[guest39538]

Both observers experience the exact same amount of light seconds . 


ls.jpg (15.79 kB . 375x253 - viewed 6233 times)

[guest39538]

I guess all three of my theory argument threads  were all affective arguments ?

[mad aetherist]

Both observers experience the exact same amount of light seconds.

I dont understand the diagram etc.  But i understand the heading -- Killing Time Dilation -- so i will comment.
There is no such thing as time, hencely no such thing as time dilation. Or, there is such a thing as time, it is the present instant, & this is universal, but it cant be dilated.
It would be ok to talk of ticking dilation, ie where processes are slowed by something, the slowing being due primarily to the speed of the clock etc relative to the aether. Here that V is inserted up Lorentz's equation for gamma.

Slowing in ticking might be exactly as described by Lorentz's gamma. But i doubt it. I thing that Lorentz's gamma might apply directly to micro ticking (eg atomic clocks), but i doubt that it can be applied directly to macro ticking.
Macro ticking is i think affected indirectly by Lorentz's gamma -- here gamma is merely applied to one or more dimensions of the macro process (the dimensions are contracted by LLC). Then the macro ticking changes according to whether it is a pendulum ticktock or a balance wheel ticktock or a tuning fork quartz ticktock etc.

Observers are of course just such a macro process.
I would think that the observer's tickerthalamus is a macro thing & has a complicated macro equation for ticking.
An observer ant would feel ticking & time differently to an observer elephant.
I think it depends on the distance from the eye to the tickerthalamus (with all due respect to the blind).

What kind of animals are your observers?
That was a major flaw in Einstein's train embankment lighting thortX -- he didnt cover the general case -- which would involve an elephant say in the carriage (the circus was coming to town) & an ant say on the embankment.

But there are three kinds of ticking, we have actual (absolute) ticking, & apparent (perceived) ticking, & relative apparent (perceived) ticking.  Hencely it is easy to get into a fight here.

[guest39538]

Both observers experience the exact same amount of light seconds.

I dont understand the diagram etc.  But i understand the heading -- Killing Time Dilation -- so i will comment.
There is no such thing as time, hencely no such thing as time dilation. Or, there is such a thing as time, it is the present instant, & this is universal, but it cant be dilated.
It would be ok to talk of ticking dilation, ie where processes are slowed by something, the slowing being due primarily to the speed of the clock etc relative to the aether.
The slowing in ticking might be exactly as described by Lorentz's gamma. Or it might be due to a macro process affecting macro ticking due to the indirect affect of Lorentz's gamma but here applied to one or more dimensions of the macro process (the dimensions having been contracted due to LLC).

Observers are of course just such a macro process.
I would think that the observer's tickerthalamus is a macro thing & has a complicated macro equation for ticking.
An observer ant would feel ticking & time differently to an observer elephant.
I think it depends on the distance from the eye to the tickerthalamus (with all due respect to the blind).

What kind of animals are your observers?
That was a major flaw in Einstein's train embankment lighting thortX -- he didnt cover the general case -- which would involve an elephant say in the carriage (the circus was coming to town) & an ant say on the embankment.

Actually , there is such a thing as time but not in accordance with present definition and semantics.  The diagram is of the Einstein's famous light clock thought experiment that explains time dilation using  length contraction .  However this experimental thought is at error and my diagram demonstrates that time does not slow down or speed up for an observer in motion .  However there is an actual  real life experiment involving  caesium clocks , these show a frequency dilation when the entropy is changed . This can be expresses delta S = delta t , where S is entropy and t is time .

Time is not an independent entity , it is a quantifiable measurement directly proportional to aging .  Meaning simply time is aging and aging has a rate of change that can be measured .

[mad aetherist]

Actually , there is such a thing as time but not in accordance with present definition and semantics.  The diagram is of the Einstein's famous light clock thought experiment that explains time dilation using  length contraction .  However this experimental thought is at error and my diagram demonstrates that time does not slow down or speed up for an observer in motion .  However there is an actual  real life experiment involving  caesium clocks , these show a frequency dilation when the entropy is changed . This can be expresses delta S = delta t , where S is entropy and t is time .

Time is not an independent entity , it is a quantifiable measurement directly proportional to aging.  Meaning simply time is aging and aging has a rate of change that can be measured.

Ticking is aging & aging is ticking. Agreed. But the notion of time is superfluous.

Re your comment that time does not slow down or speed up for an observer in motion.  I think that this might fit exactly with what i think. Me myself being an aetherist i believe that a ticktock has an absolute ticking rate when sitting still in the absolute aether reference frame, ie where the aetherwind is zero kmps.  And when there is a wind blowing throo the ticktock the ticktock ticks slower. But, if the observer is sitting next to the ticktock the observer will see that the ticktock has a ticking rate equal to the ticktock's absolute ticking rate, because the observer's ticking is affected equally to the ticktock's ticking. Which sounds to me to be virtually the same thing that u mention.

However i now have a problem. I used to think the above. But in recent weeks i have become aware that ticktocks are macro things & their ticking is affected differently depending on design, eg pendulum, balance wheel, atomic clock, light clock,  animal tickerthalamuses, etc etc. Therefore the standard aetherian law that says that an observer will see & measure a ticktock's absolute ticking as long as the observer is sitting in the same frame, is wrong.
This makes all science very complicated.  The good old days are over.  As we enter the more accurate more sensitive era we will find that ticking can no longer be relied upon.

But what is that entropy stuff re the atomic clock? Has that got something to do with elevation?
I dont know much about entropy except that it is a useless notion, & will never help anyone to get a Nobel. The same can be said about enthalpy. In fact i combine them to make enthaltropy, a completely useless word & theory. 

[guest39538]

Ticking is aging & aging is ticking. Agreed. But the notion of time is superfluous.

Actually , there is such a thing as time but not in accordance with present definition and semantics.  The diagram is of the Einstein's famous light clock thought experiment that explains time dilation using  length contraction .  However this experimental thought is at error and my diagram demonstrates that time does not slow down or speed up for an observer in motion .  However there is an actual  real life experiment involving  caesium clocks , these show a frequency dilation when the entropy is changed . This can be expresses delta S = delta t , where S is entropy and t is time .

Time is not an independent entity , it is a quantifiable measurement directly proportional to aging.  Meaning simply time is aging and aging has a rate of change that can be measured.

Ticking is aging & aging is ticking. Agreed. But the notion of time is superfluous.

Re your comment that time does not slow down or speed up for an observer in motion.  I think that this might fit exactly with what i think. Me myself being an aetherist i believe that a ticktock has an absolute ticking rate when sitting still in the absolute aether reference frame, ie where the aetherwind is zero kmps.  And when there is a wind blowing throo the ticktock the ticktock ticks slower. But, if the observer is sitting next to the ticktock the observer will see that the ticktock has a ticking rate equal to the ticktock's absolute ticking rate, because the observer's ticking is affected equally to the ticktock's ticking. Which sounds to me to be virtually the same thing that u mention.

However i now have a problem. I used to think the above. But in recent weeks i have become aware that ticktocks are macro things & their ticking is affected differently depending on design, eg pendulum, balance wheel, atomic clock, light clock,  animal tickerthalamuses, etc etc. Therefore the standard aetherian law that says that an observer will see & measure a ticktock's absolute ticking as long as the observer is sitting in the same frame, is wrong.
This makes all science very complicated.  The good old days are over.  As we enter the more accurate more sensitive era we will find that ticking can no longer be relied upon.

But what is that entropy stuff re the atomic clock? Has that got something to do with elevation?
I dont know much about entropy except that it is a useless notion, & will never help anyone to get a Nobel. The same can be said about enthalpy. In fact i combine them to make enthaltropy, a completely useless word & theory. 

Ticking is not complicated , all observers experience 1 light second per photon experienced light second . 

The ticking of aging is var(x)

You could age slower on Venus say if your clock ticked at half the rate . 

Entropy is the number of ways a system can change , when a clock is at relative rest , it's entropy is pretty constant if the temp is constant and the v=0 .

Motion or a change of temp , energy levels, is change in entropy hence ΔS=Δt

[mad aetherist]

Ticking is not complicated , all observers experience 1 light second per photon experienced light second . 
The ticking of aging is var(x)
You could age slower on Venus say if your clock ticked at half the rate . 
Entropy is the number of ways a system can change , when a clock is at relative rest , it's entropy is pretty constant if the temp is constant and the v=0 .
Motion or a change of temp , energy levels, is change in entropy hence ΔS=Δt

Yes then we agree, as i said, entropy is a useless notion.

So if u change an atomic clock's speed or acceleration or position or angle or height or temperature, then its ticking changes. Will anyone get a Nobel for that?  Were any clocks hurt in that experiment?
I can add that if u take out the batteries the ticking will change.
Noise, what about noise, that must have an effect.
Magnetism. Lightning.
What about water, what if u dropped the atomic clock in a swimming pool?

Thats the trouble with cheap atomic clocks. They are affected by entropy. U only get what u pay for.

[guest39538]

Ticking is not complicated , all observers experience 1 light second per photon experienced light second . 
The ticking of aging is var(x)
You could age slower on Venus say if your clock ticked at half the rate . 
Entropy is the number of ways a system can change , when a clock is at relative rest , it's entropy is pretty constant if the temp is constant and the v=0 .
Motion or a change of temp , energy levels, is change in entropy hence ΔS=Δt

Yes then we agree, as i said, entropy is a useless notion.

So if u change an atomic clock's speed or acceleration or position or angle or height or temperature, then its ticking changes. Will anyone get a Nobel for that?  Were any clocks hurt in that experiment?
I can add that if u take out the batteries the ticking will change.
Noise, what about noise, that must have an effect.
Magnetism. Lightning.
What about water, what if u dropped the atomic clock in a swimming pool?

Thats the trouble with cheap atomic clocks. They are affected by entropy. U only get what u pay for.

Yes , expensive clocks affected by change of entropy .

[mad aetherist]

Ticking is not complicated , all observers experience 1 light second per photon experienced light second . 
The ticking of aging is var(x)
You could age slower on Venus say if your clock ticked at half the rate . 
Entropy is the number of ways a system can change , when a clock is at relative rest , it's entropy is pretty constant if the temp is constant and the v=0 .
Motion or a change of temp , energy levels, is change in entropy hence ΔS=Δt

Yes then we agree, as i said, entropy is a useless notion.

So if u change an atomic clock's speed or acceleration or position or angle or height or temperature, then its ticking changes. Will anyone get a Nobel for that?  Were any clocks hurt in that experiment?
I can add that if u take out the batteries the ticking will change.
Noise, what about noise, that must have an effect.
Magnetism. Lightning.
What about water, what if u dropped the atomic clock in a swimming pool?

Thats the trouble with cheap atomic clocks. They are affected by entropy. U only get what u pay for.

Yes , expensive clocks affected by change of entropy .

The better atomic clocks float.  Optionally u can buy one that is guaranteed to at least 100 ft, ie much deeper than most pools.

[Bored chemist]

I guess all three of my theory argument threads  were all affective arguments ?

Why would you think that?

[guest39538]

I guess all three of my theory argument threads  were all affective arguments ?

Why would you think that?

Lack of opposing argument !  I think everyone knows if they try to oppose my correction of the error they walk right into it and it gives me chance to demonstrate the error in full . The diagram needs little words , it is plain to see .

Perhaps you'd like another diagram .


ls1.jpg (23.65 kB . 550x270 - viewed 4036 times)


Do you still insist time slows down ?

I've demonstrated it doesn't !

[Bored chemist]

Perhaps you'd like another diagram .

Not really,
but I'd like some actual explanation of what you mean.
What you have so far are nonsensical claims
It's impossible to mount a counterargument when there isn't a valid argument to counter.

[guest39538]

Perhaps you'd like another diagram .

Not really,
but I'd like some actual explanation of what you mean.
What you have so far are nonsensical claims
It's impossible to mount a counterargument when there isn't a valid argument to counter.

Observer A , Alice is onboard a spaceship that is in motion .

Observer B , Bill is on Earth and relatively at rest .

Alice measures 1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Bill measures  1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Both observers experience 1.33333 l.s



Bill observes Alice's time to run at the same speed as his time .

added- I'll add vector analysis   

t = + = 1.33333 l.s

t'= = 1.33333 l.s

[Bored chemist]

Observer A , Alice is onboard a spaceship that is in motion .

Observer B , Bill is on Earth and relatively at rest .

Alice measures 1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Bill measures  1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Both observers experience 1.33333 l.s



Bill observes Alice's time to run at the same speed as his time .

added- I'll add vector analysis   

t =  +  = 1.33333 l.s

t'= = 1.33333 l.s

I'd like some actual explanation of what you mean.
What you have so far are nonsensical claims
It's impossible to mount a counterargument when there isn't a valid argument to counter.

[guest39538]

Observer A , Alice is onboard a spaceship that is in motion .

Observer B , Bill is on Earth and relatively at rest .

Alice measures 1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Bill measures  1.33333 l.s per 1.33333 l.s

Both observers experience 1.33333 l.s



Bill observes Alice's time to run at the same speed as his time .

added- I'll add vector analysis   

t =  +  = 1.33333 l.s

t'= = 1.33333 l.s

I'd like some actual explanation of what you mean.
What you have so far are nonsensical claims
It's impossible to mount a counterargument when there isn't a valid argument to counter.

I've give the explanation , you know very well what I'm talking about , there is no time dilation .

[Bored chemist]

there is no time dilation .

Except, it's known that there is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment

[guest39538]

there is no time dilation .

Except, it's known that there is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment

Except that's not a time dilation is it , that experiment reveals a change in entropy causes a change in frequency .  It is a change in the rate of aging  , not a change in the rate of time . 

ΔS = Δt  where time is a quantifiable measurement directly proportional to aging . 

There is many different scenarios I can demonstrate this to be true .

[mad aetherist]

there is no time dilation .

Except, it's known that there is.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment

The Hafele Keating fraud has been sunk.
In any case the HKX concerns the ticking of atomic clocks, it has nothing to do with time. Time does not exist.
Aetherists dont need time, ticking does the trick.

But i aint sure about Einsteinologists, praps they do need a thing they call time (i aint sure). But praps they too would be happy to simply replace time with ticking, eg giving ticking dilation not time dilation. It doesnt of course matter much because all Einsteinian stuff is complete krapp.

[Bored chemist]

The Hafele Keating fraud has been sunk.

I think this site has rules about libel .
Anyway, in the real world, time dilation is real.
It is, for example, the reasons why GPS works.

[guest39538]

The Hafele Keating fraud has been sunk.

I think this site has rules about libel .
Anyway, in the real world, time dilation is real.
It is, for example, the reasons why GPS works.

That would be a timing synchronisation issue not a time dilation .  Don't get me wrong the light clock thought experiment was still a brilliant thought in that it calculated tri coordinates for the GPS systems , credit to Einstein where it's due .  But bless him , he was incorrect about time slowing down and if you like we can go through the light clock thought experiment step by step and I'll demonstrate .

Let us start with the relative stationary light clock , we will call this clock (a) and will say it measures 1 light second per tick .

Now we know light travels 299792458 meters in one second so we'll say that the y axis of the stationary clock is distance=299792458 meters .  We will name this vector dy  and for the first tick we will say v=+y , the light traveling from the lower to the upper of the vector  the next tick travelling in the opposite direction v=-y .


light s.jpg (16.71 kB . 759x402 - viewed 3994 times)

Is there anything you disagree with in this part ?

added- I'll add the light clock in relative motion and I've put the correct time and distance based on a 45° reflection .

Now the first diagram has done 1 tick and a 1/3rd of tick by time the moving clock registers it's first tick .

The time is equal .


moving clock.jpg (31.54 kB . 759x402 - viewed 3991 times)