Naked Science Forum
On the Lighter Side => New Theories => Topic started by: guest39538 on 02/09/2016 13:59:10
-
No matter what the ''speed'' of measurement of the rate of time, time can be measured at an infinite rate because any measurement no matter how small of an increment or how fast or slow the rate, any measurement greater than 0 becomes instantly time passed.
-
Can you give an example of a physical equation where the speed of time plays a role?
-
Can you give an example of a physical equation where the speed of time plays a role?
Probably most of the equations where time is involved, i.e d/t
time dilation, but I can't write that using my keyboard.
the speed of light etc etc
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
What this affects I will leave you to decide, I know I am correct.
-
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
That's a shame. I have a really cool thought experiment that disproves this. And I was gonna share it, but I guess you're not interested in learning. Tell me again, why are you here?
-
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
That's a shame. I have a really cool thought experiment that disproves this. And I was gonna share it, but I guess you're not interested in learning. Tell me again, why are you here?
Ok lets hear this, this should be good, you will fail to explain this away.
Why am I here? to learn together.
Learning is generally two way, both parties sharing input, the logic involved in 0 is undeniable is it not?
But please try to demonstrate why this is wrong.
-
Can you give an example of a physical equation where the speed of time plays a role?
Probably most of the equations where time is involved, i.e d/t
time dilation, but I can't write that using my keyboard.
the speed of light etc etc
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
What this affects I will leave you to decide, I know I am correct.
None of your examples seem to be ones where the rate of time is used, rather, they are ones where a rate is given, i.e., a comparison of a quantity to time. Given the definition of "rate", your claim seems to be nonsense, not true.
-
Time=Motion=fundamental energy of c. The time of motion only has the ability of distance of motion relative to c. Infinite time would = infinite c which we do not observe.
-
Time=Motion=fundamental energy of c. The time of motion only has the ability of distance of motion relative to c. Infinite time would = infinite c which we do not observe.
c is not time, there is no argument I could imagine you could give when considering any measurement greater than 0. Infinite time in no way presumes an infinite speed of light.
-
Can you give an example of a physical equation where the speed of time plays a role?
Probably most of the equations where time is involved, i.e d/t
time dilation, but I can't write that using my keyboard.
the speed of light etc etc
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
What this affects I will leave you to decide, I know I am correct.
None of your examples seem to be ones where the rate of time is used, rather, they are ones where a rate is given, i.e., a comparison of a quantity to time. Given the definition of "rate", your claim seems to be nonsense, not true.
Well it does not matter if I give no examples, my one explanation is surely an over ruling law that is 100% accurately true.
Time can be measured at any rate .
-
But it hardly matters , I think my explanation is 100% axiom fact and is unarguable and undeniable.
That's a shame. I have a really cool thought experiment that disproves this. And I was gonna share it, but I guess you're not interested in learning. Tell me again, why are you here?
##I await this thought experiment, I fail to see how any thought could over rule the initial thought.
-
Posted by: Thebox
« on: Today at 16:46:27 » "
c is not time, there is no argument I could imagine you could give when considering any measurement greater than 0. Infinite time in no way presumes an infinite speed of light."
What is your definition of time?
-
Well it does not matter if I give no examples, my one explanation is surely an over ruling law that is 100% accurately true.
Time can be measured at any rate .
If your explanation can't be used in physics, then it's not physics. The fact that you can't show an example is damning.
-
Well it does not matter if I give no examples, my one explanation is surely an over ruling law that is 100% accurately true.
Time can be measured at any rate .
If your explanation can't be used in physics, then it's not physics. The fact that you can't show an example is damning.
I do not know what you are actual asking so it is rather hard to show an example.
Regardless, this is in new theory, it is a new theory, forget all your present information because that is not a new theory.
Please explain why you think my theory is wrong?
Clearly the rate of time is infinite.
-
Posted by: Thebox
« on: Today at 16:46:27 » "
c is not time, there is no argument I could imagine you could give when considering any measurement greater than 0. Infinite time in no way presumes an infinite speed of light."
What is your definition of time?
That which allows existence.
-
Motion causes time and everything is in motion. Existence and its cause are going to be debated for as long as conscious life exists. If everything were frozen in the universe existence of mass would remain but time would not.
-
Motion causes time and everything is in motion. Existence and its cause are going to be debated for as long as conscious life exists. If everything were frozen in the universe existence of mass would remain but time would not.
What rubbish, motion does not cause time, time just is. Even in a stationary Universe time still ''passes'' by.
Why the hell would you think time would not pass in a ''frozen'' universe ? Quite an outlandish thought.
-
You have a different definition and understanding of time than I do. How do you define time? Just is? Do you use terms without knowing their meaning often? How do you expect to explain things when you do not understand the words you are using to describe your thoughts?
-
You have a different definition and understanding of time than I do. How do you define time? Just is? Do you use terms without knowing their meaning often? How do you expect to explain things when you do not understand the words you are using to describe your thoughts?
Well! perhaps I am saving better wording just in case.
Do I use terms without knowing their meaning?
I google words for their meaning, but sometimes perhaps I do misuse the definitions.
Either way, nobody in this thread as yet been able to argue my idea so I suggest therefore it must be true.
-
Your bar for the truth is similar to presidential candidates Trump and Clinton.
-
Your bar for the truth is similar to presidential candidates Trump and Clinton.
my truth involves undeniable logic, I am pretty sure politicians have no logic.
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
Was bringt dich dazu das zu sagen?
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
Was bringt dich dazu das zu sagen?
Gut! meiner Meinung nach macht mich das sagen , aber wenn Sie auf Verweigerung beziehen , ist es doch scheinbar nicht zu leugnen .
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
Was bringt dich dazu das zu sagen?
Gut! meiner Meinung nach macht mich das sagen , aber wenn Sie auf Verweigerung beziehen , ist es doch scheinbar nicht zu leugnen .
Sie haben ein sehr seltsames Verständnis der Dinge . Ein Missverständnis!
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
Was bringt dich dazu das zu sagen?
Gut! meiner Meinung nach macht mich das sagen , aber wenn Sie auf Verweigerung beziehen , ist es doch scheinbar nicht zu leugnen .
Sie haben ein sehr seltsames Verständnis der Dinge . Ein Missverständnis!
gibt es kein Missverständnis , können Sie mein erster Beitrag argumentieren ?
-
Sweeping dust under the carpet will not make the dust go away.
Does anyone deny my opening post?
Was bringt dich dazu das zu sagen?
Gut! meiner Meinung nach macht mich das sagen , aber wenn Sie auf Verweigerung beziehen , ist es doch scheinbar nicht zu leugnen .
Sie haben ein sehr seltsames Verständnis der Dinge . Ein Missverständnis!
gibt es kein Missverständnis , können Sie mein erster Beitrag argumentieren ?
Jetzt fangen Sie nicht Spiele spielen
-
Referte mihi quid intelligendum de tempore.
-
Referte mihi quid intelligendum de tempore.
non habet , et est tempus. Ludens Games ? Vitasti amet est .
edit - I think the translator failed on this one.
-
e haere pehea koe ki te imi i tēnei tangata?
-
e haere pehea koe ki te imi i tēnei tangata?
What person lol? find this person , I think my translator is completely broke.
-
Lassen Sie uns Zeit als v / g definieren, wo g die Beschleunigung aufgrund der Schwerkraft und v die Geschwindigkeit einiger Masse ist . Wie kann dann die Geschwindigkeit der Zeit unendlich sein ?
-
Lassen Sie uns Zeit als v / g definieren, wo g die Beschleunigung aufgrund der Schwerkraft und v die Geschwindigkeit einiger Masse ist . Wie kann dann die Geschwindigkeit der Zeit unendlich sein ?
oukou hoʻomaka mai 0