[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 186 KB, 804x981, file.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12654312 No.12654312 [Reply] [Original]

Is he right?

>> No.12654458
File: 1.58 MB, 320x320, 1611935159943.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
12654458

>>12654312
>Time is relative
If only physicists knew this.

>> No.12654693

>>12654312
This isn't a right or wrong thing. He just wants time renamed to something else and to create a new concept, called time, which doesn't relate to anything or have any predictive power.

>> No.12655269

>>12654312
Dilating is based

>> No.12655286

>>12654312
>retired engineer
>thinks he debunked einstein
typical. he made a circuit or something and now he feels qualified to say einstein was wrong. we went through this already in the 90s when the GPS engies thought they could do it without listening to physicists. they tried, failed, then listened to physicists and it worked thankfully since the physicists had their say in defining the specs for the technology. the pseud engies tried making it work without relativity but no, they were wrong. age old story

>> No.12655292

>Is he right?
No. Time is what clocks measure.

>> No.12655318

>>12654312
What are particle half-lives? They don't involve periodic oscillations yet they measure time and dilate.

>> No.12655332

>>12655292
I read the whole thing now. Time is what clocks measure. A second is *defined* to be some number of oscillations of some cesium atom, or of the main spectral gamma ray of the decay of that atom or something. This is the definition of what a unit of time is. He does not explain why this definition fails in his opinion and he only says that this definition by "counting cyclic activity" is not a good one.

Time dilation is an effect that describes the rate of what clocks do. His insistence that time doesn't dilate is retarded (pedantic and/or semantic?) because he never says what he thinks time dilation is if not not an effect on clocks. His insistence on not actually seeing time dilate is like he thinks time is an eyeball and we need to see the pupil in the time eye change size to actually see time dilation. He grants that the effect on clocks is real, but what he's saying about "time actually dilating" doesn't make sense because he does not identify what process he associates with time actually dilating if not the clock experiment that everyone else on Earth uses.

When he says, "Nothing involving time as a third participant," it seems to be nothing more than an identification that human exist in a hypersurface of constant proper time and do not observe the 4D universe in geometric 4D, but rather in geometric 3D complemented with motion. The motion of clocks is how we measure time: the fourth dimension.

>> No.12655712

Time is rate at which things happen

Under relativity, the rate of things happening is different relative to other things happening depending on the things happening

So no he's wrong

>> No.12655725

>>12654312
dilate

>> No.12655841

>>12654312
Time is a tranny so it definitely dilates