Would Religion still continue if....

[Guest]

You have been told...?

So much for freedom of speech (and thought)

Yes the little voice inside my head told me well it's the fuggin tumor speaking but what the hell I obey it's voice.


Oh yes I have been told by mortal means to choose. I have I choose to continue posting to whom I want, when I want so tough banana cakes.

If somebody has a problem with that go get a life.Coz I sure as hell don't' give a bowler hat and custard tart about it.

 

[Franko]

Franko:
If our Earth were some how moved to the orbit of Mercury, Newton would have been just another knucklehead?

Stimpson:
No, but we would have discovered that his laws of motion were flawed sooner.

Suppose that at some point in the future Humans are capable of building a spacecraft that can travel of 70% the speed of Light. But imagine that this is a spacecraft built to send Human colonists to another planet, so they build this craft from a large rocky asteroid captured from the solar system.

Now suppose that they build Two of these “spacecraft” – both capable of traveling 70% the speed of light …

… and they send them off in opposite directions. From the POV of the crew on either of these crafts they are standing on a “stationary planetary body” (like the Earth). But since BOTH ships are traveling away from the Earth at 70% the speed of light, wouldn’t they being traveling at 140% the speed of light away from each other? In other words from a person on one of the asteroids, wouldn’t it appear that the other asteroid was moving away from him at a speed beyond what is “allowable” by General Relativity?

Or think of it this way … suppose you have two flashlights, and you “glue” the back ends together so that the beams of lights are shining in opposite directions. From the “POV” of the photons in one beam, aren’t the photons in the opposite beam moving away at twice the speed of light?

 

[Guest]

Silence ?

Or think of it this way … suppose you have two flashlights, and you “glue” the back ends together so that the beams of lights are shining in opposite directions. From the “POV” of the photons in one beam, aren’t the photons in the opposite beam moving away at twice the speed of light?

How can that happen?

 

[Franko]

How can that happen?

Because Solipsism is True?

 

[PixyMisa]

Silence ?

How can that happen?

Simple: It can't. It doesn't. Franko, not surprisingly, is wrong.

 

[Franko]

Simple: It can't. It doesn't. Franko, not surprisingly, is wrong.

So what does that mean exactly, Princess?

If we have two ships flying in opposite directions then they can't go faster than half the speed of light?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Suppose that at some point in the future Humans are capable of building a spacecraft that can travel of 70% the speed of Light. But imagine that this is a spacecraft built to send Human colonists to another planet, so they build this craft from a large rocky asteroid captured from the solar system.

Now suppose that they build Two of these “spacecraft” – both capable of traveling 70% the speed of light …

… and they send them off in opposite directions. From the POV of the crew on either of these crafts they are standing on a “stationary planetary body” (like the Earth). But since BOTH ships are traveling away from the Earth at 70% the speed of light, wouldn’t they being traveling at 140% the speed of light away from each other? In other words from a person on one of the asteroids, wouldn’t it appear that the other asteroid was moving away from him at a speed beyond what is “allowable” by General Relativity?

Or think of it this way … suppose you have two flashlights, and you “glue” the back ends together so that the beams of lights are shining in opposite directions. From the “POV” of the photons in one beam, aren’t the photons in the opposite beam moving away at twice the speed of light?

What is this? Are you making fun of us Franko? Surely you cannot be this ignorant? Havent you understood one scrap of relativity?

Hans

 

[Franko]

What is this? Are you making fun of us Franko?

What exactly do you mean?

Surely you cannot be this ignorant? Havent you understood one scrap of relativity?

Are you telling me you are actually passing up an opportunity to demonstrate (show-off) that marvelous A-Theist intelligence of Yours?

 

[MRC_Hans]

SO you are this ignorant? The person who claims to understand Quantum Mechanics better than the entire scientific community of the past fifty years in earnest asks such questions?

You disappoint me deeply, but I guess its my own fault. It's just that I thought you had at least some clue about those laws of physics you keep yapping about.

But, at least this explains why everything seems "magic" to you.

And it explains why trying to tell you about probabilistic events has been fruitless. I thought you were ignoring my explanations because they did not fit your mode of debate, but now I realize that you simply did not understand anything. Well, in a way, it redeems you somewhat.

I could explain some of it to you, but I'm not experienced in teaching basic physics, so if you really want to know, I suggest you seek knowledge elsewhere. But I warn you: You might have to review your cosmology.

Hans

 

[Franko]

MRC:
SO you are this ignorant? The person who claims to understand Quantum Mechanics better than the entire scientific community of the past fifty years in earnest asks such questions?

You disappoint me deeply, but I guess its my own fault. It's just that I thought you had at least some clue about those laws of physics you keep yapping about.

But, at least this explains why everything seems "magic" to you.

Hey … it seemed like a simple question to me. You were the one going on and on about Newton ceasing to operate when someone is experiencing Relativistic effects.

And it explains why trying to tell you about probabilistic events has been fruitless. I thought you were ignoring my explanations because they did not fit your mode of debate, but now I realize that you simply did not understand anything. Well, in a way, it redeems you somewhat.

I could explain some of it to you, but I'm not experienced in teaching basic physics, so if you really want to know, I suggest you seek knowledge elsewhere. But I warn you: You might have to review your cosmology.

Hmmm. “Me” review? You really think so? I am curious as to why you say that?

But look MRC, you shouldn’t worry about “me” and my cosmology so much. “I’ll” be just fine. It’s You “we” should be worrying about. You still haven’t explained to me why it is you believe that an entire Universe magically appearing is more probable that YOU magically appearing and then just imagining everything else?

 

[evildave]

If a god appeared and proved its existence beyond any conceivable scientific doubt and said in a booming voice that all understood at once:

"Harken unto me, fools! All of your religions, and all of their prophets and saviors are false! You speak only to the air when you pray. Your idols are naught to me. Your religious leaders are nothing to me, and speak lies in MY name. Nothing they say or do in MY name has anything to do with MY will.

"Oh, and by the way, your sun will be destroyed by this (very large, designated object, converging on its position) in about 1000 years. Your deaths have always been final. There is no afterlife. Unless you find a means to colonize other solar systems in that time, the entire human race will become extinct. I don't really care whether you succeed or not. Just thought you'd like to know that you had better get your technological asses in gear if you want any hope of a future of any kind."

If god himself said this, not only would religion continue, a sizable subset of it would claim that it is god's divine judgment that the human race should die, and they would actively seek to sabotage all attempts to leave the solar system.

The rest would only claim that this god was false (just as they dismiss other forms of scientific evidence), and that the massive and observable object, predictably converging on the sun's position is an illusion, and that believing in it is a mortal sin that will condemn you to eternal hell. These will also actively seek to sabotage all attempts to leave the solar system, to "save souls".

 

[Yahzi]

Evildave is completely right.

 

[Franko]

I don’t see how your pessimistic little fantasies about how evil “God” is …

evildave: (God is bad!)
booming voice … Harken unto me, fools! … All of your religions, and all of their prophets and saviors are false! … You speak only to the air when you pray … Your religious leaders are nothing to me … your sun will be destroyed … Your deaths have always been final … There is no afterlife … the entire human race will become extinct … I don't really care whether you succeed or not

… And how much “superior” you’re a-Theist (paranoia/pessimism) mind is compared to all of the “imbecilic” lesser figments of your imagination …

evildave: (Most people are stupider than Me!)
Harken unto me, fools! … all of their prophets and saviors are false! … You speak only to the air when you pray … Your religious leaders are nothing to me, and speak lies in MY name … not only would religion continue, a sizable subset of it would claim that it is god's divine judgment that the human race should die, and they would actively seek to sabotage all attempts to leave the solar system … The rest would only claim that this god was false (just as they dismiss other forms of scientific evidence) … an illusion, and that believing in it is a mortal sin that will condemn you to eternal hell … These will also actively seek to sabotage all attempts to leave the solar system, to "save souls".

Is evidence against Solipsism being True … ? Sounds more just like You, (God) re-stating the obvious.

Yatzi: (A-Theist)
Evildave is completely right.

See what “I” mean? Who can argue with “God”?

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hey … it seemed like a simple question to me. You were the one going on and on about Newton ceasing to operate when someone is experiencing Relativistic effects.

You know, I wouldn't mind trying to explain things to you, but I loose patience with your strawmen. Do you think you could answer once in a while without invoking one? Newton does "not cease to operate", Newton's laws are just insufficient to precisely explain observations. The very basic of Relativity is that the speed of light is the maximum you can observe, no matter the conditions. If you are in a spaceship going 70% lightspeed and shine a light forward, you will see it leaving you at lightspeed, but the the stationary observer, it will still move only at lightspeed, not 170% lightspeed. Time dilation is the key to the answer.

Actually, you can show that certain incidents can be defined that move faster than light, the theoretical differential speed between your two spaceships being one example, but information still travels only at the speed C.

Hmmm. “Me” review? You really think so? I am curious as to why you say that?

Because your cosmology does not fit within the scientific (and thus logic) perception of the universe.

But look MRC, you shouldn’t worry about “me” and my cosmology so much. “I’ll” be just fine. It’s You “we” should be worrying about. You still haven’t explained to me why it is you believe that an entire Universe magically appearing is more probable that YOU magically appearing and then just imagining everything else?

If you don't worry about you, why should I worry about me?
I dont worry about your cosmology, but since you keep going on about it, I somehow assume you want to debate it?

Hans

 

[Franko]

MRC:
You know, I wouldn't mind trying to explain things to you, but I loose patience with your strawmen. Do you think you could answer once in a while without invoking one?

If you think I am creating a strawman fallacy on some point then you should cite specifically what you disagree with, and the specific reason why you disagree. Shouting strawman! Strawman! Doesn’t tell me (or anyone else reading along) anything (no information).

MRC:
Newton does "not cease to operate", Newton's laws are just insufficient to precisely explain observations.

If you were on a big spaceship traveling at relativistic speeds, and you were doing some calculations would Newtonian mechanics still function properly? I thought that Newton always worked relative to the observer in question?

The very basic of Relativity is that the speed of light is the maximum you can observe, no matter the conditions. If you are in a spaceship going 70% lightspeed and shine a light forward, you will see it leaving you at lightspeed, but the the stationary observer, it will still move only at lightspeed, not 170% lightspeed. Time dilation is the key to the answer.

Actually, you can show that certain incidents can be defined that move faster than light, the theoretical differential speed between your two spaceships being one example, but information still travels only at the speed C.

Right, but I thought that according to GR Nothing could move faster than the speed of light relative to any other object? And if information can’t travel faster than the speed of light, then how come the one ship could relay a signal back to the earth, and then the earth could relay the signal on to the second ship? You just acknowledged that the ships would be separating faster than the speed of light, yet they are still able to communicate?

Can you explain this apparent discrepancy for me?

 

[MRC_Hans]

If you think I am creating a strawman fallacy on some point then you should cite specifically what you disagree with, and the specific reason why you disagree. Shouting strawman! Strawman! Doesn’t tell me (or anyone else reading along) anything (no information).

You consistently claiming that I resort to explaining magic is a straw-man, since I have not done so (this also makes it a blatant lie). Or, in the post above you imply that I have said that Newtonian laws were "ceasing to operate", is a strawman. Need I go on?

Uhh, and don't kid yourself, everybody spots your strawmen (with muscleman as a possible exception, heheh)



If you were on a big spaceship traveling at relativistic speeds, and you were doing some calculations would Newtonian mechanics still function properly? I thought that Newton always worked relative to the observer in question?

I suppose that for objects within the spaceship they function, why?

Right, but I thought that according to GR Nothing could move faster than the speed of light relative to any other object? And if information can’t travel faster than the speed of light, then how come the one ship could relay a signal back to the earth, and then the earth could relay the signal on to the second ship? You just acknowledged that the ships would be separating faster than the speed of light, yet they are still able to communicate?

Can you explain this apparent discrepancy for me?

Yes. Actually they would not need to depend on Earth for a realy, exactly the same thing would happen if they communicated directly.

Lets assume that ship A sends a message towards B. For simplicity, lets assume it's just a green laser beam. The laser beam will move at the speed C, but because ship A will move away from it at 0.7C, it will be strongly red-shifted (like a police siren when the squad car speeds by, it is called Doppler shift). To the occupants of ship A it will seem normal because their time will run correspondently slower.

Sooner or later the laser beam travelling at C will catch up with ship B, and since B is running away from it at 0.7C, it will be further red-shifted (way into infrared), but this will not be visible to the occupants of Ship B, because their time-dilution will cancel out this extra red-shift. So what they will see is a laserbeam redshifted from being sent backwards from a ship going away at 0,7C; exactly the same as a stationary observer would observe.

However, the stationary observer might calculate the time taken for the laser beam to traverse from ship A to ship B and realize that their speed difference was 1,4C.

Hans

 

[LucyR]

Hans,

Perhaps it helps to state at this point the relativistic expression for composition of velocities, i.e. (v_1 + v_2)/(1 + v_1*v_2/c^2).

It's easy to see from this expression that the combined velocity cannot exceed c.

So from the point of view of Ship A, Ship B is only moving at 0.94c.

Perhaps you've already gone through this somewhere. If so, sorry.

 

[evildave]

I don’t see how your pessimistic little fantasies about how evil “God” is …

… And how much “superior” you’re a-Theist (paranoia/pessimism) mind is compared to all of the “imbecilic” lesser figments of your imagination …

Is evidence against Solipsism being True … ? Sounds more just like You, (God) re-stating the obvious.

See what “I” mean? Who can argue with “God”?

Boy listen to the rants. I give a very positive image of God being nice enough to give forewarning of doom before it happens, rather than just letting mankind die.

A sporting chance.

It's the PEOPLE who are evil in the scenario... but that's lost on him.

But of course, Franko only understands things the way he wants to, further illustrating my point about how some theists perceive things.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Hans,

Perhaps it helps to state at this point the relativistic expression for composition of velocities, i.e. (v_1 + v_2)/(1 + v_1*v_2/c^2).

It's easy to see from this expression that the combined velocity cannot exceed c.

So from the point of view of Ship A, Ship B is only moving at 0.94c.

Perhaps you've already gone through this somewhere. If so, sorry.

Thanks. No, I did not go through it.

This may not help Franko, though, as I have not seen him handle math beyond 2+2

Cheers,
Hans

 

[Franko]

Franko:
Suppose that at some point in the future Humans are capable of building a spacecraft that can travel of 70% the speed of Light. But imagine that this is a spacecraft built to send Human colonists to another planet, so they build this craft from a large rocky asteroid captured from the solar system.

Now suppose that they build Two of these “spacecraft” – both capable of traveling 70% the speed of light …

… and they send them off in opposite directions. From the POV of the crew on either of these crafts they are standing on a “stationary planetary body” (like the Earth). But since BOTH ships are traveling away from the Earth at 70% the speed of light, wouldn’t they being traveling at 140% the speed of light away from each other? In other words from a person on one of the asteroids, wouldn’t it appear that the other asteroid was moving away from him at a speed beyond what is “allowable” by General Relativity?

Or think of it this way … suppose you have two flashlights, and you “glue” the back ends together so that the beams of lights are shining in opposite directions. From the “POV” of the photons in one beam, aren’t the photons in the opposite beam moving away at twice the speed of light?

MRC:
The very basic of Relativity is that the speed of light is the maximum you can observe, no matter the conditions. If you are in a spaceship going 70% lightspeed and shine a light forward, you will see it leaving you at lightspeed, but the the stationary observer, it will still move only at lightspeed, not 170% lightspeed. Time dilation is the key to the answer.

Actually, you can show that certain incidents can be defined that move faster than light, the theoretical differential speed between your two spaceships being one example, but information still travels only at the speed C.

Franko:
Right, but I thought that according to GR Nothing could move faster than the speed of light relative to any other object? And if information can’t travel faster than the speed of light, then how come the one ship could relay a signal back to the earth, and then the earth could relay the signal on to the second ship? You just acknowledged that the ships would be separating faster than the speed of light, yet they are still able to communicate?

Can you explain this apparent discrepancy for me?

MRC:
Lets assume that ship A sends a message towards B. For simplicity, lets assume it's just a green laser beam. The laser beam will move at the speed C, but because ship A will move away from it at 0.7C, it will be strongly red-shifted (like a police siren when the squad car speeds by, it is called Doppler shift). To the occupants of ship A it will seem normal because their time will run correspondently slower.

Sooner or later the laser beam travelling at C will catch up with ship B, and since B is running away from it at 0.7C, it will be further red-shifted (way into infrared), but this will not be visible to the occupants of Ship B, because their time-dilution will cancel out this extra red-shift. So what they will see is a laserbeam redshifted from being sent backwards from a ship going away at 0,7C; exactly the same as a stationary observer would observe.

However, the stationary observer might calculate the time taken for the laser beam to traverse from ship A to ship B and realize that their speed difference was 1,4C.

Exactly.

So if the speed of light is the MAXIMUM speed, then how can information travel back and fourth between the TWO ships which are separating at 1.4 x C? In other words, if the two ships are both flying away from the Earth at 0.7 x C (each), then they are separating at a rate of 1.4 x C.

So if light (information) only travels at 1.0 x C, then how can the Two ships communicate? Isn’t 1.0 less than 1.4?

MRC:
This may not help Franko, though, as I have not seen him handle math beyond 2+2

Hehehe … think so?