"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really Think"

Jan 22, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Examiner.com

It is fascinating to note that atheists boast that most scientists are atheists.

Comments (Page 666)

Showing posts 13,301 - 13,320 of13,521
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13651
Oct 22, 2012
 
polymath257 wrote:
You are a troll and a fool when it comes to these matters. Go cry in your milk now.
Listen mitch... I will teach you something now if you manage not to cling to your religion but let logical reason guide you.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13652
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Here comes the fun part:
Do you notice how you used absolute time there in your calculations?
No. In fact, it is quite clear that each part of the trip experiences time differently. I gave you what you claimed could not be given: a description from both twin's point of view that predicts the aging of both twins. Furthermore, the predictions of the two twins agree.
Let me put it this way:
Twins 1 and 2 are in the same rest frame. Do you think that acceleration away from that rest frame *always* means that observed proper time will begin ticking slower for that who accelerates???
If one twin accelerates and the other twin does not, then when they meet up again, the accelerated twin has aged less.
What if I claim that within the relativistic model sometimes the traveling twin must age more? Would you agree? Or do you insist that the traveling twin must always age less?
Do you still have an answer?
Do the calculations. The Lorentz transformations are fundamental and show how both length contraction and time dilation come about. But they also take care of the situations that are not located at the same place or at the same time in some frame.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13653
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Listen mitch... I will teach you something now if you manage not to cling to your religion but let logical reason guide you.
You don't know enough to teach a monkey how to eat a banana. In particular, you have shown, repeatedly, that you misunderstand the terminology of special relativity, don't understand how to use it to make predictions, and are generally incompetent in the basics of the subject, let alone any subtleties.
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13654
Oct 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
If one twin accelerates and the other twin does not, then when they meet up again, the accelerated twin has aged less.

Do the calculations. The Lorentz transformations are fundamental and show how both length contraction and time dilation come about. But they also take care of the situations that are not located at the same place or at the same time in some frame.
I find it funny when you revert to religious ambiguity and are too afraid to give a clear and direct answer.

Your claim is that the accelerating twin will always begin to experience a slower rate of time relative to the stay-at-home brother.

Now, is it possible that in some situation the accelerating twin's proper time will in fact start ticking faster relative to the stay-at-home brother ? Yes or no?(premise: no other large sources of gravity except Earth)

Simple question and you're not able to give a direct simple answer?
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13655
Oct 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Polymath is too afraid to answer these questions because he knows where I am leading him.

So we know Polymath will refuse to answer the simple questions, therefore I will just explain what I was leading him into.

1. three brothers are on Earth in the same rest frame
2. two of the brothers hop on a ship and accelerate to 0.5*c away form Earth (as Polymath has admitted, according to Einstein's relativity their proper time must always begin to tick slower than time on Earth)
3. the two brother on the ship still share the same rest frame
4. one brother on the ship hops into a shuttle and accelerates to 0.5*c towards Earth
5. the shuttle has entered into Earth's rest frame and is stationary relative to Earth, therefore the shuttle must now observe the same proper as observed on Earth
6. acceleration of the ship caused the ship's proper time rate to slow down
7. acceleration of the shuttle caused the shuttle's proper time rate to speed up
8. Einstein's theory of relativity is shown to be false
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13656
Oct 22, 2012
 
5. proper = proper time

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13657
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
I find it funny when you revert to religious ambiguity and are too afraid to give a clear and direct answer.
I gave you the answer: do the Lorentz transformations and calculate the result.
Your claim is that the accelerating twin will always begin to experience a slower rate of time relative to the stay-at-home brother.
No, my claim is that an accelerated twin will have aged less when they meet again. During travel both twins will measure time for the other running slower.
Now, is it possible that in some situation the accelerating twin's proper time will in fact start ticking faster relative to the stay-at-home brother ? Yes or no?(premise: no other large sources of gravity except Earth)
The question makes no sense. there is no absolute 'ticking faster' or 'ticking slower'. if you want to compare aging, you have to bring the twins together. In that case, the twin that accelerated will have aged less.
Simple question and you're not able to give a direct simple answer?
Your very question shows you don't know what proper time *means*.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13658
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
Polymath is too afraid to answer these questions because he knows where I am leading him.
So we know Polymath will refuse to answer the simple questions, therefore I will just explain what I was leading him into.
1. three brothers are on Earth in the same rest frame
2. two of the brothers hop on a ship and accelerate to 0.5*c away form Earth (as Polymath has admitted, according to Einstein's relativity their proper time must always begin to tick slower than time on Earth)
Once again, the earth measures time for the twins as going slower, but the twins measure time for the earth as going slower. This is different than what you said.
3. the two brother on the ship still share the same rest frame
yes, which is different than the rest frame of the earth.
4. one brother on the ship hops into a shuttle and accelerates to 0.5*c towards Earth
5. the shuttle has entered into Earth's rest frame and is stationary relative to Earth, therefore the shuttle must now observe the same proper as observed on Earth
Each will measure the clock of the other as going the same rate. But the clocks will no longer be synchronized. The ship measures time for both the earth and shuttle as going slower than its own.
6. acceleration of the ship caused the ship's proper time rate to slow down
Here is where you are assuming an absolute time frame. The ships time slows down *with respect to the earth*. But the earths' time slows down *with respect to the ship*.
7. acceleration of the shuttle caused the shuttle's proper time rate to speed up
No, it did not. The ship sees time for both the earth and the shuttle as going slower. Both the earth and the shuttle see time for the ship as going slower. This is not a contradiction because the time measurements are for different positions each way.
8. Einstein's theory of relativity is shown to be false
No, you simply don't understand what it is predicting.

Do you want me to run the numbers for you? Do you mind if I use .6*c rather than .5*c since the time dilation factor is easier for .6*c?
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13660
Oct 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

polymath257 wrote:
Once again, the earth measures time for the twins as going slower, but the twins measure time for the earth as going slower. This is different than what you said.
Once again, no one on Earth can measure the proper time of the traveling twin, they can only measure Earth time. They will know the aging result of the traveling twin when he returns.
polymath257 wrote:
Each will measure the clock of the other as going the same rate. But the clocks will no longer be synchronized. The ship measures time for both the earth and shuttle as going slower than its own.
Once more, observers can only measure their own proper time. No one can measure the proper time of other frames.
polymath257 wrote:
Here is where you are assuming an absolute time frame.
WRONG. There are two frames in questions. Earth frame and the ship frame. The proper time is ticking slower in the ship frame. The shuttle accelerated from the ship frame to Earth frame. Thus acceleration caused the proper time rate of the shuttle to increase. They began to age faster after that acceleration.
polymath257 wrote:
The ships time slows down *with respect to the earth*. But the earths' time slows down *with respect to the ship*.
That is a paradox and can not happen in reality. If these are your supposed predictions, then one of these predictions will be falsified upon return to the same frame and therefore also the model is false.

The ship can not measure Earth's proper time, Earth can not measure the ship's proper time. They can only calculate theoretical predictions for their proper times.
polymath257 wrote:
Here is where you are assuming an absolute time frame. The ships time slows down *with respect to the earth*. But the earths' time slows down *with respect to the ship*.
We are talking about aging and observed proper times. What you insist on is a paradox and can not be verified through observable facts. You fail.
polymath257 wrote:
No, it did not. The ship sees time for both the earth and the shuttle as going slower. Both the earth and the shuttle see time for the ship as going slower. This is not a contradiction because the time measurements are for different positions each way.
Even once more:
It does not matter what they see, there is delay in the propagation of light and they can not observe the proper times of other frames than their own.

Stop falling back to your fallacies.
polymath257 wrote:
No, you simply don't understand what it is predicting.

Do you want me to run the numbers for you? Do you mind if I use .6*c rather than .5*c since the time dilation factor is easier for .6*c?
I can run all the numbers myself. You don't need to fall into your number fallacies again.

Do you understand that an observer can only measure his own proper time???
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13661
Oct 22, 2012
 
polymath257 wrote:
Your very question shows you don't know what proper time *means*.
Wrong. You constantly confuse coordinate time and proper time.

Proper time is what dictates aging. I am only talking about proper time here. I haven't made any mention relating to coordinate times and have been constantly specifically spoken about proper times.

Stop confusing proper time with coordinate time.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13662
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Once again, no one on Earth can measure the proper time of the traveling twin, they can only measure Earth time. They will know the aging result of the traveling twin when he returns.
<quoted text>
Once more, observers can only measure their own proper time. No one can measure the proper time of other frames.
<quoted text>
WRONG. There are two frames in questions. Earth frame and the ship frame. The proper time is ticking slower in the ship frame. The shuttle accelerated from the ship frame to Earth frame. Thus acceleration caused the proper time rate of the shuttle to increase. They began to age faster after that acceleration.
<quoted text>
That is a paradox and can not happen in reality. If these are your supposed predictions, then one of these predictions will be falsified upon return to the same frame and therefore also the model is false.
The ship can not measure Earth's proper time, Earth can not measure the ship's proper time. They can only calculate theoretical predictions for their proper times.
<quoted text>
We are talking about aging and observed proper times. What you insist on is a paradox and can not be verified through observable facts. You fail.
<quoted text>
Even once more:
It does not matter what they see, there is delay in the propagation of light and they can not observe the proper times of other frames than their own.
Stop falling back to your fallacies.
<quoted text>
I can run all the numbers myself. You don't need to fall into your number fallacies again.
Do you understand that an observer can only measure his own proper time???
The only effect is dilation due to acceleration and or gravity to the clock at your location , if you have different clocks at different locations all will be ticking at the rate of dilation for each clock.(forget looking at the other clocks)
If one clock goes to another clocks location and is then under the same gravity and acceleration , they will both tick at the same rate but will show different times. Due to different dilation rates. With your scenario , all you have is three clocks
Earth/ship/shuttle. Due to different dilation rates you have 3 different times showing on their counts.

You have falsified nothing nor created a paradox.

humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13663
Oct 22, 2012
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
The only effect is dilation due to acceleration and or gravity to the clock at your location , if you have different clocks at different locations all will be ticking at the rate of dilation for each clock.(forget looking at the other clocks)
If one clock goes to another clocks location and is then under the same gravity and acceleration , they will both tick at the same rate but will show different times. Due to different dilation rates. With your scenario , all you have is three clocks
Earth/ship/shuttle. Due to different dilation rates you have 3 different times showing on their counts.
You have falsified nothing nor created a paradox.
Why do you confuse yourself with nonsense?

1. Two twins accelerate away from Earth and thus they begin to age slower (as compared to the stay-on-Earth bro). Yes?-Yes.

2. The two twins share the same rest frame on the ship, they age at the same rate relative to the stay-on-Earth bro.

3. One of the two twins accelerates from the ship towards Earth and thus he begins to age slower that the bro left on the ship. Yes?-No.

Thus, Einstein's relativity is VERY much falsified.
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13664
Oct 22, 2012
 
And please don't misunderstand #2 to mean that all three age at the same rate. This is already explained not to be the case in #1...

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13665
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Why do you confuse yourself with nonsense?
1. Two twins accelerate away from Earth and thus they begin to age slower (as compared to the stay-on-Earth bro). Yes?-Yes.
2. The two twins share the same rest frame on the ship, they age at the same rate relative to the stay-on-Earth bro.
3. One of the two twins accelerates from the ship towards Earth and thus he begins to age slower that the bro left on the ship. Yes?-No.
Thus, Einstein's relativity is VERY much falsified.
What you fail to understand is you have 3 clocks with 3 different ET's and that is all.
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13666
Oct 22, 2012
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
What you fail to understand is you have 3 clocks with 3 different ET's and that is all.
What you fail to understand is that if the acceleration of the two brothers is equal in magnitude to the second acceleration of one of them THERE ARE THEN ONLY TWO RATES OF TIME TO BE OBSERVED. One brother is still on the ship traveling away from Earth, the other brother has returned to Earth's rest frame.

Do you understand this?

Now. Try to make a claim that all acceleration leads to slower rate of proper time with respect to the old rate in the frame from which the acceleration originated from.

You're plain and simple toast.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13667
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
What you fail to understand is that if the acceleration of the two brothers is equal in magnitude to the second acceleration of one of them THERE ARE THEN ONLY TWO RATES OF TIME TO BE OBSERVED. One brother is still on the ship traveling away from Earth, the other brother has returned to Earth's rest frame.
Do you understand this?
Now. Try to make a claim that all acceleration leads to slower rate of proper time with respect to the old rate in the frame from which the acceleration originated from.
You're plain and simple toast.
The only thing that changes is rate of each clock from the effect of dilation exerted on it.

clock 1 ship
clock 2 shuttle
clock 3 Earth

clock 1&2 leave Earth their clocks are slowed,
clock 2 leaves the ship and returns to Earth.

No it's plain and simple , when clock 2 returns to earth it's dilation rate returns to normal and you now have 3 different ET's on 3 different clocks.

Nothing is falsified , it is exactly as predicted by Lorentz.

Poly is very confusing switching back and forth explaining how each will see each others clock, but the end result is.....

3 clocks 3 different elapsed times. Nothing more nothing less.
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13668
Oct 22, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aura Mytha wrote:
The only thing that changes is rate of each clock from the effect of dilation exerted on it.
clock 1 ship
clock 2 shuttle
clock 3 Earth
clock 1&2 leave Earth their clocks are slowed,
clock 2 leaves the ship and returns to Earth.
No it's plain and simple , when clock 2 returns to earth it's dilation rate returns to normal and you now have 3 different ET's on 3 different clocks.
Nothing is falsified , it is exactly as predicted by Lorentz.
Poly is very confusing switching back and forth explaining how each will see each others clock, but the end result is.....
3 clocks 3 different elapsed times. Nothing more nothing less.
Well there you have your paradox in your very own hands. One acceleration causes slower rate of ageing, another acceleration causes faster rate of ageing.

This renders the claim of the accelerating twin (twin paradox) ageing less pure nonsense.

You can not have it both ways. Either all acceleration results in slower rate of ageing or the solution to the twin paradox is false.

Those are your only options, you don't have any other options. You have now effectively argued that not all acceleration results in slower rate of ageing. Your sugar coding it with different terms does not help you at all. You still have the same problem in your hands.

Just utter the words. Does all acceleration lead into slower rate of ageing? Yes or no?

That is after all your claim as the solution for the twin paradox, otherwise you would have no way to determine how that acceleration affects the traveler.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13669
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Well there you have your paradox in your very own hands. One acceleration causes slower rate of ageing, another acceleration causes faster rate of ageing.
This renders the claim of the accelerating twin (twin paradox) ageing less pure nonsense.
You can not have it both ways. Either all acceleration results in slower rate of ageing or the solution to the twin paradox is false.
Those are your only options, you don't have any other options. You have now effectively argued that not all acceleration results in slower rate of ageing. Your sugar coding it with different terms does not help you at all. You still have the same problem in your hands.
Just utter the words. Does all acceleration lead into slower rate of ageing? Yes or no?
That is after all your claim as the solution for the twin paradox, otherwise you would have no way to determine how that acceleration affects the traveler.


Does all acceleration lead into slower rate of ageing?

This is a stupid question.
Get in your car and accelerate all day and see if you can shift the goal posts away from the old folks home.

The twin paradox is only a mind teaser anyway.

At the end of the day you will find that acceleration affects
the clock under it , while it is under it.
humble brother

Vanda, Finland

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13670
Oct 22, 2012
 
Aura Mytha wrote:
Does all acceleration lead into slower rate of ageing?
This is a stupid question.
Get in your car and accelerate all day and see if you can shift the goal posts away from the old folks home.
The twin paradox is only a mind teaser anyway.
At the end of the day you will find that acceleration affects
the clock under it , while it is under it.
Stop whining. You are the one to make the claim that in the twin paradox the acceleration leads into slower ageing of the accelerating twin.

Is it possible that in some case acceleration could result in faster rate of ageing for the one who accelerates? Yes or no?

If you make the claim for the solution of the twin paradox YOU MUST BE ABLE TO PRODUCE A CLEAR ANSWER to this followup question.

It is already obvious that you can not produce a clear answer to the question. That is the reason for your religious ambiguity.

“ The Lord of delirious minds.”

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13671
Oct 22, 2012
 
humble brother wrote:
<quoted text>
Stop whining. You are the one to make the claim that in the twin paradox the acceleration leads into slower ageing of the accelerating twin.
Is it possible that in some case acceleration could result in faster rate of ageing for the one who accelerates? Yes or no?
If you make the claim for the solution of the twin paradox YOU MUST BE ABLE TO PRODUCE A CLEAR ANSWER to this followup question.
It is already obvious that you can not produce a clear answer to the question. That is the reason for your religious ambiguity.
Acceleration slows time for the clock under it.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 13,301 - 13,320 of13,521
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••