Re: The Cost of Relativity

From: Androcles (androc1es_at_nospamblueyonder.co.uk)
Date: 07/26/04 

Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 20:40:36 GMT

"Peter Kinane" <pkinane@iol.ie> wrote in message
news:d8097fcc.0407260459.5acaf6ac@posting.google.com...
| "Androcles" <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:H80Nc.8132$tB7.83321969@news-text.cableinet.net...
| >
| > "Peter Kinane" <pkinane@iol.ie> wrote in message
| > news:d8097fcc.0407251046.7d91a478@posting.google.com...
| > | Sorry about threadlet.
| > |
| > |
| > | "Androcles" <androc1es@nospamblueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
| > news:QaQMc.7684$1R2.79580196@news-text.cableinet.net...
| > | >
| > | > "Peter Kinane" <pkinane@iol.ie> wrote in message
| > | > news:d8097fcc.0407250450.7aad22cf@posting.google.com...
|
| > | > |
| > | > |
http://www.effectuationism.com/forum/messages/27/27.html?1071620499
| > | > |
| > | > | "[] Given tension of indefinite and dynamic forces, establish
value
| > | > | through a definite and stationary frame of reference by selecting
a
| > | > | FOR.
| > | > | (Value is- -am indefinite, so, to establish definite value one
selects
| > | > | a frame of reference - an option crystallises).
| > | > |
| > | > | To select a FOR:
| > | > | Take, for example, the earth in its orbit around the sun. A line
| > | > | through the centre of the earth and the centre of the sun can be,
say,
| > | > | the y-axis. A line through the centre of the earth and
perpendicular
| > | > | to the y-axis can be the x-axis. Based on these and the direction
of
| > | > | the earth in relation to the sun apply the z-axis. Let the time
t-axis
| > | > | be, say, 00.00 am Jan 1st 2004.
| > | >
| > | > Horrendous FoR, but not impossible, I'll agree.
| > |
| > | Without implying that you seem to understand it, and while glad you
| > | are taking an interest: That seems to express that you premise
| > | categoricalism.
| > |
| > | Ptolemaic without daily
| > | > rotation.
| > | > Ugh...
| > |
| > | If one knows the movement path of body, one can then take an interest
| > | in its rotation.
| > |
| > | >
| > | > | (Presumably the process of developing the x,y,z axes is clear).
| > | > Ugly, but clear.
| > |
| > | This too seems to express that you premise categoricalism. I find that
| > | beauty is in part determined by the beholder.
| >
| >
| >
| > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | (To develop the time t co-ordinate: As events are rather
continuous,
| > | > | one selects a particular (point of an) event. It can be, for
example,
| > | > | 00.00.00am Jan. 1st 2004).
| > | > |
| > | > | (So, this co-ordinate system, or such FOR, is Man/Person- -Ground,
in
| > | > | effect, observer).
| > | >
| > | > If a daily carousel ride, tilted at 23.5 degrees from the z axis and
| > further
| > | > tilted by latitude and crossing the y-axis at noon and midnight, the
| > x-axis
| > | > at 6:00am and 6:00pm is your Frame of Reference, so be it. I find it
| > rather
| > | > a tough one. Which time zone do you mean, and which should we use
when
| > | > standing at the Arctic circle, i.e. on the z-axis at winter
solstice?
| > |
| > | I think you may have failed to see that this is a cosmic, 4D, FoR
| > | system.
| >
| > I most certainly have failed to see that. I've also failed to see what
it
| > has to do
| > with Christmas, who won the Cup Final and when Winston Churchill will
| > return.
| > You didn't answer the question. Which time zone should we use when on
the
| > z-axis at winter solstice?
| >
| >
| >
| > |
| > | If a body - which would probably have to be travelling faster than
| > | light to do so,
| >
| > What do you mean, "probably"? Can't you calculate it? The circumference
of a
| > circle is 2pi.r. For the nearest star beyond the sun, Proxima Centauri,
r ~
| > 4 ly. Call pi roughly 3, so about 2*3*4 = 24 ly per year. That's 24c.
| > Sirius, the brightest, is 8 light years away, so it is travelling in
your
| > FoR at circa 48c.
| >
| > | or else right at the axis of the system
| >
| > Polaris lies 23.5 degrees from the z-axis, so for homework, tell me the
| > speed of Polaris in your FoR. Use the internet to discover the distance
to
| > Polaris, I'll accept that figure. Show all calculation. Perhaps then
you'll
| > see how impractical your FoR is.
| >
| >
| > - takes, in
| > | the given cosmic FoR system, the path you stipulate then that is the
| > | FoR and that is the four dimensional path, respectively.
| > |
| > | If such a body were rotating one would select a point on the body and
| > | take that as the body - or specific point of the body - and log its
| > | (4D) path in the system.
| > |
| > | If there was a body, such as the carousel,
| >
| > The carousel IS the Earth in your FoR. Your y-axis has origin at Earth
| > centre and passes through the sun. We pass it at noon every day.
|
| Incorrect. See below.
|
| >
| > | on the rotating body in the
| > | cosmic FoR system, one would, although impractical, show its path in
| > | the cosmic FoR system - it would be pretty much within that of the
| > | rotating body path.
| > |
| > | More practically, studying such a carousel would be a different branch
| > | of science.
| >
| > Inventing your own FoR is most definitely a different branch of
something,
| > but I wouldn't call it science. Awkward mathematics, maybe.
| >
| > |
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | Moving Object/Animal in relationship with FOR is an event, with
| > | > | readily determined x,y,z,t co-ordinates.
| > | >
| > | > A lion chasing a gazelle in Africa can hardly be said to have
"readily
| > | > determined" coordinates to THAT FoR. Heck, I'd need a computer
before
| > I'd
| > | > try it.
| > |
| > | To follow the paths of two such objects, I would, as indicated, be
| > | relying on another science:
| >
| > It's your FoR, for heaven's sake! You tell me how to calculate the x,y,
z
| > and t of a lion chasing a gazelle... heck, I'll make it easy for you.
What
| > is the x,y z and t of London, England in your FoR? Use 52 degrees N, 0
| > degrees E and 4000 miles Earth radius, 23.5 degrees tilt and 00.00 am
Jan
| > 1st 2004. Let's see how beautiful this FoR really is in your, the
| > beholder's, eye.
| >
| > | "Presumably, Guidance Positioning Systems also can be independent of
| > | the Theory of Relativity". (How does the TOR deal with such events?).
| >
| > Forget other people's theory for moment. Its your FoR. What is the x,y,z
and
| > t
| > of London in the beautiful FoR that you have specified?
| > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | Such co-ordinate systems of events could be developed into
calendars
| > | > | as follows:
| > | > |
| > | > | The concept of a "point": the co-ordinate system (or observer) is
a
| > | > | co-ordinate system of, or consists of a block of, four-dimensional
| > | > | points - the dimensions of points being various- -different values
of
| > | > | x,y,z,t of the system.
| > | >
| > | > Well, ok. You've heard of the Horoscope, perhaps? Horology is the
study
| > of
| > | > time. The words have the same root because the constellations rotate
| > about
| > | > your z-axis once a year, and a year is a measure of time.
| > |
| > | ??? I rather doubt if this is applicable to this 4D system.
| >
| > I rather doubt you can tell me something as simple as the coordinates of
| > London in your 4D system, let alone that of any star.
| > |
| > | >
| > | > |
| > | > | So, if a body moves in the co-ordinate system - in relationship to
the
| > | > | co-ordinate system - we can call its starting co-ordinates
P_1((x_1,
| > | > | y_1, z_1, t_1) and its next position P_2(x_2, y_2, z_2, t_2) or
| > | > | abbreviated P(1) and P(2). We thereby have the co-ordinates of the
| > | > | magnitude of movement of the body - in effect an event.
| > | >
| > | > Yeah, well, Just about every body in the Universe moves in that
| > "horondous"
| > | > coordinate system.
| > |
| > | What percentage of bodies in the Universe move in the TOR system?
| >
| > 100%. All motion is relative. What makes your FoR so beautiful?
| >
| > |
| > | > |
| > | > | We can easily develop a log or calendar of such events.
| > | >
| > | > I think it has been done, but no thanks for re-inventing it.
Ptolemaic
| > | > thinking went out with Copernicus 400 years ago, and the Gregorian
| > calender
| > | > replaced the Julian (except for Astronomers, of course).
| > |
| > | Perhaps "thinking" per se has almost gone out.
| > Let's find out. Give me the x,y, z and t of London and any one of Cairo,
| > Johannesburg, Mombai, Winnepeg, Beijing or Los Angeles in your specified
FoR
| > and we'll see who's thinking has gone out. Approximation will do, as
long as
| > its good enough to calculate the distance to a third city from either of
the
| > other two. Let's see how easily YOU can develop a log or calendar, it's
your
| > claim.
| > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | The magnitute
| > | > | of movement required to be expressed in a calendar might vary with
| > | > | different phenomena from a per minute rate, a day, a year, 100
light
| > | > | years, ...
| > | > |
| > | > | Different calendars would express different sections of the
universe.
| > | >
| > | > Good grief!
| > | >
| > | > Androcles.
| > | >
| > | > | Presumably, Guidance Positioning Systems also can be independent
of
| > | > | The Theory of Relativity.
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | I believe such a calendar would express, a more formidable model
of
| > | > | the nature of 'Nature' than does the Theory of Relativity. []".
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | > | This post may at least serve to remind people of the main
substance of
| > | > | this thread and general issue - and perhaps generate further
comments
| > | > | there-on.
| > | > |
| > |
| > | I'll give this a new thread, as others may not be clear about its
| > | simple, intuitive beauty.
| >
| > By all means make all the threads you like. Just answer the question,
where
| > are London and Sydney? I'd like to know how far I have to travel to see
| > Henri Wilson in your simple, intuitive and beautiful FoR.
| > Androcles
|
| So, the carousel is an attempted analogy of the Earth orbiting the Sun
| in TECCS. So, let's stay with the concept of the moving Earth in
| TECCS.

Not at all. The carousel is the Earth spinning on its axis once a day. In
your chosen FoR, the Earth doesn't orbit the Sun, the Sun is on the y-axis.
I thought you said this was simple and beautiful?
You don't seem to understand your own FoR.
Allow me to remind you.
To select a FOR:
Take, for example, the earth in its orbit around the sun. A line
through the centre of the earth and the centre of the sun can be, say,
the y-axis. A line through the centre of the earth and perpendicular
to the y-axis can be the x-axis. Based on these and the direction of
the earth in relation to the sun apply the z-axis. Let the time t-axis
be, say, 00.00 am Jan 1st 2004.

|
| Starting point or co-ordinates of the earth are P_0(x_0, y_0, z_0,
| t_0), as it is at the x,y, and z axes and at t0, and without any
| practical idea of what sense of scale to use. It moves, in a premised
| inflationary universe which inflation shall be, for now, at the same
| rate as the speed of the Sun orbiting in relation to the galaxy, and
| presuming standard event speed (SES) - the common one of the Earth
| revolving in relation to the Sun - so it would (again) cross the
| y-axis at a half day plus, let's say, 0.001 (the Sun will have moved
| somewhat in the negative in relation to both the x-axis and the
| y-axis: P_1(x_0, y_0.009, z_0/?, t_0.5001). Relationship of bodies to
| the z-axis shall be unknown, for now.
|
| Alternatively, let's log the event based on half day (12 hour)
| intervals, or 0.5 SES's:
| P_0(x_0, y_0, z_0, t_0),
| P_1(x_-0.001, y_0.009, z_0/?, t_0.5).
| P_2(x_-0.002, y_-0.001, z_0/?, t_1.0).
| P_3(x_-0.003, y_0.008, z_0/?, t_1.5).
| P_4(x_-0.004, y_-0.002, z_0/?, t_2.0).,
| and so on. A pattern emerges, as would one for various stars, etc.
| Different points on a given body can be based on selected lines of
| longitude and latitude.
|
| As regards "standing at the Arctic circle, i.e. on the z-axis at
| winter solstice": As I said in my last post, one can select a point on
| a body, such as "standing at the Arctic circle, i.e. on the z-axis at
| winter solstice" and log the path in the same way. Of course, it
| involves the added complication of the amount and rate of wobble of
| the point as well as the movement of the overall body as above. But,
| once one has settled on a practical rate of overall scale to be used,
| accommodating a tilt or wobble would not be very difficult - and we
| have to leave some work for others, and, in any case, it remains
| pretty constant, whatever its cycle.
|
| As regards the overall scale, I expect that one would feature
| decimalization to far more places.
|
| As regards your point about time zones: The system is concerned with
| SES. Time zones, if applicable, can be related to the initial t0.
|
| Let me know how well it is growing on you.

Fucking awful, as before. It sucks. You can't even tell me where to find
London and you don't understand it yourself.
Androcles

|
| Peter Kinane
| http://www.effectuationism.com/

Quantcast