Is There A Universal Now?

Discussion in 'Physics & Math' started by Cyperium, Jun 14, 2022.

  1. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    Many scientists contend there is no such animal as FUNDIMENTIAL TIME

    No one has any equipment which measures TIME

    The clocks etc we have as time measure's only measure what WE define as time

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. LaurieAG Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    552
    This might be more like what the OP is thinking about.

    In his draft paper "Space geometry in rotating reference frames: A historical appraisal" Øyvind Grøn talks about the “optical appearance” of points of light on a rolling ring at retarded points of time and this plot shows the position of the points when they emitted light that arrived at a camera on the ground just as the ring passed the camera. This plot is not actually a frame as such.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,362
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Beaconator Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,362
    Does time slow down or speed up when you slow down?
     
  8. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,404
    But isn't that true of anything that we measure?
     
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    No

    We measure the the speed of light (which is FUNDIMENTIAL)

    The units we use, yes, are our own

    Aliens will measure speed of light in their units. Once both groups of scientists work out the translations and conversations it will be apparent both groups are taking about the same speed

    For TIME there is no FUNDIMENTIAL aspect we can match with Alien version

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  10. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,611
    If that was true then we could not agree with aliens on the speed of light since that obviously also includes a time conversion.

    I realize arguing with you on time is an exercise in futility, but maybe you can see the flaw in this particular point.
     
  11. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    And please tell me the time conversion. you are talking about

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,404
    Tell me how you can measure the speed of light without measuring the time light takes to travel a measured distance.
     
  13. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    The time used to measure the speed of light IS NOT FUNDIMENTIAL TIME

    The units used ARE OUR OWN MADE UP UNITS

    Are you aware of any FUNDIMENTIAL units of time? other than our own designated units?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,611
    There are no FUNDIMENTIAL units of length and mass either, so why do you insist on singling out poor time?
     
  15. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    I don't insist (insist is a bit strange and strong since I never mentioned either) but if you wish I can drag those non FUNDIMENTIALS in

    However TIME (the FUNDIMENTIAL version) happens to be currently under scrutiny

    I note posting FUNDIMENTIAL units of time was sidestepped

    Also I note no properties of TIME listed

    Is it not correct to say for something to exist it must have properties?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Aug 15, 2022
  16. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,611
    That would be helpful, to understand what your point is.

    I'm not sure how a lack of FUNDAMENTAL units have anything to do with something being real or not.

    There are no FUNDAMENTAL units for time, length or mass. Do you feel that time, length mass don't exist or is it just time?
     
  17. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,611
    I didn't side step anything I acknowledged there are no FUNDAMENTAL units of time, I'm just not sure why you think that's important.
     
  18. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    Then I will attempt to be helpful

    Any FUNDIMENTIAL units would be consistent throughout the Universe under, as I understand our current knowledge of physics

    Hence the gravitational constant and speed of light will have the same value throughout the Universe

    We (scientists) will still measure them in our own units, as will scientists in levels of technology equal to our level

    Translation of both our levels will confirm that both are the same confirming the FUNDIMENTIAL level of the gravitational constant

    Do you feel that , length mass don't exist or is it just ?

    length does not exist as a FUNDAMENTAL correct

    mass exist, it has properties

    If FUNDIMENTIAL UNITS OF TIME EXIST, (and I do note YOU acknowledge they do not), acknowledgement of FUNDIMENTIAL units of time would confirm the existence of time

    But since they don't TIME does not. Hence in previous sentence is not the single reason TIME does not exist

    Hence, if they existed, they would be important

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,611
    I see that you believe that neither time nor length exist (I don't actually believe you because based on your posts you are not insane). However, I will go ahead and accept what you are saying at face value and leave it there. There is nothing else for me to add.
     
  20. phyti Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    679
    Why did Einstein define time in terms of simultaneity?
     
  21. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    Enlighten me please why

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  22. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,404
    If you don't have fundamental units for time (or distance for that matter) then you don't have fundamental units for the speed of light either, seeing as the units of that are distance units/time units.
     
  23. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 72 years oldl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,700
    Correct

    And your reason for highlighting that aspect?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page