Re: Why do relativists ignore the "missing" ticks of traveling clock?

On 26 sep, 11:08, "Spaceman" <space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
kenseto wrote:
On Sep 25, 11:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
kenseto wrote:
On Sep 25, 12:17 pm, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
kenseto wrote:
On Sep 24, 11:48 am, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
kenseto wrote:
On Sep 23, 12:21 pm, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
To time things properly and scientifically, One single clock is
used.

What single clock is used?

Any "single clock" can be used,
That is how you do scientific comparison.
And If the clock is accurate enough you get the most accurate
scientific comparisons.

So are you saying that the clock you selected is the only clock
that is not malfunctioning? In that case how do you know that?

I am merley saying if you wish to properly time two objects
you must only use one clock.
If the clock is accurate enough and "at rest" to Earth
it will give the best results for which object did anything in
less or more time.

What you are saying is the same as what SR is saying. In SR the
observer's clock is assumed to be at *rest* and it is used to make
all predictions. So what is your point of clock malfunctioning?

Because the clock is malfunctioning.
A clock that fails to keep a non variable periodic motion
has failed to properly "keep" time.
The physical cause can not be "time changin rate"
Time is a single standard measurement system created by humans.
Saying the a standard changed.. is a copout for finding the true
cause of the clock malfunction.
Length contraction is the other coppout to fix the math that
gets all screwed up with time dilation alone.

But you said to pick any clock as standard and that's what SR does. SR
pick the observer's clock as standard.

No it picks multiple clocks as all standard even though the moving
ones prove they are no longer keeping a "standard" timing count.

Do you like "standards" of measurement?
OR would you rather keep pushing multiple standards and forget
science completely?

But you didn't offer any standard.

I actually did, It is called the science of measurement and it
uses single standards and not multiple standards, and it finds
what changes the measurement instead of changing the measurement
system itself to find the measurements.

This troll is like a dog chasing for his tail....
Talks about standards but he knows of no one...just talks, and talks
and talks....and round and round he goes...for years.

Well this is what you get when you become an unemployed troll, like
Spaceman or the Strich characters. One day they get up in the morning
and say themselves: Oh I will talk about relativity! I do not like
that stuff!. Have they study the subject? No!, Will they study the
subject? Of course No! How could they...if they lack even the tools
kids have developed. A kid will ask questions and after receiving
answers, he will scratch his head, ask another question or move on to
other stuff. Not these guys!, they are old, unemployed, lazy and above
all obnoxious characters, who think their only way of being
recognized, since their personal lives have been a failure after
failure, is to contaminate these forums with their hate! It does not
matter how stupid are their posts, they will continue to post the same
nonsense day after day, for years.

Miguel Rios
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Circular motion in SR
    ... about the NIST standard for the SI second. ... you say that a clock in a satellite is ... when a most straightforward measurement shows that nature ... Scientists in Newton's time told him that he had left nothing to be ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR clocks - which book do you recommend
    ... >>>by my clocks, a clock in the moving frame passes my clocks and also ... >>>at twice the rate of my standard clock always matches the time shown ... >the same duration as compared to locally-at-rest standard durations. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: SR clocks - which book do you recommend
    ... have a clock that runs twice as fast as my standard clock. ... a clock in the moving frame passes my clocks and also ... the same duration as compared to locally-at-rest standard durations. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Another Tricky Problem I am Messing With (Not Homework)
    ... I don't believe I've misunderstood the C standard, ... "The clock function returns the implementation's best approximation..." ... "APPROXIMATION"! ... _sleep() does; you've just insulted me for not already knowing. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: Another Tricky Problem I am Messing With (Not Homework)
    ... Keith Thompson wrote in message ... I don't believe I've misunderstood the C standard, ... The clock function determines the processor time used. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
Quantcast