User Tag List

Page 3 of 57 FirstFirst 1234561353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 849

Thread: Summit Clock Experiment 2.0: Time is Absolute

  1. #31
    Journeyman Aethril's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    74
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by Jukia
    Yeah, incredible. The only question I have is whether he gets his Nobel before bob b gets his. We all know Dr. Walt Brown gets the first one for this group.

    But wait, perhaps we can make sure they get one in the same year. bob b for whatever one they give out for the biological sciences, (based no doubt on his "cell trends, too" thread), Dr. Brown in physics (the hydroplate theory) and Pastor Bob for literature (The Plot) or maybe Pastor Bob for peace (his new US constitution?).
    Well, it is just my imagination but it could be that Dr. Brown, bob b, and Enyart might equate a Nobel award to getting blacklisted by being included with the likes of Ghandi (nominated 5x) and Yassir Arafat

  2. #32
    Old Timer Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    374
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173
    Johnny hit the nail on the head, but I'm not sure if anyone explicitly answered your question, so here you are:

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Enyart
    So, here is my question. What time would the Base Clock show at the moment that they made contact?
    The Base Clock would show 12:10 p.m. on Friday, same time as the Summit Clock (or rather, the Summit Clock would show the same time as the Base Clock). And while I can't vouch for Calvinists, I'd imagine that this is the answer that most physicists and cosmologists would give you.

    By the way, where did you get that bit about the "river of time [flowing] backward, not forward"?

  3. #33
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,276
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 7,657 Times in 6,026 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147793
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf
    The Base Clock would show 12:10 p.m. on Friday,
    Not Thursday?
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf
    same time as the Summit Clock
    Same time or same day? Or both?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  4. #34
    Old Timer Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    374
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    Not Thursday?
    Not Thursday.

    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    Same time or same day? Or both?
    Both.

  5. #35
    Over 500 post club SUTG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Cole Valley, CA
    Posts
    626
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    I think Enyart's position is solid observational genius and utterly destroys some of the work of the so called greatest minds of recent history. It seems so obvious and simple in light of the ridiculous predictions of established theory.
    Priceless.

  6. #36
    Gold level Subscriber Bob Enyart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Rocky Mountains
    Posts
    1,104
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 120 Times in 116 Posts

    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    67911

    Confused for my sake...

    Guys, I have three minutes before CRTL president Brian Rohrbough shows up to do today's show, and this thread popped to the top with SUTG's post, and while I haven't read his post, or the thread itself (I'm ashamed to admit [schedule-bound]), I saw this from Johnny and had to reply:
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny
    This is more of a philosophical issue but I think it is paramount to the issue at hand and really needs to be discussed. What does it mean to say that clocks and things that measure intervals are effected but the interval itself is not effected? It is just as valid to say that the interval itself has changed as it is to say that all our measurements of any given interval have changed. (bold emphasis added)
    Okay, where to begin... (and I only have 80 seconds left!)

    Johnny, let me demonstrate the extreme error of your observation. If two wind-up clocks are ticking away side-by-side, and it takes me thirteen seconds to physically wind the hour-hand of the one clock ahead three hours, that was an action (an influence) that effected the clock, not the time the clock was measuring. That clock did not age three hours in the 13 seconds I fiddled with its big hand, and it didn't pass through three hours of time while it's neighbor ticked off 13 seconds. And of course, this illustration applies to countless influences upon all kinds of clocks.

    Please, Johnny, don't confuse yourself just for my sake

    -Bob
    The Bob Enyart Live talk show airs at KGOV.com weekdays at 5 pm E.T. Also, same time, same station, check out Theology Thursday (.com) and on Fridays, Real Science Radio (.com) a.k.a. rsr.org. All shows are available 24/7 and you can call us at at 1-800-8Enyart.

  7. #37
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,276
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 7,657 Times in 6,026 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147793
    Quote Originally Posted by Greywolf
    Not Thursday. Both.
    I'm confused like Johnny. You don't think gravity affects time?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  8. #38
    TOL Subscriber Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    8,352
    Thanks
    1,795
    Thanked 3,498 Times in 2,088 Posts

    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1708535
    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    I'm confused like Johnny. You don't think gravity affects time?
    I found this article interesting and believe it tries to be balanced as well as answering a similar question (inertia, laws of motion):

    http://home.pacbell.net/skeptica/time.html

  9. #39
    TOL Subscriber Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    8,352
    Thanks
    1,795
    Thanked 3,498 Times in 2,088 Posts

    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1708535

    Space-Time relativity and Physics

    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Enyart
    For my interest in all this is theological. Biblically, I have been convinced that time is an eternal attribute of reality, and thus, of God’s existence, seen most easily in that He is relational. And many Calvinists and others teach that God is outside of time existing in an eternal now, and that He created time. So Calvinists commonly quote popular understandings of General Relativity’s time dilation as evidence for their claim that time is not absolute, and thus, God can exist outside of time. So, I have a vested interested in refuting that. Thus I argue that when folks say that time speeds up or slows down in different frames of reference, what they really mean is that stuff affects clocks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jefferson
    The natural universe is subject to the physical laws, so it would run out of useable energy; a supernatural, spiritual God is not subject to physics.
    Quick question and my particular confusion (You'll forgive my science ignorance please) If God is not subject to physics, wouldn't it also be correct to say He is not subject to time as well? Space-Time relativity is a property of Physics?

  10. #40
    Old Timer Greywolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    374
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173
    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    I'm confused like Johnny. You don't think gravity affects time?
    It turns out I made a mistake regarding the effects of time dialation on physical phenomenon. Please ignore my previous posts. (But to answer your question, yes.)

  11. #41
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    960
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by Bob Enyart
    Johnny, let me demonstrate the extreme error of your observation. If two wind-up clocks are ticking away side-by-side, and it takes me thirteen seconds to physically wind the hour-hand of the one clock ahead three hours, that was an action (an influence) that effected the clock, not the time the clock was measuring. That clock did not age three hours in the 13 seconds I fiddled with its big hand, and it didn't pass through three hours of time while it's neighbor ticked off 13 seconds. And of course, this illustration applies to countless influences upon all kinds of clocks.
    Of course. You introduced a mechanical error into the clock's measurement of time -- the clock is no longer measuring time against a standard. It'd be like stretching a ruler out and measuring distance with a stretched ruler. That's not what I asked you. What I asked you is that if everything you measured with (ruler, thumb length, sonar, etc) gave you a certain distance, what meaning does it have to say that the length isn't actually that distance? I'll give you two analogies, one with time, and one with length. They both make the same philosophical point, but for some the second analogy might be easier to visualize. Chose whichever you want (I realize your time is limited, but both ask the same question).

    Analogy 1: Time
    Assume you and your buddy are floating in space each with your own wall clock. You picked this friend because coincidentally, he has the same heart rate and respirations you do. He also ties his shoes in the exact same amount of time you do.

    You happen to look at your buddy floating some distance away from you and you notice that his wall clock is ticking off twice the rate yours is. You also notice that his heart rate and his respirations are twice that of yours. Finally, you see that he ties his shoes in half the time you do. If you time his actions against his clock, you notice that he's taking the normal amount of time. But if you clock them against your clock, you see that he's doing them too fast.

    Your buddy looks over at you and notices that your wall click is ticking slow. Not only is your clock ticking slow, but your heart rate and respirations are half what they should be. Finally, he sees you tie your shoes in twice the time he did. If he clocks your actions against your clock, he notices that you're taking the normal amount of time. But if he clocks you against his clock, he sees that you're going too slow.

    Question #1: In this scenario, if each observer had only himself and his clock (i.e. they couldn't see each other), would either know that something is not right?

    Question #2: Can you tell me any method -- philosophical, mathematical, empirical, or other -- to determine whose clock is actually correct in this scenario?

    Analogy 2: Length
    Imagine you're floating out in space with a water bottle and a ruler. You take out your ruler and you measure the water bottle to be 10 inches tall. Then, imagine a process which shrinks you and your ruler but does not shrink the water bottle. You now measure the water bottle as 20 inches tall.

    Now imagine again you're floating with the 10 inch water bottle. Then, imagine a process which expands the water bottle but you and your ruler stay the same. You now measure the water bottle as 20 inches tall.

    Can you tell me any method -- philosophical, mathematical, empirical, or other -- to deduce which process has actually happened? Can you tell what meaning it has to assert that one or the other has happened? Is there any reason to assert that both cases are not functionally equivalent?
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

  12. #42
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,276
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 7,657 Times in 6,026 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147793
    Quote Originally Posted by Lonster
    Quick question and my particular confusion (You'll forgive my science ignorance please) If God is not subject to physics, wouldn't it also be correct to say He is not subject to time as well? Space-Time relativity is a property of Physics?
    He is not "subject" to time, he simply acts as one would expect a rational being to act - in good time.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  13. #43
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,276
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 7,657 Times in 6,026 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147793
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny
    Analogy 1: Time
    Assume you and your buddy are floating in space each with your own wall clock. You picked this friend because coincidentally, he has the same heart rate and respirations you do. He also ties his shoes in the exact same amount of time you do. You happen to look at your buddy floating some distance away from you and you notice that his wall clock is ticking off twice the rate yours is. You also notice that his heart rate and his respirations are twice that of yours. Finally, you see that he ties his shoes in half the time you do. If you time his actions against his clock, you notice that he's taking the normal amount of time. But if you clock them against your clock, you see that he's doing them too fast. Your buddy looks over at you and notices that your wall click is ticking slow. Not only is your clock ticking slow, but your heart rate and respirations are half what they should be. Finally, he sees you tie your shoes in twice the time he did. If he clocks your actions against your clock, he notices that you're taking the normal amount of time. But if he clocks you against his clock, he sees that you're going too slow.
    How would this situation arise. It would not arise from velocity because that would mean both would observe the same slowing down effect. One would have to be in a stronger gravitational field.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny
    Question #1: In this scenario, if each observer had only himself and his clock (i.e. they couldn't see each other), would either know that something is not right?
    No.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny
    Question #2: Can you tell me any method -- philosophical, mathematical, empirical, or other -- to determine whose clock is actually correct in this scenario?
    Both are working as they should.

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny
    Analogy 2: Length
    Imagine you're floating out in space with a water bottle and a ruler. You take out your ruler and you measure the water bottle to be 10 inches tall. Then, imagine a process which shrinks you and your ruler but does not shrink the water bottle. You now measure the water bottle as 20 inches tall. Now imagine again you're floating with the 10 inch water bottle. Then, imagine a process which expands the water bottle but you and your ruler stay the same. You now measure the water bottle as 20 inches tall. Can you tell me any method -- philosophical, mathematical, empirical, or other -- to deduce which process has actually happened? Can you tell what meaning it has to assert that one or the other has happened? Is there any reason to assert that both cases are not functionally equivalent?
    there's no way to tell that I can think of.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


  14. #44
    TOL Subscriber Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    8,352
    Thanks
    1,795
    Thanked 3,498 Times in 2,088 Posts

    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1708535
    Quote Originally Posted by stipe
    He is not "subject" to time, he simply acts as one would expect a rational being to act - in good time.
    Does this set you in the Calvinist camp Bob Enyart is speaking to? He seems to be saying that God is not limited to Physics but is constrained in a relational way to time. Again, please forgive my lack of strong science understanding but this is what leads to my confusion. Are you speaking for Enyart here, or the opposite?

  15. #45
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    15,276
    Thanks
    114
    Thanked 7,657 Times in 6,026 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147793
    I'm speaking for myself. God acts rationally with respect to time just as we do.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us