0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
First you have to define time before you can describe time affects. The reason you do not understand Alex is because you are not using the same definition of time. Alex has a deeper understanding of time than just <it is>. You may be at the limit of your depth of understanding. As apparently I am also. We are each fixed in our unshakable opinion. I believe both Alex and I feel time is condition caused by space separate from macro mass. There is observation and subjective reasoning for observations it is in the form of theories. Relativity being the best theory because it has passed every test so far. This is a theory based on postulates and not mechanics. When mechanics are removed it opens the door to magical causes. The Copenhagen interpretation opened that door very wide. Multi verse, time travel, worm holes and even the big bang is the result. They are all something from nothing magic. Those that are smarter than I came up with it so it must be true. In the past the so called smartest men of their time voted on the big bang. There were 13 men and the vote was 12 to 1 in favor so it passed for the cause of the creation of mass. I might also remind you that it was a Catholic Priest who named it the Big Bang. He probably wanted to tell science it took 7 days to complete. Some one could have come up with a stat that would have confirmed it but then again the concept of a day would have to have been pre-defined. I grew up with religion from my mother and science with my father. Obviously my father won my mind. Back to proofs. There are no proofs period without a mechanical basis. Mathematicians believe math is mechanical. And yes it is mechanical. A theory has to follow math to be possible but impossible theories can also follow mathematics. Like Einstein I have faith in Relativity. Main stream fails the Relativity postulates. Main streams mechanical structure is non existent so it opens the door to not following the postulates. Lets take light going down a gravity well. Main stream will suggest light increases momentum to be blue shifted. Of course by their interpretation that is the only way the observation could be interpreted by their understanding of their standard model. They violated the constant speed of light postulate in order to maintain their model. That observation should have destroyed there standard model in favor of a model that included red shift without a SR velocity increase of light. This red shift in GR is described in the gamma term for dilation. Space is being expanded by this gamma term (dilation). Than we have to ask what is being dilated? What ever is being dilated is directly affecting light propagation and electron cycle time in what is considered a frame. Mass is dilated to fill a larger volume of space so your measuring stick becomes larger. A larger measuring stick will measure a meter longer than a smaller measuring stick. Your measure of time by either light distance or electron cycle ticks slower to match the measuring stick in your frame. The measured speed of light in every frame in a vacuum is measured to be the same. That the distance measured is not the same is what allows Euclidean mathematics to remain valid. Main stream suggests the magic of contraction of the universe and use the muon as proof. The muon has to slow down in order to react with its new environment of the mass on Earth rather than the energy of space. Space energy has to control the distance and propagation of light and cycle of the electron to measure the speed of light in a vacuum the same in every frame. Or you can maintain a belief in coincidence of magic.When you move a standardized spectrum detector cell down a gravity well the standardization changes its size to the newly dilated frame. Light used for the standardization higher in less dilated space will appear blue shifted to the more dilated position of the detector. The reverse will be a red shifted detection. The speed of light remains the same because the spin of energy particles remain the same. Space energy is an organized pattern while mass is a disorganized pattern causing friction with fundamental energy. That friction is what we describe as energy. Our mass energy is just a conduit for space time energy, zero point energy or Dark mass energy. Name it anything you like other than main streams model of energy from magic.Do I know why the spin energy for the motion of time exists? Absolutely not. That depth of understanding has to be relegated back to the God of the unknown.
the box" it is a fact you can not observe free space has any sort of motion "Can you observe gamma rays? That is unobservable yet a physical reality.
", it is a fact that no aether has been detected"I would suggest light being detected proves a type of Ether.
"There is no evidence of expanding space"The slowing of the tick rate of a clock in GR
I do not have faith in the big bang and do not have an opinion on the size of the universe
Quote\We can detect gamma rays? But you are adding something to free space, you have to think the void of space that is ''behind''/''underneath'' everything./QuoteI do not believe space is a true void.Quote\Just no, a clock or rate has no relationship to free space. /Quote It has everything to do with space.Quote\Interesting, you understand that distance is defined by the last ''piece'' of visual matter? /Quote The last piece of a visual image measured through relativity for distance.There is something you can explain to me. How do you frame quotes?
[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void?
Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:01:40[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void? Because energy is of space not mass.
Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:08:00Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:01:40[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void? Because energy is of space not mass.and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?
Quote from: Thebox on 11/10/2016 18:51:41Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:08:00Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:01:40[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void? Because energy is of space not mass.and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?Gravity(X)
Quote from: Alex Siqueira on 11/10/2016 20:08:21Quote from: Thebox on 11/10/2016 18:51:41Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:08:00Quote from: GoC on 11/10/2016 01:01:40[Quote\] For what reason would anyone presume free space was not a void? Because energy is of space not mass.and why would you think that energy does not occupy a spacial void?Gravity(X)gravity is a product of mass, mass occupies space , I see no reason why space itself can not be a void , absolute emptiness.
That something we call space could be comprised of the smallest unit of existence, not holding mass or energy (hence undetectable)
yes, product of masses, but not on the macro mass, "the gravity" is happening right at space, the friction of macro mass with space, releases energy from space,
But energy could occupy space, I ''see'' space to be a blank canvass and all that is of ''matter'' is of ''creation'' that occupies free space of a void.
If time really slowed down , then it would take longer to get somewhere and the velocity would also have to slow down of the moving Caesium atom.
Quote from: Thebox on 05/10/2016 03:25:56If time really slowed down , then it would take longer to get somewhere and the velocity would also have to slow down of the moving Caesium atom.This is a very important point and the fact that you are considering it demonstrates your intellect. Don't let anyone say otherwise. Think about this a little more.