Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[MRC_Hans]

The second is always a second according to the observer and their clock.
What the observer measures is that a different clock in a different gravitational potential ticks at a different rate.

I don't know where Bjarne is, because I have him on ignore, but the above is correct. It may look like semantics, but it is important: A second (time) is defined in a certain way, the modern definition being defined by atom oscillation. This definition holds true wherever you are, and at whatever velocity you move; your atomic clock will run true, and a second is a second.

However, if you compare clocks placed in different places, you will find that they run at different speeds; a person on the surface of Earth will see a clock in a satelite run slightly slow, and at the same time, a person i a satelite will see a clock on Earht run slightly fast.

This is because spacetime is warped, curved, bent, or compressed, pick your favorite word, none of them describe exactly what happens.

This may tempt some to say that the two realities are different, but that is, of course, wrong: This thing is a property of the same reality. We know this because I can apply the rules of my reality (on Earht) and calculate exactly how things are on the satelite.

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

However, if you compare clocks placed in different places, you will find that they run at different speeds; a person on the surface of Earth will see a clock in a satelite run slightly slow, and at the same time, a person i a satelite will see a clock on Earht run slightly fast

According to Mother Cow, this is excact opposite.

This thing is a property of the same reality. We know this because I can apply the rules of my reality (on Earht) and calculate exactly how things are on the satelite.

If you compare realities these cannot be the same.
Even the Univers is no longer the same.
Simple logic and calculation proves that.

Try this
Let’s now (again) say that the time dilation is 50% at the ISS., it is the year 3012 and the ISS is now replaced by a little Moon stolen from Jupiter.
It is orbiting the excact same orbit as the Earth.
So only gravity is different.

The mission is now a gravity experiment.
Acceleration due to gravity (ADG) must be measured on board.
On board is a ruler completely identical to one on Earth, both made in Germany.

A stone is dropped from 1 meters altitude and reach the surface of the ISS-Moon.
From Earth we can observe the same event, - we will now say that ADG was exactly as we beforehand have calculated, it was 1 m/s.

But on board the ISS-Moon,- they do not agree, because it took the stone 2 second to reach the surface.

• So is the gravity constant “G” not the same.
• Is it something wrong with the ruler, I mean is a 1 meter ruler no longer 1 meter ?
• Is something wrong with the universal definition of one second?
• And finally, how can we be sure what the problem is?

There are no "looks like" - clock are ticking , and this is REAL everywhere.

Unless you or anyone else can answer very clear to such simple questions, don't tell me anyone understand relativity.

 

[Paul]

If you compare realities these cannot be the same.

Why not?

Anyway, Hans said nothing about comparing different realities, he said that using universal rules allows for the calculation of the conditions at different points.

Even the Univers is no longer the same.

What is that supposed to mean?

Simple logic and calculation proves that.

Then you will have no problem supplying a solution involving them.

Let’s now (again) say that the time dilation is 50% at the ISS., it is the year 3012 and the ISS is now replaced by a little Moon stolen from Jupiter.

Let's not, you are a very, very silly man.

And finally, how can we be sure what the problem is?

Apparently, you have no idea what any of the problems are.

Unless you or anyone else can answer very clear to such simple questions, don't tell me anyone understand relativity.

If someone patiently and clearly explains it to you again, will you accept the truth or will you ignore it and talk about cows?

 

[DazzaD]

Let’s now (again) say that the time dilation is 50% at the ISS., it is the year 3012 and the ISS is now replaced by a little Moon stolen from Jupiter.
It is orbiting the excact same orbit as the Earth.
So only gravity is different.

Grr.. when you say "gravity is different" what on Earth (or off Earth) do you mean?

What is different? Why? You said the EXACT same orbit so they take the SAME time to orbit the Sun once? Yes/no?

The mission is now a gravity experiment.
Acceleration due to gravity (ADG) must be measured on board.
On board is a ruler completely identical to one on Earth, both made in Germany.

Do you mean g? The acceleration due to gravity... as in Newtonian physics

g = GM/r^2 where G is the universal gravitational constant, M is the mass that you are 'orbiting' so to speak and r is the seperation between the two centres of mass (between say the ISS and the Earth).

Are we to assume that we JUST have the ISS and the Earth, in an imaginary model, with NOTHING else? Or are they both still orbiting the Sun?

A stone is dropped from 1 meters altitude and reach the surface of the ISS-Moon.
From Earth we can observe the same event, - we will now say that ADG was exactly as we beforehand have calculated, it was 1 m/s.

But on board the ISS-Moon,- they do not agree, because it took the stone 2 second to reach the surface.

Arglle....

So an acceleration has units of velocity here?

Was this accidental? Else it shows a gross misunderstanding that my Year 8 students would get picked up on...

So.. the same "event" seems to take a different time from different points of view.

No real problem with that. Welcome to relativity.

Have you looked at the classic examples of muons and half lifes?

• So is the gravity constant “G” not the same.
• Is it something wrong with the ruler, I mean is a 1 meter ruler no longer 1 meter ?
• Is something wrong with the universal definition of one second?
• And finally, how can we be sure what the problem is?

G or g?
Big difference. G is the universal gravitational constant and is thought to be the same everywhere in the universe in all the highly successful mainstream theories.

The ruler can appear to be a different length to different observers yes.

The definition of one second is neither here nor there. You get the same effect if you use any agreed upon measure of time.

I dont even know what the 'problem' is you are supposed to be describing. So far all you have tried to explain is what is well known about relativity and is demonstrated amply in everyday life billions of times to be incredibly successful.

Do any of your objections look similar to these thought experiments?

http://aether.lbl.gov/www/classes/p139/exp/gedanken.html

 

[MRC_Hans]

Arglle....

So an acceleration has units of velocity here?

Was this accidental? Else it shows a gross misunderstanding that my Year 8 students would get picked up on...

(my bolding)

Hard to say. Some time back it seems that we made Bjarne understand the m/s² thing, but he has a tendency to unlearn things, after a while.

Hans

 

[Daylightstar]

According to Mother Cow, ...

Hey Bjarne, could you pull yourself out of mother cow's rear end, and start talking like a grown up and leave the cows alone?

 

[Bjarne]

Hey Bjarne, could you pull yourself out of mother cow's rear end, and start talking like a grown up and leave the cows alone?

Who can then save the world ?

 

[Bjarne]

Grr.. when you say "gravity is different" what on Earth (or off Earth) do you mean?
What is different? Why? You said the EXACT same orbit so they take the SAME time to orbit the Sun once? Yes/no?

What I am saying is that it is only different GR influence , - not different SR differences.

Do you mean g? The acceleration due to gravity... as in Newtonian physics

g = GM/r^2 where G is the universal gravitational constant, M is the mass that you are 'orbiting' so to speak and r is the seperation between the two centres of mass (between say the ISS and the Earth).

Are we to assume that we JUST have the ISS and the Earth, in an imaginary model, with NOTHING else? Or are they both still orbiting the Sun?

Imaging these 2 objects is orbiting the Sun , one by one, in the same orbit. - Only their own gravity would be different.

Arglle....

So an acceleration has units of velocity here?

the experiment take 1second, so why ^2

G or g?
Big difference. G is the universal gravitational constant and is thought to be the same everywhere in the universe in all the highly successful mainstream theories.

The ruler can appear to be a different length to different observers yes.

The definition of one second is neither here nor there. You get the same effect if you use any agreed upon measure of time.

I dont even know what the 'problem' is you are supposed to be describing. So far all you have tried to explain is what is well known about relativity and is demonstrated amply in everyday life billions of times to be incredibly successful.

I asked you to explain the comparable differences between the 2 different space-time realities.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8022039&postcount=5602

You wrote distances was not the same.

Now let's check which consequences this must have...
We must now look at the example again....
A stone is dropped from 1 meters altitude and reach the surface of the ISS-Moon.
From Earth we can observe the same event, - we will now say that ADG was exactly as we beforehand have calculated, it was 1 m/s.
But on board the ISS-Moon,- they do not agree, because it took the stone 2 second to reach the surface.

So the distance the stone falls is now 2 meter instead of 1 meter.
Is this what you think ?

These differences would not only be local, but the whole universe must now be different too.
So how can you say the universe is the same comparable size for all observers?

This version also means that distances can dissaper and reapper , hmmm maybe possible ?

I too believed once in this version, but maybe it seems more logical that EVERTHING is stretching or contracting due to space time differences. Also the second, which mean the definition of one second, simply is not the same in different space time.
In this case 1 meter would still be one meter, stretching or contracting YES, but it would not suddenly be 2 meter.

In both cases, the universe, reality, - out there, - cannot be comparable the same. Simply because GR and SR is changing EVERYTHING locally and “GLOBALLY”.

The dilemma is now that that global, there cannot be a certain reality,- ONLY local.

Shortly a certain reality is a common illusion.

 

[Paul]

Who can then save the world ?

Someone without a cow's backside for a head.

 

[Paul]

What I am saying is that it is only different GR influence , - not different SR differences.

As DazzaD will no doubt say, argle!

I would also like to add, on a personal note, W T F!

the experiment take 1second, so why ^2

Please don't go back to not understanding the meaning of acceleration.

I asked you to explain the comparable differences between the 2 different space-time realities

What comparable differences?

What different space-time realities?

But I see you like all others again failed to do so.

To extend your own analogy, you do not even appear to have an optic nerve.

Most likely because you don’t understand these differences, so how could you answer the question better than you did ?

Stupidity is not really something to parade around like a prize heifer you know.

 

[Paul]

But well you wrote distances was not the same.
So can these 2 realities be the same?
How can the Universe be the same "out there?" ?

Just because there are thoughts spinning around your head, it does not mean they are clever insights that should be shared with others; try a little internal editing.

 

[DazzaD]

What I am saying is that it is only different GR influence , - not different SR differences.

Why? Is SR included within GR? If not, why not? Do you understand when one applies?

Imaging these 2 objects is orbiting the Sun , one by one, in the same orbit. - Only their own gravity would be different.

What does "their own gravity" even mean?

So in your model you have the Sun and the ISS and then in the second model we have the Sun and the Earth. And we are comparing these two. Yes?

What is the force we are looking at? The gravitational field due to the ISS alone? The Newtonian gravitational force between the ISS and the Sun?

the experiment take 1second, so why ^2

I dont like to belittle people but if you are seriously trying to contend you understand relativity and gravity better than everyone else over the last 100 years and yet you dont even know what the correct units for acceleration are or why that might matter then you DO need to go back to square 1.

You wrote distances was not the same.

No.

I said, that to an observer moving in a frame relative to the ruler (i.e. an observer on the Earth looking at a ruler which is in a spaceship whizzing by) then the ruler may appear to be a different length (compared to the length as measured by someone ON the spaceship itself).

This is one of the most basic principles of SR.

Now let's check which consequences this must have...
We must now look at the example again....
A stone is dropped from 1 meters altitude and reach the surface of the ISS-Moon.
From Earth we can observe the same event, - we will now say that ADG was exactly as we beforehand have calculated, it was 1 m/s.
But on board the ISS-Moon,- they do not agree, because it took the stone 2 second to reach the surface.

So the distance the stone falls is now 2 meter instead of 1 meter.
Is this what you think ?

Absolutely not because your example does not make sense.


I note that yet again, for the 9th post in a row, you have avoided answering the key questions I asked in maths and physics.

I contend sir, that is because you have not got a clue about the physics and maths you are questioning.

I have plenty of time for people wishing to debate maths and physics and to investigate different ideas, even "weird" ones, but ignoring most of the discussion means you are standing there preaching while holding your hands over your ears... you dont seem to be interested in any of the replies you seek...

 

[Reality Check]

If you compare realities these cannot be the same.

That is insane. You cannot "compare realities" because there is only oine reality. That is what reality means !

In philosophy, reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined.[1] In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. A still more broad definition includes everything that has existed, exists, or will exist.

The science is that SR and GR describe one reality. The fact is that in this one reality, different observers can measure different distances and times than other observers. The reality has not changed. All of the observers explain the different measurements using the same theories (SR and GR).

 

[MRC_Hans]

Recently noticed this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Rings a bell, doesn't it?

Hans

 

[Bjarne]

Recently noticed this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

Rings a bell, doesn't it?

Hans

Oohhh, -so this is why the higgs religion, the inner dynamo religion, the big bang religion, dark matter religion, the parallel universe religion, the dark energy religion, the multi dimension religion, the mass brain wash program etc.etc. etc was invented

 

[Reality Check]

Oohhh, -so this is why the higgs religion...

How insane - that is why there are Internet cranks unable to understand science but still with the delusion that their fantasies are right.
These cranks seem to be effected by the Dunning–Kruger effect

The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which the unskilled suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes

You have demonstrated that you

1. Are unskilled.
2. Cannot recognize your mistakes.

So there is evidence that the Dunning–Kruger effect is influencing you.

This has nothing to do with the science that

• The Higgs boson is a candidate for the cause of mass. There is evidence (but not strong) that it exists.
• The dynamo theory for the Earth's magnetic field works!
  Your fantasy about the cause is easily debunked: Yet another fundamentally flawed idea from Bjarne
• There is strong evidence for dark matter.
• String theory is great mathematics and a nice scientific hypothesis. It still has the problem hat it cannot predict anything.

 

[Bjarne]

How insane - that is why there are Internet cranks unable to understand science but still with the delusion that their fantasies are right.
These cranks seem to be effected by the Dunning–Kruger effect

You have demonstrated that you

1. Are unskilled.
2. Cannot recognize your mistakes.

If I for one year ago would have say that there is something wrong with relativity, you would have say the same.
Today we know it is something wromg, - but not what.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR1vecO5hKs

I guess what happen in your and Hans'es head after watching this video is almost nothing.

I mean if it where increased brain activity (mean more than 3 second) after watching the video you would guaranteed be classified as an insane person that certainly must believe that you are Good.

I mean both Josef Staling, Pol Pot, and Mr Kim Dae Jung, and many Oberststrumbanfuhrer , and probably also yourself and Hans would agree.

Because after the systematical mass brainwash program nobody shall use their own brain, but only listen to their leaders. It is only allowed to recite the holy scientific book, not to think. Those that believe they (still) can think them self, - don't belong to this planet, - but to mad houses, and only deserve scorn.
Only the leaders are allowed to think, because they are not insane.
Sieg.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect

The holy scientific book is absolutely truths, - only insane people doubt it.
Halleluja Halleluja .
Amen

 

[id est]

However, if you compare clocks placed in different places, you will find that they run at different speeds; a person on the surface of Earth will see a clock in a satelite run slightly slow, and at the same time, a person i a satelite will see a clock on Earht run slightly fast.
Hans

I'm generally in agreement with you Hans and Reality Check among others, and I've been enjoying this thread as a non-member (in a masochistic sort of way ) for a while now.

So then apologies but even though I'm only a newly minted forum member, I'm going to have to quibble with you on this. I think the size and direction of time dilation would depend on the height at which the satellite was orbiting.

So for example the ISS is so low and travelling fast enough that time dilation due to SR effects is larger than the opposing time dilation due to GR effects, and the clocks on the satellite would run a little slower when viewed from Earth.

But a satellite in geostationary orbit, as another example, is far enough away and travelling slow enough that the GR effect is bigger than the SR, and the clocks on the satellite would run a little faster when viewed from Earth.

And at some orbital distance in between, there would be an equilibrium point where the two effects are equal and opposite, and the clocks in both frames of reference would be in step.

 

[Paul]

Congratulations Bjarne, you've managed to Godwin a cosmology thread.

 

[Bjarne]

I'm generally in agreement with you Hans and Reality Check among others, and I've been enjoying this thread as a non-member (in a masochistic sort of way ) for a while now.

So then apologies but even though I'm only a newly minted forum member, I'm going to have to quibble with you on this. I think the size and direction of time dilation would depend on the height at which the satellite was orbiting.

So for example the ISS is so low and travelling fast enough that time dilation due to SR effects is larger than the opposing time dilation due to GR effects, and the clocks on the satellite would run a little slower when viewed from Earth.

But a satellite in geostationary orbit, as another example, is far enough away and travelling slow enough that the GR effect is bigger than the SR, and the clocks on the satellite would run a little faster when viewed from Earth.

And at some orbital distance in between, there would be an equilibrium point where the two effects are equal and opposite, and the clocks in both frames of reference would be in step.

Right
If we speak about the Moon ( more distance satellite), the SR influence is weak, due to the lower speed. ( & probaly also geostationary orbit as you wrote)
In such distance orbit, - time tick comparable faster for a (normal) satellite.
Furthermore at polar, and retrograde orbiting satellite, - time is also ticking faster than here.
So Hans is mostly wrong

I think Hans should read this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect
I did not know he was an ignorant unskilled crackpot.
But now he has revealed what he really is.
Puuuhhh Hans Puuuh.....................