A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Arrow of Time



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 2nd 10, 08:08 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
JT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Arrow of Time

On 19 Juni, 18:04, Sam wrote:
On Jun 19, 10:58*am, "Robert L. Oldershaw"
wrote:

An interesting discussion has started at sci.physics.research
concerning the nature of the "arrow of time"


Consider these Arrows
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time#Arrows


Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
of those is however proved.

But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
spatial.

JT
  #2  
Old July 2nd 10, 08:56 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default Arrow of Time

On 7/2/10 2:08 PM, JT wrote:
On 19 Juni, 18:04, wrote:
On Jun 19, 10:58 am, "Robert L.
wrote:

An interesting discussion has started at sci.physics.research
concerning the nature of the "arrow of time"

Consider these Arrows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_of_time#Arrows


Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.


Sounds like a rock song from the 50s.

Special relativity, like general relativity uses the three observed
spatial dimensions plus a time dimension. Those relativity theories,
as well as the modern physics theories, such as QED, enjoy the fact
that there has never been an observation that contradicts a prediction
of those theories.

  #3  
Old July 2nd 10, 09:57 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default Arrow of Time

On 7/3/2010 1:08 AM, JT wrote:
Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
of those is however proved.

But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
spatial.


Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
rates.

Yousuf Khan
  #4  
Old July 3rd 10, 01:02 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.astro
Androcles[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default Arrow of Time


"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
| On 7/3/2010 1:08 AM, JT wrote:
| Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
| Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
| accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
| So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
| bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
| every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
| line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
| of those is however proved.
|
| But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
| measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
| that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
| relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
| can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
| spatial.
|
| Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
| saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
| reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
| rates.
|
| Yousuf Khan

Well, if *you* think ab... but you can't, can you?
A slower rate than what? Do you have any idea what a rate is?

Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that there are longer metres than metres.




|

  #5  
Old July 3rd 10, 01:02 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.astro
Androcles[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 63
Default Arrow of Time


"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
| On 7/3/2010 1:08 AM, JT wrote:
| Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
| Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
| accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
| So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
| bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
| every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
| line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
| of those is however proved.
|
| But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
| measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
| that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
| relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
| can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
| spatial.
|
| Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
| saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
| reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
| rates.
|
| Yousuf Khan

Well, if *you* think ab... but you can't, can you?
A slower rate than what? Do you have any idea what a rate is?

Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that there are longer metres than metres.




|

  #6  
Old July 3rd 10, 04:21 AM posted to sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.fractals,sci.astro
Robert L. Oldershaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 617
Default Arrow of Time

On Jul 2, 11:02*pm, eric gisse wrote:
On Jul 2, 11:02 pm, eric gisse wrote:

If you read what I wrote more carefully you would have seen that I
understand where the disparity originates.


In fact I have written a paper on how to resolve the crisis:


http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0901/0901.3381.pdf


Yoy might read this to edify yourself, Woofster.


RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw


  #7  
Old July 3rd 10, 05:50 AM posted to sci.physics.particle,sci.physics,sci.fractals,sci.astro
eric gisse
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 342
Default Arrow of Time

Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:

On Jul 2, 11:02 pm, eric gisse wrote:
On Jul 2, 11:02 pm, eric gisse wrote:

If you read what I wrote more carefully you would have seen that I
understand where the disparity originates.


I rather much doubt that, as you had just explicitly blamed GR and 'modern
cosmology' as opposed to the theory that actually predicts it.



In fact I have written a paper on how to resolve the crisis:


http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/0901/0901.3381.pdf


You have not shown that your resolution correctly replicates the Casimir
effect. Or anything at all, for that matter. You just announce 'I've solved
it!' while in reality, you've shown **** all.

That your thoughts on the matter remain unpublished in anywhere of note is
equally telling.



Yoy might read this to edify yourself, Woofster.


RLO
www.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw


  #8  
Old July 3rd 10, 11:03 AM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
hanson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,934
Default Arrow of Time

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
On 7/3/2010 1:08 AM, JT wrote:
Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
of those is however proved.

But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
spatial.


"Yousuf Khan" wrote:
Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
rates.

hanson wrote:
Yossi, you sing the song of the Einstein Dingleberries.
You express & parrot fantasies of deranged Jews and
abberant goyim kikeophiles. There is not a singe instant
where, in the local, testable neighborhood, humankind
has been able to accelerate any ponderable body, bigger
then atoms to relativistic speeds. -- Consider, there are
N_A, 6E23 atoms needed to produce a handful of dirt.
That's the amount of mass needed to produce a real
solid ~5" disk... for which your relativity fails pitifully...

At least, you should toned your parroting down & said:
To a (stationary) observer (outside the speeding frame)
CBK processes may, perhaps, APPEAR to be slower.

Also, Youssi, don't tell anybody that you can't be really
sure what happened because of it's relativistic speed, that
the disk went by you... Except that its hypersonic boom
knocked you out of your chair, and that you are ever
more grateful that the relativistically speeding disk did
not hit you head on.... ahahahaha....

Of course, like all Einstein Dingleberries do, you may
loudly disagree & prove your notion by simply providing
the address of, and an interview with, Einstein's Younger
Twin... Thanks for the laughs, Youssi... ahahahanson


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---
  #9  
Old July 3rd 10, 12:11 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
JT
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 114
Default Arrow of Time

On 2 Juli, 22:57, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 7/3/2010 1:08 AM, JT wrote:

Well the spatial dimensions in special relativity is all ****ed up.
Since events are not local they may not behave the way we are
accustomed to but they will abey the logic of causality in some form.
So we have a timeline that is a rubberband but the reality outside the
bubble of universe is still stringent in fact it will be stringent in
every point of universe that studies our universe it will follow the
line of causality but with both spatial and timelike distorsion, none
of those is however proved.


But even if we suppose there is local timelines, the causality will
measure and describe events in a logical consise and coherent way. And
that is from any point that studies the event....s , in special
relativity that is not the case however it is a faulthy theory, that
can not give a coherent description of events separated by time and
spatial.


Well, if you think about it, in special relativity, all they are really
saying is that causality is slowed down at relativistic speeds. Chemical
reactions, biological processes, kinetic processes, all occur at slower
rates.

* * * * Yousuf Khan


No they make predictions of spatial separation and timelike separation
that do not occur in reality, it is a faulthy theory it can not be
used to predict where an object in mapped space will be. It us totally
useless for navigational or ballistical purposes at speeds close to
c.

It is proved again and again that relativists can not give an answer
to what position and space, an object at relativestic place will
occupy.
They are all jugglers dropping bananas behind the curtain, basicly
their theory allways was in freefall but because of the limitations of
the gedankens noone ever noticed.

Einstein never dared to juggle with more then two bananas, special
relativity is a very limited theory it is not even a theory it is all
a dreamwork.

JT
  #10  
Old July 3rd 10, 01:58 PM posted to sci.physics.relativity,sci.physics,sci.physics.particle,sci.fractals,sci.astro
Huang
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 36
Default Arrow of Time

You guys still havent answered my questions about chaos and fractals
in nature.

If you have a dynamical system which "could" or even "will be"
exhibiting chaotic or fractal geomatry in it's behaviour, or with
respect to something happening on other scales, and suppose that it's
not.........

..........do you still have a fractal ? Do you still call it chaos ?

Is it possible to morph in and out of a fractal structure, or do you
believe that the universe is locked into a particular modality - and
why ? Most importantly - why ?

Can you prove it to me in a way which is :

reproducible
falsifiable
quantitative
qualitative
and predictive

?????????????????

If you cannot, then you are just spewing diahhrea from the mouth.

But I remain open to anyone who claims he can.



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Arrow of Time bert Astronomy Misc 2 July 8th 10 01:08 PM
The Cosmic Quantum Clock. The Arrow of Time [email protected] Astronomy Misc 2 September 30th 07 11:11 AM
Does the Arrow of Time Point in Different Directions? Double-A Misc 5 June 12th 06 12:44 PM
Black hole entropy and arrow of time [email protected] Astronomy Misc 0 May 26th 06 08:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.