User Tag List

Page 5 of 43 FirstFirst ... 234567815 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 636

Thread: about Bob's article on absolute or relative time

  1. #61
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    496
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    I certainly don't buy it. And not just because there's no proof.
    Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in theoretical physics in 1979, speaks in one of his books (now over 10 years old) of experiments specifically directed to seeing if General Relativity is correct. He claimed that it has been verified to less than 1% margin of error. No proof?
    But anyone with an ounce of common sense can see how ridiculous the idea that time passes at different rates for different people, based on perspective is trash. The only thing that's relative is perception. Time doesn't change.
    And now you are right back at your own personal rendition of “I just don’t believe it”.

  2. #62
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147882
    Quote Originally Posted by dan1el View Post
    Where do you get the ridiculous idea that common sense should be trusted when examining how the universe works?


    Quote Originally Posted by ThePhy View Post
    Steven Weinberg, Nobel Prize in theoretical physics in 1979, speaks in one of his books (now over 10 years old) of experiments specifically directed to seeing if General Relativity is correct. He claimed that it has been verified to less than 1% margin of error. No proof? And now you are right back at your own personal rendition of “I just don’t believe it”.
    OK. What was the proof?


  3. #63
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    496
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    210
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    ... OK. What was the proof?
    A very immediate one you rely on is the correct functioning of GPS systems.

  4. #64
    Journeyman dan1el's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    140
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    Is it common sense that we consist of tiny particles? Is it common sense that those tiny particles are made from even smaller ones? Is it common sense that a varying magnetic field can induce a current in a closed circuit loop?
    "[Knut Hamsun] was very poor and weathered the deep winter of Chicago by wearing news paper under his clothes; his colleagues liked to touch him to make him crackle."

  5. #65
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks
    593
    Thanked 6,462 Times in 3,424 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by Adambassador View Post
    The thread I'm referring to is here http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...945#post850945 where Bob explains that time is absolute and not relative. He says that gravity affects clocks, not time.

    Well, here is some guy claiming that he experienced time dilation by taking cesium clocks up Mt. Rainier. http://www.leapsecond.com/great2005/tour/

    Thoughts?
    I didn't read the article and I have no intention of doing so as it is surely irrelevant.

    All you have to do is go up to the guy claiming to have experienced time dilation, shake his hand and ask him whether or not you and he are there in the room together at the same time. If he answers you tell him his clock is slow.

    Resting in Him,
    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  6. #66
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks
    593
    Thanked 6,462 Times in 3,424 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePhy View Post
    A very immediate one you rely on is the correct functioning of GPS systems.
    No one denies that clocks, including the ones in GPS satellites are effected by momentum.

    It is time itself that isn't being effected.

    Clocks - effected.
    Time - not real - only any idea - therefore not effected.

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  7. #67
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    960
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    No one denies that clocks, including the ones in GPS satellites are effected by momentum.

    It is time itself that isn't being effected.

    Clocks - effected.
    Time - not real - only any idea - therefore not effected.
    Clete, would you be open to the rephrasing "duration is relative"? In other words, what one might count as one second would not be what someone else at a different speed would count? I'm just trying to clarify whether you disagree with relativity in principle or semantically.
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

  8. #68
    Journeyman eveningsky339's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Western Maine
    Posts
    109
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    146
    Open Theists should inform NASA that gravity-gradient torque is a myth. Then the space shuttle won't have to dock with its tail to the earth in order to minimize the torque, because the torque does not exist.

    Oh, and the astronauts can forget non-spherical gravity sources as well.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    The word 'politics' is derived from the word 'poly', meaning 'many', and the word 'ticks', meaning 'blood sucking parasites'.

    Larry Hardiman

  9. #69
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,693
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked 1,072 Times in 737 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    304884
    This train wreck again?
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  10. #70
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks
    593
    Thanked 6,462 Times in 3,424 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    Clete, would you be open to the rephrasing "duration is relative"? In other words, what one might count as one second would not be what someone else at a different speed would count? I'm just trying to clarify whether you disagree with relativity in principle or semantically.
    Time is a convention of language used to convey information about duration and/or sequence. We use clocks of varying type and complexity to give us words with which to express that information. It is therefore an easy to understand error that people make when they confuse a discussion about clocks for a discussion about time.

    And it is that confusion where my objection rests. I do not deny that there is an effect that an object's speed has, but that effect only looks to us like it has to do with time because its effecting the things we use as clocks, which is the only thing we have with which to discuss time. And this confusion becomes clear when you use a different clock that can be used to "time" both of the other clocks that are being Relativistically compared to one another. Sort of an objective, "big picture" clock, if you'll allow the expression. In Bob's article this third clock was the Earth's orbit around the Sun and how many days it took to make that orbit. But any third clock that can be simultaneously applied to both of the other two would do, like how many time the newspaper was delivered, for example.

    The bottom line is that both the base and summit of a mountain make the same exact number of revolutions around the Earth's center. Their relative position within the Earth's gravity well is irrelevant to the measure of this third, more objective, clock. If Relativity were actually effecting time itself this would not be the case. The base would eventually become severely out of phase with the summit to the point that the summit will have made an extra half a revolution than the base had all without ever having come away from the mountains base. That would be a neat trick.

    A real world example might be the center of galaxies. The closer you get to the Black Hole the more pronounced the Relativistic effects. This would continue to magnify to the point that time would virtually stop for any object near the center. And yet, we have witnessed objects orbiting very closely to the Black Hole. How is an orbit accomplished in any reasonably brief period of time if time has all but stopped? You might say that time has only nearly stopped for the thing orbiting. And I would respond that I'm sitting here watching IT perform its orbit. I'm not the one orbiting the Black Hole every few hours, it is. And it doesn't matter what the object's perception of time is unless you are attempting to synchronize your clocks with the clocks on the object. The fact is that it exists now and I exist now and I am therefore able to observe its movement around the Black Hole. I have no evidence whatsoever that suggests that it has ever left the present moment nor that such is even possible. Indeed, if you pay close attention to that last sentence you'll notice the self-contradictory nature of such an idea.

    Okay, I'm rambling now. I hope I successfully answered your question.

    Resting in Him,
    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  11. #71
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147882
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePhy View Post
    A very immediate one you rely on is the correct functioning of GPS systems.
    How is GPS effected by the relativity of time?

    Quote Originally Posted by dan1el View Post
    Is it common sense that we consist of tiny particles? Is it common sense that those tiny particles are made from even smaller ones? Is it common sense that a varying magnetic field can induce a current in a closed circuit loop?


  12. #72
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,386
    Thanks
    593
    Thanked 6,462 Times in 3,424 Posts

    Mentioned
    52 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147767
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    How is GPS effected by the relativity of time?
    The GPS satellites are moving pretty darn fast and they work by sending a time coded signal to the GPS receiver. And both the clocks on the satellites and the ground based clocks that are used to keep the whole system working are sensitive enough that they have to adjust for the relativistic effects of the satellite's speed in order to keep all the clocks in sync. If they didn't make this adjustment the position reading would not be nearly as accurate.

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  13. #73
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147882
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    The GPS satellites are moving pretty darn fast and they work by sending a time coded signal to the GPS receiver. And both the clocks on the satellites and the ground based clocks that are used to keep the whole system working are sensitive enough that they have to adjust for the relativistic effects of the satellite's speed in order to keep all the clocks in sync. If they didn't make this adjustment the position reading would not be nearly as accurate.
    Like I said, and I'm sure you agree, what does that have to do with teh relativity of time?


  14. #74
    Over 5000 post club fool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    5,693
    Thanks
    422
    Thanked 1,072 Times in 737 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    304884
    Do Clete and Lighthouse agree that the guy at the top of the mountain is going faster that the guy on the ground?
    Everyman is a voice in the dark.
    I II III IV

  15. #75
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147882
    Quote Originally Posted by fool View Post
    Do Clete and Lighthouse agree that the guy at the top of the mountain is going faster that the guy on the ground?
    50 MPH is 50 MPH.


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