"The Hopi, an Indian tribe, have a language as sophisticated as ours,
but no tenses for past, present and future. The division does not exist.
What does this say about time?"
Jeanette Winterson (1959- )
Sexing the Cherry.

Enjoy, Len.
.................................................. .........

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...

"The Hopi, an Indian tribe, have a language as sophisticated as ours,
but no tenses for past, present and future. The division does not exist.
What does this say about time?"
Jeanette Winterson (1959- )
Sexing the Cherry.

Enjoy, Len.
.................................................. ........

I got to thinking what caused man to originate the concept of the "flow" of
time in the first place. Of course we are all born with the idea that days
come and go.
During the night we sleep and during the day we live our lives. This has
been part of our very way of life since the beginning of time.

Humans also realized since time immemorial that as the days pass we grow
older and that one day we all will die. As we became more sophisticated we
realized that it was important to know when to sow and when to harvest, i.e.
pin point the seasons.

This caused man to study what happened to his surroundings over a given
period of time such as hours, days, weeks, months and years. The
measurement of time also allowed people to make and keep appointments at
some future time.

Finally in the study of physics the constant flow of time is one of the most
useful and basic requirements in the measurements of many physical
parameters.

Now for all of the above to work the flow of time must be constant, that is
to say each day last the same number of hours and there are the same number
of days in each year etc.

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible physical
cause and effect can there be between them?

Moreover, in the relativistic "twin paradox" when the fast moving twin gets
home will the sun have come up and set fewer times for him than for his twin
brother who stayed at home? If this were the case he would somehow have
been able to cause the whole solar system to function at a slower rate
during his trip but only for him!

Not only that but since the solar cycle performed normally for everyone
else, it implies that somehow the fast moving twin was living in a parallel
universe for the duration of his trip, which only he was able to enter to
the exclusion of all others. Finally the moving twin is able to re-enter
the regular universe when he gets home, a universe which aged at the normal
rate during the time he was gone.

Now this is what is illogical about the whole idea of time dilation because
if the moving twin on re-entering the normal universe has aged the number of
normal days that he was gone, how could he at the same time have aged fewer
days during his trip? It is like saying that a man is white some of the
time but black the rest of the time. You simply can't be both black and
white (unless you got beaten up! :-) ).

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is unworkable,
unscientific and illogical. Or to put it plainly, it is ridiculous!
Consequently when a physicist chooses to embrace such a concept he ceases
to be a scientist and becomes a religious bigot who will stand by and defend
his beliefs no matter what the facts or the cost. That is to say, he has
ceased to be a physicist and has become a member of a cult based on doctrine
(faith) instead of logic.

The is also why I maintain that the relativists have done untold harm to
science by corrupting its very nature. It is one thing to say that the
world is flat but quite another to say that it becomes actually flat and/or
spherical depending on the way you look at it.

Because this would mean that when observer A sees the world as flat and in
so doing causes it to be flat, while at the same time observer B sees it to
be spherical and in so doing causes it to become spherical, that the world
is both flat and spherical at one and the same time, which is impossible.

Enjoy, Len.
.................................................. .

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message ...
Hi Len
[snip]

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible physical
cause and effect can there be between them?

Well Len technically you're correct. I had a similiar problem
when studying SR, and didn't get good handle on time dilation
until I studied GR. Let me explain....

As you know from Plancks Quantum Theory, a photon's
energy is E = h*f, (frequency). So as it moves up in a g-field
it loses frequency. This is called the Einstein Shift, and has
been well verified observationally and experimentally, and
so should be accepted as fact, (Sirius B and Pound-Rebka),
(at least for now). But it makes common sense.
Suppose you have two lamps that output the same
frequency of light when compared closely, and you
define a second by counting numbers of cycles of the
frequency of the lamp light, much as one does using a
quartz crystal. Now if you lower one of the lamps
down into a g-field the frequency of that lamp/clock
will become less than the frequency of the stationary
lamp/clock compared by the stationary clock observer.
Yet, the observer lowered with clock, will find no
difference in the rate of the lowered clock, but will
observe the upper clock speeding up. Biological,
chemical and physical processes are all synchronized
to the same physical laws that set the frequencies of the
lamp/clocks so the lower observer will age more slowly
than the upper observer.
This has been experimentally verified by the famous
Pound-Rebka experiment.

Would you accept this graviatationally induced *time
dilation*?
[snip]

Enjoy, Len.

Always,
Ken S. Tucker

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
om...
"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...
Hi Len
[snip]

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible
physical
cause and effect can there be between them?

Well Len technically you're correct. I had a similiar problem
when studying SR, and didn't get good handle on time dilation
until I studied GR. Let me explain....

As you know from Plancks Quantum Theory, a photon's
energy is E = h*f, (frequency). So as it moves up in a g-field
it loses frequency. This is called the Einstein Shift, and has
been well verified observationally and experimentally, and
so should be accepted as fact, (Sirius B and Pound-Rebka),
(at least for now). But it makes common sense.
Suppose you have two lamps that output the same
frequency of light when compared closely, and you
define a second by counting numbers of cycles of the
frequency of the lamp light, much as one does using a
quartz crystal. Now if you lower one of the lamps
down into a g-field the frequency of that lamp/clock
will become less than the frequency of the stationary
lamp/clock compared by the stationary clock observer.
Yet, the observer lowered with clock, will find no
difference in the rate of the lowered clock, but will
observe the upper clock speeding up. Biological,
chemical and physical processes are all synchronized
to the same physical laws that set the frequencies of the
lamp/clocks so the lower observer will age more slowly
than the upper observer.
This has been experimentally verified by the famous
Pound-Rebka experiment.

Would you accept this graviatationally induced *time
dilation*?
[snip]

[Len] I would not. See my Selected Papers which you will find at:
http://www2.rideau.net/gaasbeek

Enjoy, Len.

Always,
Ken S. Tucker

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message ...
"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...

"The Hopi, an Indian tribe, have a language as sophisticated as ours,
but no tenses for past, present and future. The division does not exist.
What does this say about time?"
Jeanette Winterson (1959- )
Sexing the Cherry.

Enjoy, Len.
.................................................. ........

I got to thinking what caused man to originate the concept of the "flow" of
time in the first place. Of course we are all born with the idea that days
come and go.
During the night we sleep and during the day we live our lives. This has
been part of our very way of life since the beginning of time.

Great questions... it looks to me like this idea, or "illusion" if
you will, began not with man contemplating days, but with bacteria,
some of which do have a rudimentary memory.

I imagine that the Hopi language can convey tenses, at least with
context. I guess this isn't the linguist newsgroup, but I think I
heard Chomsky say that all (human) languages are basically the same,
containing the same tenses, cases, etc., just that they come "out the
mouth" differently, sometimes explicitly, sometimes not..


Finally in the study of physics the constant flow of time is one of the most
useful and basic requirements in the measurements of many physical
parameters.

Now for all of the above to work the flow of time must be constant, that is
to say each day last the same number of hours and there are the same number
of days in each year etc.


Perhaps the inconstancy of time is just as useful and fundamental..
for what is a measurement without an error bar? An atomic clock would
be useless without the knowledge of its drift.. True, there is little
variation in the number of seconds in a sidereal day, but "constant"
is perhaps too strong a term.. How about saying relatively constant?
Or don't you like the r word?

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible physical
cause and effect can there be between them?


Ridiculous? It sounds like you are dismissing empirical science.. is
it ridiculous to suppose that like charges repel, "for what possible
physical cause and effect can there be between them?" Just because
you don't know the answer to that interesting question doesn't mean it
is ridiculous, in fact it is observable (in both cases).


It is like saying that a man is white some of the
time but black the rest of the time. You simply can't be both black and
white (unless you got beaten up! :-) ).

Again, you elude to a relativistic point (and again I digress). There
are places where Michael Jordan would be considered white, for he has
some European heritage. He is more white than Colin Powell is black..
it's all relative..


This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is unworkable,
unscientific and illogical. Or to put it plainly, it is ridiculous!
Consequently when a physicist chooses to embrace such a concept he ceases
to be a scientist and becomes a religious bigot who will stand by and defend
his beliefs no matter what the facts or the cost. That is to say, he has
ceased to be a physicist and has become a member of a cult based on doctrine
(faith) instead of logic.

At some level, we are doomed to be members of this cult.. for we
cannot ask again and again "for what physical reason" and know the
answers forever. At some point there is experiment and observation,
and the explanation "I don't know why, but that's the way nature
works".

[snip]
It is one thing to say that the
world is flat but quite another to say that it becomes actually flat and/or
spherical depending on the way you look at it.

The latter seems more accurate to me. The radius of curvature is
large compared to what? When I pour a concrete foundation, the world
is flat. When I fly across the Atlantic, it is spherical.


Enjoy, Len.
..................................................
Thanks - luke

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message ...
"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
. com...
"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message ...
Hi Len
[snip]

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible physical
cause and effect can there be between them?

Well Len technically you're correct. I had a similiar problem
when studying SR, and didn't get good handle on time dilation
until I studied GR. Let me explain....

As you know from Plancks Quantum Theory, a photon's
energy is E = h*f, (frequency). So as it moves up in a g-field
it loses frequency. This is called the Einstein Shift, and has
been well verified observationally and experimentally, and
so should be accepted as fact, (Sirius B and Pound-Rebka),
(at least for now). But it makes common sense.
Suppose you have two lamps that output the same
frequency of light when compared closely, and you
define a second by counting numbers of cycles of the
frequency of the lamp light, much as one does using a
quartz crystal. Now if you lower one of the lamps
down into a g-field the frequency of that lamp/clock
will become less than the frequency of the stationary
lamp/clock compared by the stationary clock observer.
Yet, the observer lowered with clock, will find no
difference in the rate of the lowered clock, but will
observe the upper clock speeding up. Biological,
chemical and physical processes are all synchronized
to the same physical laws that set the frequencies of the
lamp/clocks so the lower observer will age more slowly
than the upper observer.
This has been experimentally verified by the famous
Pound-Rebka experiment.

Would you accept this graviatationally induced *time
dilation*?
[snip]

[Len] I would not. See my Selected Papers which you will find at:
http://www2.rideau.net/gaasbeek

Two things,
1) you didn't specifically post where my reasoning
was erroneous. (just as a matter of courtesy) where did you
locate a reasoning fault?
2) I went to your suggested reference and found a virtual
book, could you provide a more specific reference?

Ken S. Tucker

"Dennis" wrote in message ...
Len,

Consequently when a physicist chooses to embrace such a concept he
ceases
to be a scientist and becomes a religious bigot who will stand by and
defend
his beliefs no matter what the facts or the cost.

You have said some very harsh words against something that you clearly do
not understand. Rather than calling others names for statements that you
cannot understand, why do you not instead make an attempt to understand
about the nature of space-time. If you know nothing of space-time, as you
clearly do not, then naturally these ideas are as foreign to you as those
of
people who belong to a different religion than you.

a religious bigot who will stand by and defend his beliefs no matter
what
the facts or the cost

I wonder if you were looking in the mirror as you thought this up.

Dennis

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...

"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...

"The Hopi, an Indian tribe, have a language as sophisticated as ours,
but no tenses for past, present and future. The division does not
exist.
What does this say about time?"
Jeanette Winterson (1959- )
Sexing the Cherry.

Enjoy, Len.
.................................................. ........

I got to thinking what caused man to originate the concept of the "flow"
of
time in the first place. Of course we are all born with the idea that
days
come and go.
During the night we sleep and during the day we live our lives. This
has
been part of our very way of life since the beginning of time.

Humans also realized since time immemorial that as the days pass we grow
older and that one day we all will die. As we became more sophisticated
we
realized that it was important to know when to sow and when to harvest,
i.e.
pin point the seasons.

This caused man to study what happened to his surroundings over a given
period of time such as hours, days, weeks, months and years. The
measurement of time also allowed people to make and keep appointments at
some future time.

Finally in the study of physics the constant flow of time is one of the
most
useful and basic requirements in the measurements of many physical
parameters.

Now for all of the above to work the flow of time must be constant, that
is
to say each day last the same number of hours and there are the same
number
of days in each year etc.

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is illogical
and
impossible.
The assumption that somehow the speed at which a body travels changes
the
rate at which it ages is equally ridiculous because what possible
physical
cause and effect can there be between them?

Moreover, in the relativistic "twin paradox" when the fast moving twin
gets
home will the sun have come up and set fewer times for him than for his
twin
brother who stayed at home? If this were the case he would somehow have
been able to cause the whole solar system to function at a slower rate
during his trip but only for him!

Not only that but since the solar cycle performed normally for everyone
else, it implies that somehow the fast moving twin was living in a
parallel
universe for the duration of his trip, which only he was able to enter
to
the exclusion of all others. Finally the moving twin is able to
re-enter
the regular universe when he gets home, a universe which aged at the
normal
rate during the time he was gone.

Now this is what is illogical about the whole idea of time dilation
because
if the moving twin on re-entering the normal universe has aged the
number
of
normal days that he was gone, how could he at the same time have aged
fewer
days during his trip? It is like saying that a man is white some of the
time but black the rest of the time. You simply can't be both black and
white (unless you got beaten up! :-) ).

This is why I maintain that the concept of time dilation is unworkable,
unscientific and illogical. Or to put it plainly, it is ridiculous!
Consequently when a physicist chooses to embrace such a concept he
ceases
to be a scientist and becomes a religious bigot who will stand by and
defend
his beliefs no matter what the facts or the cost. That is to say, he
has
ceased to be a physicist and has become a member of a cult based on
doctrine
(faith) instead of logic.

The is also why I maintain that the relativists have done untold harm to
science by corrupting its very nature. It is one thing to say that the
world is flat but quite another to say that it becomes actually flat
and/or
spherical depending on the way you look at it.

Because this would mean that when observer A sees the world as flat and
in
so doing causes it to be flat, while at the same time observer B sees it
to
be spherical and in so doing causes it to become spherical, that the
world
is both flat and spherical at one and the same time, which is
impossible.

Enjoy, Len.
..................................................

The same old refrain. If one doesn't agree with time dilation etc. and
shows it to be illogical and unscientific, one is accused of not
understanding relativity.
In other words, you are telling me that I don't know what I am talking
about.

When in primary school I learned that when you are debating a subject and
can't think of a valid reply, it won't do to tell your opponent that he is
crazy.
Not only is it bad manners but in so doing you have just lost the argument.

It is like telling a soccer player who just scored a goal, you don't
understand the game of soccer, consequently your goal doesn't count!
It won't do.

Len.
.................................................. ...
"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in message
om...
"Len Gaasenbeek" wrote in message
...

To all,

The one fact that Relativists do not comprehend is that just because a
clock
appears to run slow or fast that doesn't mean that it affects the rate at
which time flows.

That's interesting, let's permit the invention of a *Len Clock*,
defined by his statement, "the rate at which time flows".
Is there some way to compare a "relativists clock" with a *Len
clock* ?

So all their experiments that "prove" that time dilation
exist don't prove anything.

If you will permit free-enterprise, then I can purchase my
clock at the Relativists Clock Store or Len's Clock
Store. ((I'm going to buy both, and see which one best
predicts when my favorite TV shows come on.))

Also when the moving twin looks at his clock and sees that it runs
normally,
why should the observation of the stationary twin over-ride his
observation
that he is aging at a normal rate? After all he is a lot closer to his
clock than the twin who stayed at home.

However I am sure I won't change the mind of a Relativist. It is like
trying to convince a Catholic that a married woman who has had several
children isn't likely to be a virgin.

Which one of my wifes 9 kids proves shes NOT a VIRGIN?

Enjoy, Len.

Always
Ken S. Tucker