Einstein's Time

Dear sci.astro.amateur people,

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well. Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"
http://www.w-g.jp/member/suzuki/time-at-light-speed.htm

In Einstein's theory of relativity, when an object moves at the light speed, time stops and the object becomes a line. My paper shows a new explanation for these phenomena.
New thoughts are often eccentric. My paper is also eccentric. But if you understand the contents, they are very interesting and important. Especially, please see "Figure 9. Field of Soul-Energy". If this figure is understood, the essence of this paper is understood. Also I wrote about god and soul. The contents of this paper have not been proved scientifically. But, mere imagination is valuable if it is closer to the truth than conventional thoughts. I think this paper is closer to the truth than the Einstein's theory of relativity.
Please have a look.

Yours Sincerely
Toshio Suzuki

On 6/1/15 4:09 PM, Toshio Suzuki wrote:

Dear sci.astro.amateur people,

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well. Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"
http://www.w-g.jp/member/suzuki/time-at-light-speed.htm

In Einstein's theory of relativity, when an object moves at the light speed, time stops and the object becomes a line. My paper shows a new explanation for these phenomena.
New thoughts are often eccentric. My paper is also eccentric. But if you understand the contents, they are very interesting and important. Especially, please see "Figure 9. Field of Soul-Energy". If this figure is understood, the essence of this paper is understood. Also I wrote about god and soul. The contents of this paper have not been proved scientifically. But, mere imagination is valuable if it is closer to the truth than conventional thoughts. I think this paper is closer to the truth than the Einstein's theory of relativity.
Please have a look.

Yours Sincerely
Toshio Suzuki





I worry that you don't understand that the velocity of an object
is always relative to an observer. Different observers can measure
different velocities. There is no absolute speed for material objects.

Student understanding of time in special relativity: simultaneity and
reference frames
http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0207109...ication_detail

This article reports on an investigation of student understanding of
the concept of time in special relativity. A series of research tasks
are discussed that illustrate, step-by-step, how student reasoning of
fundamental concepts of relativity was probed. The results indicate
that after standard instruction students at all academic levels have
serious difficulties with the relativity of simultaneity and with the
role of observers in inertial reference frames. Evidence is presented
that suggests many students construct a conceptual framework in which
the ideas of absolute simultaneity and the relativity of simultaneity
harmoniously co-exist.

On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 14:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Toshio Suzuki
wrote:

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well. Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"

Please, when the paper is published in a mainstream, peer-reviewed
journal, let us know.

On Monday, June 1, 2015 at 10:13:48 PM UTC+1, Sam Wormley wrote:


I worry that you don't understand that the velocity of an object
is always relative to an observer. Different observers can measure
different velocities. There is no absolute speed for material objects.


You poor creatures can't discuss the issues in general or in detail but literally try to bait people into talking up the early 20th century jargon fest.

When you were shown what Newton's absolute/relative time represented in terms of the Equation of Time you have that empirical curiosity of screening it out -

"Absolute time, in astronomy, is distinguished from relative, by the equation of time. For the natural days are truly unequal, though they are commonly considered as equal and used for a measure of time; astronomers correct this inequality for their more accurate deducing of the celestial motions. " Principia

The whole lot of it is a sham - what began as an overreaching agenda which attempted to dissolve the boundaries between hypotheses at an experimental level and an astronomical scale turned into a nightmare we all suffer from today with the education system rigged to infect one generation to the next..

"Rule III. The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton

I do not marvel at the ability to continue asserting this via the 'scientific method' or as 'universal gravitation' as it was originally presented, it is the fact that none of you have a clue at any level what Newton tried to do and how he tried to do it.

On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 14:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Toshio Suzuki
wrote this crap:


Dear sci.astro.amateur people,

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well.
Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"
http://www.w-g.jp/member/suzuki/time-at-light-speed.htm

In Einstein's theory of relativity, when an object moves at the
light speed, time stops and the object becomes a line.
My paper shows a new explanation for these phenomena.

Objects with mass cannot move at the speed of light. Only photons can
move at the speed of light.


This signature is now the ultimate
power in the universe

In article
Toshio Suzuki wrote:


Dear sci.astro.amateur people,

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well. Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"
http://www.w-g.jp/member/suzuki/time-at-light-speed.htm

In Einstein's theory of relativity, when an object moves at the light speed, time stops and the object becomes a line. My paper shows a new explanation for these phenomena.
New thoughts are often eccentric. My paper is also eccentric. But if you understand the contents, they are very interesting and important. Especially, please see "Figure 9. Field of Soul-Energy".

My willing suspension of disbelief got un-suspended at this point.

.... The contents of this paper have not been proved scientifically.

And they never will be because what you're saying is not scientific.

But, mere imagination is valuable if it is closer to the truth than conventional thoughts.

You are certainly entitled to that opinion. It makes no sense, but
you are entitled to it.

I think this paper is closer to the truth than the Einstein's theory of relativity.

You are free to think that, but you are being delusional when you
think that.

Why do people insist on bringing their supernatural fantasies to
issues of science?

On Tue, 2 Jun 2015 12:34:36 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio
wrote this crap:

I think this paper is closer to the truth than the Einstein's theory of relativity.

You are free to think that, but you are being delusional when you
think that.

Why do people insist on bringing their supernatural fantasies to
issues of science?

It's human nature. Science is supposed to be able to explain
everything even if it's fantasy. Such examples are global warming,
the Big Bang Theory, and dark matter.

On Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 11:35:43 AM UTC+1, Nomen Nescio wrote:

Why do people insist on bringing their supernatural fantasies to
issues of science?

More like science fiction fantasies overwhelming the noble tradition of astronomy. In 1898 a book appeared on shelves with a narrative that time and space were one and the same thing --

" 'Now, it is very remarkable that this is so extensively overlooked,' continued the Time Traveller, with a slight accession of cheerfulness. 'Really this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some people who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It is only another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between time and any of the three dimensions of space except that our consciousness moves along it" The Time Machine

http://www.bartleby.com/1000/1.html


To be fair to the late 19th century empiricists, they adored Newton's agenda without really understanding it but hated the clockwork solar system represented by the predictive framework of the Ra/Dec system. They couldn't make sense of Newton's absolute/relative time by virtue that Sir Isaac was tinkering around with timekeeping rather than time itself.

"This absolute time can be measured by comparison with no motion; it
has therefore neither a practical nor a scientific value; and no one
is justified in saying that he knows aught about it. It is an idle
metaphysical conception." Mach, Analyse der Empfindungen, 6th ed

People are being conned of course ,at least those who take the words of academics that Newton somehow enlightened humanity instead of the grotesque and overreaching agenda he created using distortions and meaningless wordplays which mimic astronomical terms but lack any substance.

On Monday, June 1, 2015 at 10:25:43 PM UTC+1, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 14:09:36 -0700 (PDT), Toshio Suzuki
wrote:

I hope this mail will find you are doing very well. Recently, I have written a paper.

"Time at the Light Speed"

Please, when the paper is published in a mainstream, peer-reviewed
journal, let us know.

The mischief that began in astronomy has spread to many other endeavors as a matter of course -

"It's common for many to dismiss a lot of great work by experts and researchers at various institutions around the globe which isn't "peer-reviewed" and doesn't appear in a "credible" medical journal, but as we can see, "peer-reviewed" doesn't really mean much anymore. "Credible" medical journals continue to lose their tenability in the eyes of experts and employees of the journals themselves, like Dr. Horton."

http://www.collective-evolution.com/...ture-is-false/

In a true scientific sense there is nobody sitting in judgment of another but rather a situation where people are either inspired and inspiring in an atmosphere of competition. The affirmations these days,at least in astronomy, come from imaging and graphics even though they are barely used correctly.

So ,peer-review in astronomy has its place in the same realm as music or movie critics have in their respective commentaries but ultimately it is how it delights the observer that sways humanity. The days of contrived bluffing and voodoo are over as the instruments of visual imaging take center stage in conveying an astronomical narrative as its connection to terrestrial sciences.

Dear Mr. Sam Wormley,

Thank you for a comment. I am very happy. You gave me a same comment in another group. As for relativity of velocity, it is easily understood from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9zrt__lec

I do not think I am definitely correct. I know some people do not like my posing. But I must write my opinion because I am very serious. Please carefully read a passage around the figure 9.

Yours Sincerely
Toshio Suzuki