0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mr Box, I think you are trying to equate ignorance with knowledge.

You are quite clearly very confused. Time exists and marches on despite the absence of clocks or any measurement of it (very much like the fact that the distance between two points on the Earth that are 1 mile apart continues to be 1 mile apart even if you don't measure it).

If you think of it in terms of two arrays of numbers.A = (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)B = (0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0)Then the indexes for both arrays range from 0 to 9. So A(3) = 3 and B(3) = 0. So that only the indexes are equal and not the values that they select from each array. If we say that the index for A is i and the index for B is j then if i=0=j then A(i) = B(j) if and only if the indexes are both zero. If the indexes are equal and both greater than zero then A(i) <> B(j) if both indexes are in the range 1 to 9.

I am not confused, your sentence is confusing, you have just ruled out time dilation and length contraction with a few words.

I think Jeff sort of get's it

added - science and maths labels the value 0 , as 1. 0.....00.....10=1 and there is no difference.

Take a length , let us say 1m measured by you0.......1mnow if i dont measure it 0.......0

1 is seemingly a number that marks the end ....

p.s I suppose this will be moved again....to the ignore areas of the forum

I learn from your answers and corrections, that is my style and tenacious.

Any number can mark an end

sorry, I know it is off topic, but I am compelled to comment:doe's ≠ does!!!

So then you agree that numbers are just marks? purely invention and in reality there is no numbers,

The thread is not asking if 1 smarty is equal to 0 smarty's .

So then you agree that numbers are just marks?

So then you agree that numbers are just marks? purely invention and in reality there is no numbers

if there is no numbers then that means 0, so every single number must be equal to zero because they don't exist to begin with

Quote from: TheBoxThe thread is not asking if 1 smarty is equal to 0 smarty's . I assume that this is talking about pieces of confectionery, not comparing Einsteins and Van Goghs?When you count interchangeable (but indivisible) objects, we call these natural numbers, because you can count them in nature. You can have a positive number of objects (or zero), but you can't have a "negative" number of Smarties....sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please REGISTER or LOGINQuoteSo then you agree that numbers are just marks? If you have divisible objects (like liters of wine), you can have a physical representation of a rational number (and perhaps it helps you imagine a real number). And accountants quickly worked out how to produce negatives - if I loan you 50 litres of wine, and you give me 75 litres back, you have really only given me 25 litres overall. A debt acts like a negative.QuoteSo then you agree that numbers are just marks? purely invention and in reality there is no numbersNatural numbers exist in nature in terms of electric charge. Numbers exist in polarization of light (horizontal vs vertical) and also flips of a coin or rotations of a sheet of paper. You end up with different kinds of numbers depending on the shape of the sheet of paper (square, rectangle, triangle, circle) or even whether it is colored on one side vs the same.We can represent the numbers by marks on a line (or a 2D ), by writing the numbers in some script, or in equations.Quoteif there is no numbers then that means 0, so every single number must be equal to zero because they don't exist to begin withHistorically, Classical mathematics developed the other way. The Greek mathematicians knew a considerable amount about numbers, but they debated a lot about whether you could have a zero.You may recall from school that Roman Numerals had no zero - they didn't need one (so they thought).It was Indian mathematicians who invented zero as an explicit number (although the accountants had worked it out a long time before that).

Ok, so If i do a time line and mark a point on the line number 1, what is number 1 equal to?

Quote from: Thebox on 03/05/2016 07:01:23Ok, so If i do a time line and mark a point on the line number 1, what is number 1 equal to?While we are waiting for Evan to come back:Ok, you say this is a timeline therefore we assume the mark represents a point in elapsed time. However, you haven't said what measure. It could be 1s, m, h, day, yr, month, century, you have to specify.It also helps if you show where your starting point is, which is represented by 0.

The starting point is a 0 point of space, the end point is also a 0 point of space, I will call it vector X and mark 1 second (the length I will define as 0.28820601851 mile.)

Quote from: TheBoThe starting point is a 0 point of space, the end point is also a 0 point of space, I will call it vector X and mark 1 second (the length I will define as 0.28820601851 mile.) There is a difference between "a number" and "a number with meaning or direction"You can compare 1 with 2, as an abstract mathematical conceptBut you cannot "compare apples and oranges", as the proverb goesYou can walk 1 km north without changing your east/west distance at all (ie these are independent).And you can pass 1 second into the future without changing your east/west or your north/south position (ie these are independent)You can mark seconds on a time line (or hours or centuries).And you can mark miles on a space line (or feet or km).But you cannot mark seconds on a space line...unless you are using some standard conversion rate (eg the speed of light c= 186,282 miles/second)...and 1 second = 0.28820601851 miles is definitely not it!That is why relativity describes the universe as a 4-dimensional spacetimeWith light as the only thing that relates the space and time dimensions in a repeatable way Once you introduce relativistic speeds (eg objects moving faster than 1% of c) or intense gravitational fields (eg near a black hole), then you cannot accurately compare the distances or times measured by you with the distances or time measured by them. It's like the space line and the time line get warped.

you will find if you check the maths that the entire universe is scaled and measured on the principle that 1s=~0.288mile relative to the Earths rotation relative to the motion of the sun.

do you mean that there is no time of space unless there is something travelling through it to create a measurement?

But you will find that:At your location, the rotation of the Earth will not take you 0.288miles in 1 second - it will be something considerably less than this.

This definition was obsoleted in 1967 by the cesium clock

The unit of time was not derived from a length (the circumference of the Earth at the equator=24902 miles)/(86400 seconds in a day) ≈ 0.288miles

There are some good reasons why the rotation of the Earth was abandoned as a measure of time - for one thing, the rotation rate keeps changing with the weather and earthquakes, and it is gradually slowing down due to tidal friction with the oceans. Plus, it is not a measure which is readily accessible by a spacecraft far from Earth, and will not be agreed by a spacecraft traveling near the speed of light, or near a deep gravitational well.

I mean that for me sitting at my keyboard, in the frame of reference of my desk, time and space are pretty much independent.I can move through time without moving a finger (at the steady rate of 60 seconds every minute).I can freely move my fingers through 3 dimensions, provided I don't try to exceed the speed of light (or even the speed of sound!)

So it is true that we now define the measure of space by a measure of time - but it uses a well-defined conversion factor = the speed of light in a vacuum.