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
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. That CAN'T be true!
  4. Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10   Go Down

Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?

  • 186 Replies
  • 12150 Views
  • 2 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #100 on: 13/04/2019 21:45:58 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:42:10
I have considered that you may all be under some sort of hypnotic state .

Okay then, so which is more likely?

1) One person being delusional.
2) Many thousands (or even millions) of people being hypnotized?

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:42:10
want to look at one step by step ?

It's probably something that you've already spoken of many times before, but if you want to try go ahead.
Logged
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #101 on: 13/04/2019 21:51:06 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 21:45:58
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:42:10
I have considered that you may all be under some sort of hypnotic state .

Okay then, so which is more likely?

1) One person being delusional.
2) Many thousands (or even millions) of people being hypnotized?

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:42:10
want to look at one step by step ?

It's probably something that you've already spoken of many times before, but if you want to try go ahead.
It's more likely that your semantics sucks and your understanding is misinformed because of this .

Ok , lets start simple , time dilation , time slowing down or speeding up as predicted by Einstein in relativity .  Later in experiment proven to be true by the Hafele-Keating experiment .
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Relativ/airtim.html

To start just one agreement question , don't try to add any complex to the question , just a yes or no please .

Do you agree that a change of velocity of a relative stationary clock v=0  changes the frequency ?

Δv=Δf


Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #102 on: 13/04/2019 21:55:03 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:51:06
It's more likely that your semantics sucks and your understanding is misinformed because of this .

So you think it really is more likely that the world at large is hypnotized by some mysterious hidden power structure than a single individual being delusional?

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:51:06
Do you agree that a change of velocity of a relative stationary clock v=0  changes the frequency ?

The frequency of what?
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #103 on: 13/04/2019 21:59:17 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 21:55:03
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:51:06
It's more likely that your semantics sucks and your understanding is misinformed because of this .

So you think it really is more likely that the world at large is hypnotized by some mysterious hidden power structure than a single individual being delusional?

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:51:06
Do you agree that a change of velocity of a relative stationary clock v=0  changes the frequency ?

The frequency of what?
What do you mean the frequency of what ?  This is what I mean , if we're talking about time dilation and I have posted an experiment with a caesium clock , it is quite obvious we're discussing the caesium frequency .  Sorry to sound patronizing but that is quite obvious .

Do you agree that changing the velocity of a stationary caesium clock alters the frequency ?

Δv=Δf
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #104 on: 13/04/2019 22:02:58 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:59:17
Do you agree that changing the velocity of a stationary caesium clock alters the frequency ?

The answer depends on the reference frame that you are asking the question in.
Logged
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #105 on: 13/04/2019 22:04:46 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 22:02:58
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 21:59:17
Do you agree that changing the velocity of a stationary caesium clock alters the frequency ?

The answer depends on the reference frame that you are asking the question in.

The stationary clock at the naval base if I need to be a bit more precise .
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #106 on: 13/04/2019 22:07:46 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:04:46
The stationary clock at the naval base if I need to be a bit more precise .

Relative to that clock, yes, the frequency will change.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #107 on: 13/04/2019 22:13:03 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 22:07:46
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:04:46
The stationary clock at the naval base if I need to be a bit more precise .

Relative to that clock, yes, the frequency will change.

Ok thank you , so we can express this in basic math

Δv = Δf  where v is velocity , f is frequency and Δ is change

Are you ok with this , do you agree this expresses change of velocity is equal to a change of frequency ?

Equal in  a sense of the cause .  Δv causes Δf
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #108 on: 13/04/2019 22:15:10 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:13:03
Are you ok with this , do you agree this expresses change of velocity is equal to a change of frequency ?

No, because the change in frequency is not linearly proportional to the change in velocity.
Logged
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #109 on: 13/04/2019 22:18:15 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 22:15:10
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:13:03
Are you ok with this , do you agree this expresses change of velocity is equal to a change of frequency ?

No, because the change in frequency is not linearly proportional to the change in velocity.
I did explain = didn't mean proportional , it means causes , I don't know the symbol for causes , can I use an arrow as in mapping ?

Δv→Δf

Would you agree with that ?

Or do you know a symbol of causality ?

Δv is the cause

Δf is the effect



Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #110 on: 13/04/2019 22:21:07 »
Fine, I'll tentatively accept that.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #111 on: 13/04/2019 22:28:48 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 22:21:07
Fine, I'll tentatively accept that.
That's great , now in time dilation , I'm pretty sure you will agree with that a change of frequency is equal to a change of time proportionally  ?


Δt = Δf 

Do you agree with this ?

I'm coming to my first point .

Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #112 on: 13/04/2019 22:36:33 »
Actually, I need to make a correction. It isn't the change in velocity that causes the the frequency to be different. A change in velocity is equal to an acceleration. Acceleration isn't necessary for time dilation. A difference in a constant speed is sufficient.

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:28:48
I'm pretty sure you will agree with that a change of frequency is equal to a change of time proportionally  ?

That doesn't sound quite right. It would be better to say that the measured difference in frequency between the two clocks is proportional to the rate of the passage of time (time dilation). A "change of time" is present whether there is time dilation or not (time is always changing).
Logged
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #113 on: 13/04/2019 22:44:14 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 13/04/2019 22:36:33
Actually, I need to make a correction. It isn't the change in velocity that causes the the frequency to be different. A change in velocity is equal to an acceleration. Acceleration isn't necessary for time dilation. A difference in a constant speed is sufficient.

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:28:48
I'm pretty sure you will agree with that a change of frequency is equal to a change of time proportionally  ?

That doesn't sound quite right. It would be better to say that the measured difference in frequency between the two clocks is proportional to the rate of the passage of time (time dilation). A "change of time" is present whether there is time dilation or not (time is always changing).
I've noticed you've tried to complicate things but never mind .

Δv→Δf

Tell me where does the time function come from in this process ?

It only exists if the practitioner invents one and defines the frequency to be time .

You say there is a change of time ?  Where ?

Δv→Δf 

There is no time function .




Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #114 on: 14/04/2019 00:43:20 »
Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:44:14
Tell me where does the time function come from in this process ?

What is a "time function"?

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:44:14
It only exists if the practitioner invents one and defines the frequency to be time .

I never defined frequency as time, so that's irrelevant.

Quote from: Thebox on 13/04/2019 22:44:14
You say there is a change of time ?  Where ?

Time is always changing (just watch the clock), so everywhere.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #115 on: 14/04/2019 05:41:46 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 14/04/2019 00:43:20
I never defined frequency as time, so that's irrelevant.

That's very relevant actually because if you don't define the frequency as time , then obviously there is no time dilation .

Hafele-Keating experiment  does not show a time dilation , it shows a change of frequency and anything other than that is subjective and made up .

Quote
What is a "time function"?


Something subjective you might add and define 1.s is equal too . If you'd flew the caesium clock before 1967 in experiment , the frequency wouldn't of been defined equal to a second . 

I see what happened now , they already  knew the caesium frequency would change if they moved the clock so in an elaborate scheme got the frequency defined as 1.s so they could get famous by proving Alberts made up chit with more made up chit .
Crafty gits lol , I got there eventually , I can see what they did .

So somewhere around about 1965-1967 ,  somebody else must of worked out the famous clock thought experiment error so science had to cover it up by inventing the caesium time dilation .

Thinking maybe it is this guy …  In 1965 a scientist named Prof. R. Foster tried to turn conventional science on its head.








Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #116 on: 14/04/2019 06:08:55 »
Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
That's very relevant actually because if you don't define the frequency as time , then obviously there is no time dilation

Frequency is a measure of cycles per unit time. Time alone does not give you a frequency.

Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
it shows a change of frequency

A change of frequency by the exact amount (within experimental error margins) as predicted by relativistic time dilation.

Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
Something subjective you might add and define 1.s is equal too . If you'd flew the caesium clock before 1967 in experiment , the frequency wouldn't of been defined equal to a second . 

In that case, the "time function" would be defined by whatever clock is being used to conduct the experiment.
Logged
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #117 on: 14/04/2019 06:16:54 »
Quote from: Kryptid on 14/04/2019 06:08:55
Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
That's very relevant actually because if you don't define the frequency as time , then obviously there is no time dilation

Frequency is a measure of cycles per unit time. Time alone does not give you a frequency.

Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
it shows a change of frequency

A change of frequency by the exact amount (within experimental error margins) as predicted by relativistic time dilation.

Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 05:41:46
Something subjective you might add and define 1.s is equal too . If you'd flew the caesium clock before 1967 in experiment , the frequency wouldn't of been defined equal to a second . 

In that case, the "time function" would be defined by whatever clock is being used to conduct the experiment.


I think you've missed the point some how .  A frequency is not time , a change of frequency is not a change of time . 
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #118 on: 14/04/2019 06:22:06 »
This gets creepier , 

Science and Technology Act 1965
1965 CHAPTER 4
5 Further powers of Secretary of State and Minister of Technology. (1) The [F1Secretary of State][F2or the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food], . . . F3 may defray out of moneys provided by Parliament any expenses which, with the consent of the Treasury, they may respectively incur— (a) in carrying on or supporting scientific research or the dissemination of the results of scientific research; F4[( b ) in furthering the practical application of the results of scientific research;] (c) in making payments in respect of remuneration, allowances or pension benefits payable to or in respect of members of any advisory body established for the purpose of assisting the Secretary of State [F5or, as the case may be, the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food]. . .in matters connected with scientific research.


1965 , how curious , then 1967 the caesium etc , they well scammed you ...I now have their motive ...the secret group is amongst you politicians .
Logged
 

Offline Kryptid

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 5764
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 240 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does science think we are all stupid as they create more lies ?
« Reply #119 on: 14/04/2019 06:27:23 »
Quote from: Thebox on 14/04/2019 06:16:54
A frequency is not time

I said the exact same thing when I said:

Quote from: Kryptid on 14/04/2019 06:08:55
Frequency is a measure of cycles per unit time. Time alone does not give you a frequency.

Quote
a change of frequency is not a change of time

Nor did I say it was.
Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: conspiracy theory  / paranoid delusions 
 

Similar topics (5)

"DNA Diets" : Are they junk science?

Started by mydietingwayBoard General Science

Replies: 4
Views: 5229
Last post 01/03/2021 08:05:44
by alexaben
Can you still donate your body to science? Are there any "bits" they don't want?

Started by paul.frBoard General Science

Replies: 11
Views: 12647
Last post 07/06/2007 07:27:35
by Karen W.
"Simple" Rocket Science: Where have I gone wrong?

Started by harrogate22Board General Science

Replies: 2
Views: 7220
Last post 06/01/2008 16:33:26
by lyner
Simple Motor - Homopolar motor - Kitchen Science

Started by thedocBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 0
Views: 4875
Last post 24/11/2016 23:55:16
by thedoc
How realistic is the science on "Star Trek" (and other SF?)

Started by cluelessBoard Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology

Replies: 25
Views: 4480
Last post 09/03/2020 17:53:01
by instagyu
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 0.117 seconds with 77 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.