The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Answering Jeffrey's question.
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Answering Jeffrey's question.

  • 0 Replies
  • 1749 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

guest39538

  • Guest
Answering Jeffrey's question.
« on: 22/01/2018 12:37:25 »
I can't post in other sections will answer you here, you put :

Quote
Consider three frames labeled A, B and C containing objects a, b and c respectively. If we set our frame of observation to be A we can then define the motions of B and C. observations from A show that C is moving away with a constant velocity and B is maintaining an equal distance between both in straight line. Now we can determine that time dilation must be greater than that in A for both B and C. However, the inverse must also be considered possible if we take our observation point to be frame C. In both these situations the value of time dilation in A and B cannot be equal. If we now consider B to be our observation frame then the values in A and C MUST be equal. To state that this is because all things are relative misses the point. The absolute values of time dilation may be impossible for us to determine but that doesn't mean they do not exist. Opinions?

A,B,C all occupy time and space, they are not time and neither is your measurement.  All A,B,C occupy the present and time passes for all at the same constant rate.   Only your measurement of time is out of synchronisation. i.e a timing dilation.    Only a fool would define time as its measurement , the reason, the measurement is indirectly.

added- A car drives around a race track at exactly 100mph.

Two observers time the journey.

Observer (A)'s stop watch runs slower than observers (B) stop watch, does anyone in their right mind thinks this affects the velocity of the car? 

Its called indirect measurements.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.674 seconds with 25 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.