post and what you are postulating?
There's no way you can prove he didn't.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/10/2017 21:37:17There's no way you can prove he didn't.I can prove I did. Do you think I could actually have different notions and ideas on things if I did not know the original view of that thing? Of course not . I understand why you and even I use to think darkness is just the absence of light. In my opinion that is a cop out without a complete investigation. So I investigated and found a different answer that ''fits'' reality and the physics involved also agrees with it. I thought the Universe was mysterious before but with my ''findings'' I now find it even more mysterious. I even will say I admire it because it is just such a ''clever'' universe.
I understand why you and even I use to think darkness is just the absence of light.
Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 21:46:46Quote from: Bored chemist on 09/10/2017 21:37:17There's no way you can prove he didn't.I can prove I did. Do you think I could actually have different notions and ideas on things if I did not know the original view of that thing? Of course not . I understand why you and even I use to think darkness is just the absence of light. In my opinion that is a cop out without a complete investigation. So I investigated and found a different answer that ''fits'' reality and the physics involved also agrees with it. I thought the Universe was mysterious before but with my ''findings'' I now find it even more mysterious. I even will say I admire it because it is just such a ''clever'' universe. Plenty of people, like me, have a view on relativity without having read the original paper(s).I couldn't read it- that's why I wondered if German was your first language.Quote from: Thebox on 09/10/2017 21:46:46I understand why you and even I use to think darkness is just the absence of light. I think that, because it's plainly observably true.May I remind you that you were writing an account of your thoughts on the mater.It might be better if you got back to that.
Funny how you mentioned the Hafele–Keating experiment only to subsequently ignore its results.
Quite clearly you have not read it properly . The conclusion about time dilation is it is a timing dilation.
Quote from: Thebox on 10/10/2017 12:39:31Quite clearly you have not read it properly . The conclusion about time dilation is it is a timing dilation. Call it whatever you want to, but the results of that experiment (and others) demonstrate that different objects do indeed experience the flow of time at different rates depending on their relative velocities and positions in a gravity well. To argue anything else is to argue against observed reality.
Quote from: Kryptid on 10/10/2017 15:21:57Quote from: Thebox on 10/10/2017 12:39:31Quite clearly you have not read it properly . The conclusion about time dilation is it is a timing dilation. Call it whatever you want to, but the results of that experiment (and others) demonstrate that different objects do indeed experience the flow of time at different rates depending on their relative velocities and positions in a gravity well. To argue anything else is to argue against observed reality.Nope, what they experience is a different rate of the measurement of time. Time is independent of the clocks. Counting slow or counting fast does not alter the rate of time. Perhaps if you had read it properly and tried to understand it you might not be so defensive. Yes there is a timing dilation but no there is not a time dilation.
Nope, what they experience is a different rate of the measurement of time. Time is independent of the clocks. Counting slow or counting fast does not alter the rate of time. Perhaps if you had read it properly and tried to understand it you might not be so defensive. Yes there is a timing dilation but no there is not a time dilation.
Without time dilation there is nothing making the clocks speed up or slow down
Why would you think time was slowing the clock down?
The clock measures time but is not time.
Quote from: Thebox on 10/10/2017 21:31:30Why would you think time was slowing the clock down?It obviously isn't due to any changes in the internal structure of the clock, given that it's identical when it's sitting on the ground or when it's flying in an airplane. Even unstable subatomic particles take longer to decay when they are moving quickly. So whatever is causing processes to slow down at high speeds or in strong gravity wells affects all devices and processes equally. Also, the amount by which it slows down is in accordance with the amount that Einstein predicted mathematically that it would if time itself is indeed slowing down. Due to these facts, it is perfectly sensible to say that time is slowing down.QuoteThe clock measures time but is not time. You don't say...