0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
sorry Bogie,I must for once disagree.there comes a time to lay down the sword (or your principles), when you come to the conclusion you are dealing with either those unworthy of combat, or those unable to reasonably dispute your values.
Applies to both @David Cooper @Bogie_smilesAdvice On Absolutes, a poemLife is a learning instituteWhere no class bells will chimeBut not one fact brings no disputeAnd certainly not time.Some will say time is absoluteJust like they’ll say of space.But then surely some will refute Theres Absolutes in place.So stand your line, and don’t stay mute,Or make apology.Stand up for things beyond refute,In your cosmology
"Thank you, I always appreciate creative writing, it is a powerful way to send a message"I concur.I encourage Bogie to find a musician with whom to collaborate; and release the next great religious/pop hit!
Yet life is so undaunted that perpetually its found there,Created or evolved it seems to spring form almost nowhere.From galaxies, to holes of black, dark matter and neutrinos,Where endlessly life's dice are tossed in cosmic class casinos.
Btw as a believer of ISU, what is the official explanation for the origin of life
You do have pretty detailed scenarios related to absolute time and space. I wonder what the list of absolutes includes, i.e., time, space, the speed of light in vacua, and I suppose many absolute values like that. Can you give me a little insight into to the path you followed that guides to adopt absolute time and space?
Given that life has already existed for an infinite amount of time, certain life forms would be so advanced and developed that any possible method of transportation has been learned and mastered, any knowledge about this universe has been acquired, they must be so high tech that they consider us modern humans as how we consider bacteria.They would also probably be laughing at our feeble technology
maybe the posture of the super-advanced is to cautiously lend a hand.[/font][/color]
That would be wonderful
Quote from: ATMD on 15/12/2018 01:23:37That would be wonderful If I didn’t mention it, part of the philosophy of the ISU includes maintaining a positive attitude, lol.
To be honest this should be a strict policy. Only people with a positive attitude allowed to join ISU
Quote from: ATMD on 15/12/2018 11:53:02To be honest this should be a strict policy. Only people with a positive attitude allowed to join ISU I wish . But in the ISU everything is relative to something else. I guess we have to face the fact that the ISU rules are the invariant natural laws of the universe, and they're already set. On the other hand, our personal philosophy of life allows us to set our own rules to live by. That is good because we can decide to require a positive attitude, and we can decide when to change our philosophy, lol.
Our measurements show us that light consistently travels at the same speed through space (for a given depth in a gravity well, and that it varies in a predictable way at different heights in a gravity well). In that, we already see that space and time must be extremely consistent things - they give us the same results for experiments over and over again. We run experiments which show us the functionality of clocks being slowed by movement through space (and by depth in a gravity well).
...As we send two lots of light round different paths to get from A to B, we get predictable results - time isn't speeding up and slowing down in random ways in different places, and space maintains separations predictably rather than having distances between two things continually vary in random ways. There's a very precise mechanism in play behind everything we see.
If time was behaving in unpredictable ways, we'd see distortions in space between ourselves and distant stars and galaxies.
Can time run slow for some clocks if those clocks run slow?
Not if it's a moving clock - we can see the mechanism by which the clock runs slow and we know that the light in a moving light clock is still moving at the same rate through space as it would if the clock was stationary, so we are not fooled by the clock running slow. If we put a clock down a gravity well, we are not fooled by it running slow either because the speed of light is slower down there - we know that time is not running slow there, but that the clock is. We also know that the clock isn't taking a shortcut into the future by being in a gravity well - it is simply ticking more slowly while passing through the same amount of time as a clock right at the top of the well, and we can check this by moving them apart and then moving them back together - ...
... if one of them had taken a shortcut into the future, we would see an event-meshing failure and the laws of physics would break because we see them meeting up and can knock them against each other, but a shortcut into the future would mean that the one that took the shortcut would fail to collide with the other clock because that other clock wouldn't be there yet when the shortcut taker arrives at the reunion point.
It's really simple to demonstrate this with a simulation, but all the people who simulate theories without absolute time have to sneak it into the simulation to coordinate the action while pretending they haven't done so. Their models simply cannot work the way they claim, and it's extraordinary that they're able to get away with cheating like that even after they've been found out, but so few people can get their head round this stuff that they simply aren't capable of checking the facts. Those who are so sure they're right though have an obligation to show a working simulation of their model that doesn't cheat by smuggling in absolute time. They refuse to do so.
is it my imagination, or is Bogie channeling Nostradamus?