Re: "The Arrow of Time"


Retne wrote:
> "The Arrow of Time"
>
> Over the years the immutable passage of time from past to future has
> been likened to the passage of an arrow, "the Arrow of Time". There have
> been numerous speculations as to why time should only progress in that
> direction and not occasionally progress from future to past. The physical
> explanation that has evolved is based upon the concept that the physical
> Universe "moves" from order to disorder and it is this "movement",
> mathematically defined as increasing "entropy", which determined the passage
> of time.

No stupid, this is not a good explanation if Time is fundamental. the
problem comes from the second derivative wrt time in Newton's 2nd law.
This results in position functions that obey: f(t) = f(-t). You cannot
solve this problem by supperimposing another concept. You got to find
different principles of motion stupid that conform with empirical
evidence of no time reversal. Stupid.

> Under General Relativity, the energy contained in the Universe is
> asserted to continuously increases, supplied from an unknown source, as time
> passes. When one corrects General Relativity for the sophomoric mathematical
> error Dr. Einstein made in its derivation, the reason for the direction of
> "time's arrow" becomes apparent. As shown in
> http://einsteinhoax.com.com/gravity, as a material object is lowered (falls)
> in a gravitational field, the energy equivalent of its mass (expressed in
> ABSOLUTE terms) decreases with the decrease in energy appearing as the
> energy of fall. This energy of fall is released in the form of heat and
> radiation, both of which serve to increase the overall entropy (or the
> reduction in the availability of energy if you prefer the term) of the
> system.

I wonder if you ever took an undegradute introductory course in
dyanmics or even physics.


>
> In order to reverse the direction of times arrow, it is necessary to
> recollect this energy and return it to the masses! Since this is a patent
> impossibility, the "Arrow of Time " must point from present to future.

Hey stupid, Do ou think each mass has each own arrow of time when it is
free-fallling? And what about a melting ice cube in your glass? This
absorbs energy, it does not lose any. Yet time goes on, whether losing
or gaining energy stupid. It seems you are so confused you should not
be talking about physics or anything related.

Aren't you ashamed of yourself?


Mike





>
> The source material for this posting may be found in
> http://einsteinhoax.com/hoax.htm ("The Einstein Hoax" {1997});
> http://einsteinhoax.com/gravity.htm; ("Gravity" {1987}); and
> http://einsteinhoax.com/relcor.htm ("Corrections to Special Relativity"
> {1997}). EVERYTHING WHICH WE ACCEPT AS TRUE MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH
> EVERYTHING ELSE WE HAVE ACCEPTED AS TRUE, IT MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
> OBSERVATIONS, AND IT MUST BE MATHEMATICALLY VIABLE. PRESENT TEACHINGS DO NOT
> ALWAYS MEET THIS REQUIREMENT. THE WORLD IS ENTITLED TO A HIGHER STANDARD OF
> WORKMANSHIP FROM THOSE IT HAS GRANTED WORLD CLASS STATUS.
>
> All of the Newsposts made by this site may be viewed at
> http://einsteinhoax.com/postinglog.htm .
>
> Please make any response via E-mail as Newsgroups are not monitored on
> a regular basis. Objective responses will be treated with the same courtesy
> as they are presented. To prevent the wastage of time on both of our parts,
> please do not raise objections that are not related to material that you
> have read at the Website. This posting is merely a summary.
>
> E-mail:- einsteinhoax@xxxxxxx
>
> The material at the Website has been posted continuously for over 5
> years. In that time THERE HAVE BEEN NO OBJECTIVE REBUTTALS OF ANY OF THE
> MATERIAL PRESENTED. There have only been hand waving arguments by
> individuals who have mindlessly accepted the prevailing wisdom without
> questioning it. If anyone provides a significant rebuttal that cannot be
> objectively answered, the material at the Website will be withdrawn.
> Challenges to date have revealed only the responder's inadequacy with one
> exception for which a correction was provided.

.

Quantcast