0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I know very well the difference in units, an attempt at deflecting away from what is being said, deflecting towards me and not my ideas.I do not mention temperature or a barometer this is seemingly something you are trying to add to confuse the thread in some vain attempt to try to make myself look stupid.
Quote from: Thebox on 14/03/2015 14:06:29I know very well the difference in units, an attempt at deflecting away from what is being said, deflecting towards me and not my ideas.I do not mention temperature or a barometer this is seemingly something you are trying to add to confuse the thread in some vain attempt to try to make myself look stupid.You misunderstand me. I do not judge you as stupid, you will be judged on the quality of your answers and explanations. I am not trying to make you look stupid or deflect anything towards you or away from your ideas. I know you did not raise the subject of temperature and pressure. I am sure you understand units, but this is not a question of units, but of measurement.My question was aimed at improving my understanding of your idea and I hoped you would be keen to answer and help me understand. I was directly addressing your idea that the history of science measures time as distance. If your idea is true then by your own logic, as expressed in this thread, you have to accept that the history of thermometers and barometers also shows that they measure distance.Is it possible for you to explain why you view these measurements as invalid?
''an empty inflated area of space later on has no time either''Poor logic - You do not observe empty space, you observe only matter or a medium occupying a space.
You observe red shift by matter observation, you do not observe a red shift of empty space.
Science shows us that firing an arrow through the air does not expand the space the arrow is travelling through, the arrow travels through space and not with space,
Science by poor logic has changed the Physics involved in the same process as an arrow flying through space.
It is science inventing the Unicorns and not I,
I will try it another way to get you to understandme- hello science, in using a sundial to measure time do I give an increment of time period to an increment of distance the shadow has travelled?science - well yes there is no other way
me- that would mean a period of time was always equal to a period of distance would it not?
science - errrr, oh ek yes it does what a blunder in history.
From 0 degrees to 180 degrees is movement, movement that convertibility equals a distance travelled of observer or device relative to angular movement of the Sun relative to orbital earth motion.
So if you define 15 degrees of the shadow movement to be 1 hr, we get our 24 hour day. A 15 degree of movement still equalling a distance of motion. An up scaling of the sun dials 360 degrees.
Quote from: Thebox on 14/03/2015 10:53:17''an empty inflated area of space later on has no time either''Poor logic - You do not observe empty space, you observe only matter or a medium occupying a space.We observe the way the matter moves and conclude that the space between galaxies appears to be expanding. Unless the universe is virtual, space is not nothing - it has some kind of fabric to it which even Einstein referred to as an aether. This fabric makes the distances between different objects in space have distances between each other which don't change randomly from moment to moment, but either maintain a constant separation or a change in separation that itself does not change randomly in extreme ways. You can try to decouple time from space altogether and claim that time has no impact on it at all, but all that will ever be is a pointless philosophical assertion which can never be proved, but in reality there is not a cubic nanometre of space that doesn't have light passing through it all the time, so it's a doubly pointless assertion.QuoteYou observe red shift by matter observation, you do not observe a red shift of empty space.Denying the expansion would put you into the crackpot category. Sometimes the crackpots are right, of course, but your reason for denying the expansion ought to be based more on reasoned argument rather than basing it on what you want to believe.QuoteScience shows us that firing an arrow through the air does not expand the space the arrow is travelling through, the arrow travels through space and not with space,I'm not aware of anyone suggesting that shooting an arrow through air would expand space.QuoteScience by poor logic has changed the Physics involved in the same process as an arrow flying through space.The expansion of space is not understood and science has not claimed to understand it. Science has merely detected the expansion.QuoteIt is science inventing the Unicorns and not I,I don't understand why you're comparing this to unicorns. What is it you're trying to attack that matters so much? You want time to exist for matter, but not for the fabric of space upon which matter plays. You appear to be the person suggesting something outlandish here by denying space any connection with time, all based on zero evidence.
Quote from: Thebox on 14/03/2015 11:05:15I will try it another way to get you to understandme- hello science, in using a sundial to measure time do I give an increment of time period to an increment of distance the shadow has travelled?science - well yes there is no other wayYou are obsessed with ancient ways of measuring time based on the Earth's rotation, and you then assert that this is how scientists measure time. They don't. We still stick with units of time that suit the way we live on this planet, but the length of a second is now measured by more accurate means involving atomic clocks.Quoteme- that would mean a period of time was always equal to a period of distance would it not?Time can certainly be tied to distance through the relationship of distance travelled by something in an amount of time. There is such a thing as a light clock (at least in thought experiments) where light travels to and fro between two points, each round trip counting as a tick. You could use something more primitive like a sound clock or the rotation of a planet, but those methods introduce large random errors.Quotescience - errrr, oh ek yes it does what a blunder in history.Science hunts out the most accurate ways to measure time and then uses them. It doesn't stick with inaccurate methods handed down by the ancients.QuoteFrom 0 degrees to 180 degrees is movement, movement that convertibility equals a distance travelled of observer or device relative to angular movement of the Sun relative to orbital earth motion.The Earth rotates on average apx. 361 degrees in 24 hours, so it's already very messy. It's rotation is also slowing, so it's not a good clock. That is why science ditched it.QuoteSo if you define 15 degrees of the shadow movement to be 1 hr, we get our 24 hour day. A 15 degree of movement still equalling a distance of motion. An up scaling of the sun dials 360 degrees.You seem to be incapable of understanding that the Earth is not an accurate clock. Please try to move on.
I can see from your replies that you have not really understood what we are saying. I see no merit in continuing this as you have offered no proof of your ideas and even your video offers no explanation.You will find that TNS is more forgiving than the other forums you have been banned from. Folks here do not judge you by other's opinions, but on the merit of the arguments you present. If your idea is judged to be incorrect you will find that replies to your posts tend to peter out, this is not a sign that your argument is won, but that folks are tired of your inability to make a convincing presentation of your ideas.You are unlikely to be flamed, banned, or locked out unless you makes nuisance of yourself. The worst that will happen is that you are ignored.It is, however, easy to see why you would have been banned from other forums, I wish you luck with finding one which accepts your ideas.
What?...............Again changing the entire context of my points and re-wording science to suit the flaw.
''We observe the way the matter moves and conclude that the space between galaxies appears to be expanding. ''Re-worded from space is expanding with the matter, all you have said there is we observe a greater distance between galaxies.
'' it has some kind of fabric to it which even Einstein referred to as an aether''A misconception, the fabric of space is EM radiation and CBMR
''Denying the expansion would put you into the crackpot category. '' [V] Pfff, which part of matter moving away from us did you not understand in my video?
nothing is expanding, space is not a balloon or a gaseous medium.Matter is moving through space and the seen distance between matter is getting greater.
''I don't understand why you're comparing this to unicorns. What is it you're trying to attack that matters so much?''There is no wall on the edge of space where visual matter ends, it is not a flat universe, there is no edge to nothing, it is continuous space, no edge. Space continues way beyond the last matter you can observe.space is infinite, space is timeless, light in space is zero to sight, F=P=f, force equals the pressure which equals the frequency which equals spectral content.
What matters is there is no time travel, no time dilation, a complete misunderstanding about space.
Again no, when you changed over in 1960 to a Caesium clock you used the old value of the old second meaning it is the same still. I understand the Earth is not an accurate clock , neither is the Caesium clock which is not a constant.
Quote from: Thebox on 14/03/2015 21:01:44What?...............Again changing the entire context of my points and re-wording science to suit the flaw.I'm not trying to distort anything you said, but am merely responding to what you appear to be saying. If you're saying something different, you need to state things more clearly to avoid being misunderstood.Quote''We observe the way the matter moves and conclude that the space between galaxies appears to be expanding. ''Re-worded from space is expanding with the matter, all you have said there is we observe a greater distance between galaxies.Do you imagine that we are at the centre of the universe and that everything else is blasting away from us, or is one of those other galaxies out there at the centre while we are blasting away from it? Either way, that's a perfectly reasonable thing to consider, but the microwave background fits in with the idea of all the stuff we can see exploding from a single point in such a way that that point has spread out to become every point in today's universe - these microwaves are coming from all directions and that doesn't fit in with there being one single point in the universe now from which everything else is moving away. That's the key evidence which you need to take on board.Quote'' it has some kind of fabric to it which even Einstein referred to as an aether''A misconception, the fabric of space is EM radiation and CBMRThe fabric is the Spacetime of relativity or the aether of LET. If you consider it to be nothing more than the content, what do you imagine it is that keeps it all in order such that a photon travelling along a path through "nothing" is able to maintain its course through that "nothing" when there is "nothing" there for it to travel through?Quote''Denying the expansion would put you into the crackpot category. '' [V] Pfff, which part of matter moving away from us did you not understand in my video?Your video merely illustrates what something looks like if it is moving away OR if the space between you and it is expanding.Quotenothing is expanding, space is not a balloon or a gaseous medium.Matter is moving through space and the seen distance between matter is getting greater.Aether is not a gaseous or liquid kind of beast - it's a fabric of some kind, although we can't reach out and feel it, so it's only reason that tells us it is there. If you reject reason, you can call it nothing if you wish, but that will cause you no end of trouble in explaining how things work.Quote''I don't understand why you're comparing this to unicorns. What is it you're trying to attack that matters so much?''There is no wall on the edge of space where visual matter ends, it is not a flat universe, there is no edge to nothing, it is continuous space, no edge. Space continues way beyond the last matter you can observe.space is infinite, space is timeless, light in space is zero to sight, F=P=f, force equals the pressure which equals the frequency which equals spectral content.So how do you account for the microwave background? I would like space to be infinite too, but the facts do not obey my wishes.QuoteWhat matters is there is no time travel, no time dilation, a complete misunderstanding about space.There is time travel, but it all goes forwards. There is arguably no time dilation - in LET there is an absolute time which always ticks at the same rate everywhere, but clocks can run slow due to increased communication distances in clocks when they move through space or due to a local lower speed of light. If you want that with your theory though, you're going to need an aether to control the way clocks run slow - without it you're stuffed. Without it you can't even have a consistent speed of light as no two photons will be able to keep pace with each other accurately due to the fact they'd be moving through absolutely nothing, having no way of determining how long it should take them to pass through the same length of nothing.
Quote from: Thebox on 14/03/2015 21:04:44Again no, when you changed over in 1960 to a Caesium clock you used the old value of the old second meaning it is the same still. I understand the Earth is not an accurate clock , neither is the Caesium clock which is not a constant.A second is merely a unit of time. We have to use some unit, so we've stuck with one that was handed down to us by the ancients because it's still a very convenient length, but there's nothing special about it, and that means the method used to define a second is unimportant. What matters is time, and you have to think about time without dragging in any of the irrelevant junk associated with the second.
Well, I still can't work out where you're trying to go with this, but good luck with your journey. It's got to the point where all it does is empty my mind and make me want to jump off a cliff, so I'm going to leave you to it.
What is time ?
When considering science emptying your head and considering the process with an empty head is the best approach. Why be influenced by others decisions that came before us or when considering something not known.