Re: Explaining Time Dilation

From: TomGee (lvlus_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 11/16/04 

Date: 15 Nov 2004 22:18:45 -0800

stephen@nomail.com wrote in message news:<cnajsc$3vl$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> TomGee <lvlus@hotmail.com> wrote:
> : stephen@nomail.com wrote in message news:<cn0s1g$11ph$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>...
> :> I agree that modern physicists have replaced Netownian gravity
> :> with General Relativity. Netownian gravity makes predictions
> :> that are in conflict with experiment. It has been falsified.
> :> So far, none of GR's predictions have been falsified.
>
>
> : AFAIK, no such thing has yet occurred. To make such a stupifying
> : claim requires a precise reference with specific detail as to what
> : exactly is recognized as evidence that gravitation is falsified.
> :>
>
> Mercury's orbit is the big one, but there have been lots
> of other tests that agree with GR and disagree with Newton.
>

Mercury's orbit was never in question. GR simply went farther in
explanation of something Newton could not explain. That does not
overthrow classical physics nor does it falsify the theory of
gravitation. The "lots of other tests that ... disagree with Newton"
are non-existent.

> <snip>
>
> :> So far that has not happened. Can your theory be falsified?
> :> Given that you apparently cannot answer a simple question
> :> about time dilation I doubt it.
> :>
> :>
Um, what question was that? I have answered many simple questions
about time dilation and I cannot imagine any simple one which I cannot
answer. Yours was either not so simple or it was one I did not wish
to answer.

My theory has wide scope so it is possible that some parts of it
cannot be falsified just like some parts of the BBT and some aspects
of GR cannot be falsified (such as curved space and the space-time
continuum). I claim only that my model gets us out of some of the
blind alleyways which current theory puts us into in not showing us
the way out of them (like in the Twin Paradox).

> : I don't know. I am hoping that someone reading this will find some
> : way to do that for me but no one has yet. Perhaps you will, if you
> : read up on my subjects better than I have been able to up to now.
> : TomGee 111204
>
> No one will be able to answer that question until your theory
> makes some actual testable predictions. However when I asked
> for a prediction from your theory, your answer was 'I don't know
> and I don't care'.
>

No, not so. That is not what is meant by a theory being
"unfalsifiable". What predictions about the existence of God(s) have
been made which are testable? What predictions does GR make which are
testable and which make false classical gravitation? How can you test
whether or not the Inflationary Period theory is true or not? The BBT
was not testable until someone came up with the idea of the cbr test,
and even then it was accidentally found. Your criteria for what
constitutes a good theory is not in accord with current theory about
that.

What are the testable predictions

> I'll try again. A space ship leaves earth travelling at .5c.
> After a year has passed on Earth (the Earth has made one orbit)
> a signal is sent to the ship and it immediately turns around
> and heads home at .5c. According to your theory, how much
> time elapsed on the ship, and why? Your explanaion should include
> equations, and some justifications for those equations.
>
> Stephen

I don't know and I don't care.
TomGee 111604

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Explaining Time Dilation
    ... > Mercury's orbit was never in question. ... > overthrow classical physics nor does it falsify the theory of ... >> makes some actual testable predictions. ... GR is a theory of gravitation thus is can not prove gravitation incorrect. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: The Chi FAQ section 2: Is Chi a Scientific Theory?
    ... that pulled things to Earth goes more to Galileo than to Newton. ... the problem here would be that labels are not explanations. ... planets conformed to Newton's predictions. ... attempting to prove chi by presenting ...
    (rec.martial-arts)
  • Re: Arthur, King of Time and Space and ToE vs ID
    ... "There are no known sequential prime digits (as defined by encoding ... predictions the failure of which would serve to falsify it. ... How would a failure of any of those predictions falsify your ... left some unknown pattern encoded in some unknown fashion using some ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A better word for "falsifiable"?
    ... I've had success with explaining "falsifiable" as "makes testable ... one of its predictions and test if it holds. ... How else would you falsify a theory? ... just as falsifiable as the standard model. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one
    ... >> laws but something that Newton took as so self evident that he didn't ... >> transformations between reference frames. ... Newton took Galilean ... will always make correct predictions. ...
    (sci.physics.particle)