Re: Your bets please....



Hexenmeister wrote:

"Hayek" <hayektt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:441b6f5b$0$11063$e4fe514c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| We all know the endless discussions about one of
the | twins chasing the stars and coming back,
about SR and | Lorentz. | | Here is a "relatively"
simple question, with two | possible, simple
answers. | | | We have the earth move at 0.6 c
through our galaxy, | more precisely the earth
moves at 0.6 c wrt the | average mass distribution
of the universe. | | Galaxus, one of the twins, is
launched in a rocket, | and accelerates away from
Earth till he reaches | immoblility wrt to the
galaxy, more precisely : | immobile wrt the average
mass distribution of the | universe. | | That's it.
| | According to your viewpoint, will the
Galaxus's clock | run : | | 1 - slower than the
Earth's clocks | 2 - faster than the Earth's clocks


| Just an answer please, don't knows, can't knows
please | abstain. This is a bet, based on the
predictive power | of your pov, and we might never
know the real answer. | | My bet is on answer 2 :
faster. | | Uwe Hayek.

Fucking hell. I DO know.

3 - EXACTLY THE SAME AS EARTH'S CLOCKS. Pay up,
you lose, we already know the real answer.

http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Synchronize/Synchronize.htm


As Roberts the idiot relativist says, "Real has
nothing to do with it", but of course he's wrong as
usual, real has everything to do with it.

You know what a voltmeter is.
You know there are different voltages, and the
voltmeter can do different readings.

A clock is an inertiameter.
It measures inertia.
How would you measure inertia ?
By moving a mass back and forth, and seeing how long
it takes.

Inertia is variable. It varies if you place more mass
around the test region, where your inertiameter
(formerly called clock) is situated. If you move the
inertiameter against the masses of the universe it
also undergoes more inertia, and moves slower.

Since inertia influences all the physical processes we
know so far, it is so far impossible to measure any
increase or decrease locally.

We can only compare two regions with different
inertia, and look at the different rates the meters run.

Inertia also influences the rate at wich our bodies
molecules react. We humans are just chemistry. As our
inertiameters indicate higher inertia, we cannot know
this locally, because our bodily chemistry has slowed
down at the same rate. Primitive minds will try to
explain this with religious concepts and will invoke
the fictitious notion of "time".

Your notion that "clocks must run everywhere the same"
is as silly as saying that voltmeters should always
measure the same voltage.

As inertia varies, the inertiameter readings will
vary, just as the voltmeter readings vary as the
voltage varies.

Physics is simple, if you understand.

"It seems to me that the test of "Do we or do we not
understand a particular point in physics" is, "Can we
make a mechanical model of it:" " - lord Kelvin


And lord Kelvin was OH SO RIGHT, and still is.

Those who claim they do not need a mechanical model,
simply haven't understood the subject.

And I add again the wise words of Heisenberg :

The physicist may be satisfied when he has the
mathematical scheme and knows how to use for the
interpretation of the experiments. But he has to speak
about his results also to non-physicists who will not
be satisfied unless some explanation is given in plain
language. Even for the physicist the description in
plain language will be the criterion of the degree of
understanding that has been reached. -- Werner
Heisenberg in Physics and Philosophy
http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Quotations/Heisenberg.html


Uwe Hayek.

--
This is the bitterest pain among men, to have much
knowledge but no power.
Herodotus (484 BC - 430 BC), The Histories of Herodotus

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the
ability to learn from the experience of others, are
also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to
do so. -- Douglas Adams, Last Chance to See

.

Quantcast