Existence

Do you not believe that a period of time for tax cuts or EPA standards can be extended or ended?What about a speech which is supposed to last 5 minutes but the speaker has only 4 in his head and is told to "stretch it out?"What is your deal with definitions? Are you not familiar with language and the evolution of? Etymology? Idioms?You're obviously not familiar with the scientific uses of these words, but it's baffling to me that you are unfamiliar with the colloquial uses.

---

"You are metaphysicians. You can prove anything by metaphysics; and having done so, every metaphysician can prove every other metaphysician wrong--to his own satisfaction. You are anarchists in the realm of thought. And you are mad cosmos-makers. Each of you dwells in a cosmos of his own making, created out of his own fancies and desires. You do not know the real world in which you live, and your thinking has no place in the real world except in so far as it is phenomena of mental aberration." -The Iron Heel by Jack London"Hazards exist that are not marked" - some bar in Chelsea

You can use drugs to dilate your mind.You can use a Taylor Series to dilate a mathematical function.You can dilate a claim into an argument.You can dilate the stupidity ICANT spews by responding to him.

Hi Jaderis, Sure I believe a deadline that has been set by a person or government can be extended by hours, days, weeks, months or indefinitely.I even believe the definition of a second could be changed.But I do not believe you can take the duration that is presently used to represent a second and make it cover a period of duration that lasted 1.25 seconds, without changing the definition of a second.In other words you can't streach duration you can only measure it by whatever system is set in place to measure duration. Words have meanings. A definition tells you what a specific word means.Do you have a definition for time?

quote:

---

Time is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects.

---

Source

quote:

---

a. A nonspatial continuum in which events occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future.
b. An interval separating two points on this continuum; a duration:

---

Source

quote:

---

1a : the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues : duration

---

Source

quote:

---

—noun
1. the system of those sequential relations that any event has to any other, as past, present, or future; indefinite and continuous duration regarded as that in which events succeed one another.
2. duration regarded as belonging to the present life as distinct from the life to come or from eternity; finite duration.

---

SourceThus time is a measuring system that man set up to measure the duration of events or the duration between events.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Time is a measuring system in exactly the same way that length is a measuring system.That is, they are not measuring systems, but rather dimensions that can be measured.Your own definitions even support that.

Hi Jaderis, I am on record as saying that existence is eternal.I am on record as saying that the universe has always existed in some form.Science tells me that the universe has not always existed in the form we see it today. That is what string theory, BBT and many others have tried to explain that happened.Whatever caused the universe to begin to exist as it is today I would call God. And yes He claims to be responsible for everything that exists.My argument is that existence has eternally existed.If existence has not eternally existed it had to begin to exist.If there was non-existence how did existence begin to exist.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Just in case you missed this... This seems to contradict your 'gravatational force' theory.
Do you agree?

Hi Taq, Then explain where the math is wrong.In Message 334 I said:

quote:

---

Light year equals the distance light can travel in 365.2425 mean solar days.

​

So at 1/2 c it would take 730.485 mean solar days to travel 1 light year.

​

If you went back and read my design for the trip you will notice I designed it with a turn around that does not require slowing from 1/2 c.

​

The light year would be completed at the half way point through my turn around making it an equal light year back to earth.

​

At this point in my journey 730.485 mean solar days have passed.

​

Since the speed of light is constant it will take 365.2425 mean solar days for the image of my turn around to reach my wife. At which time I will be half way back to earth.

​

At which point the images of my return trip will all be cramed into my final 365.2425 mean solar days. So my wifes preception would be that I was now traveling at the speed of light.

​

My total trip would take 1460.97 solar days unless the speed of light changes.

​

But you and others tell me "you'd only have been travelling for 3.5 years, although 4 years would have elapsed on Earth".

​

That is magic, not science.

---

In Message 307 to you I said: [quote]A thought:I pull out my space cycle that I built in another thread and accelerate away from my wife at 1/2 c towards a planet that is exactly 1 light year including original acceleration to the half way point around the planet. She is 6 months younger than I am. I travel for two years which puts me 1 light year away half way into my turning around with no reduction in speed. The image of my turn around is 1 light year away from my wife so by the time the image of my turn around reachers her I am half way back. So she can observe all of my trip out but only half of my return trip which will seem to her that I am traveling at c when I am only traveling at 1/2 c. So she would view my out bound trip as 2 years and my return trip as 1 year, because she would miss half the return trip, because I was half way back when she saw my turn around. Thus we both would age 4 years during the trip.If the speed of c is constant how could I close the gap between our ages? [/qs]In Message 313 you answered the question with smoke and mirrors and this assertion: You then presented a chart: You then asserted: You never attempted to show where my math was wrong.So explain why the math says my spacebike trip would take a total of 1460.97 solar days to complete the trip yet I would make the trip in
1241.97 solar days.That means I would have to get back 219 days before my spacebike did.That is magic.Show where the math is wrong.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Two half-existences combined to make a whole one.

Hi crash, But does time dilation happen? You say yes. I say no.But that is neither here or there lets do the photon thought experiment in a vaccum. I divided up a light year into 24 periods for brevity of space.When I am 6/24's (1/4) of the first light year of my journey on my spacebike your photon leaves my wife at the speed of c.I am traveling at 93,000 mps and the photon is gaining on me at 186,000 mps according to you. That means the photon is traveling at 279,000 mps or it is not aproaching me at 186,000 mps, unless I have stoped.At that rate the photon would catch and pass me and travel a light year in 2/3 thirds of a light year, if the speed of light = 186,000 mps and is constant as we are told.Which is impossible.Here is the math.1/24 of the first light year of my journey = 122,283,189,000
2/24 of the first light year of my journey = 244,566,378,000
3/24 of the first light year of my journey = 366,849,567,000
4/24 of the first light year of my journey = 489,132,756,000
5/24 of the first light year of my journey = 611,415,945,000
6/24 of the first light year of my journey = 733,699,134,000
7/24 of the first light year of my journey = 855,982,323,000 the photon has traveled 366,849,567,000
8/24 of the first light year of my journey = 978,265,512,000 the photon has traveled 733,699,134,000
9/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,100,548,701,000 the photon has traveled 1,100,548,701,000
10/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,222,831,890,000 the photon has traveled 1,467,398,268,000The photon has caught me and passed me as it was coming towards me at c. It continues away from me at c.11/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,345,115,079,000 the photon has traveled 1,834,247,835,000
12/24 of the first light year of my journey =1,467,398,268,000 the photon has traveled 2,201,097,402,000
13/24 of the first light year of my journey =1,589,681,457,000 the photon has traveled 2,567,946,969,000
14/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,711,964,646,000 the photon has traveled 2,934,796,536,000
15/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,834,247,835,000 the photon has traveled 3,301,646,103,000
16/24 of the first light year of my journey = 1,956,531,024,000 the photon has traveled 3,668,495,670,000
17/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,078,814,213,000 the photon has traveled 4,035,345,237,000
18/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,201,097,402,000 the photon has traveled 4,402,194,804,000
19/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,323,380,591,000 the photon has traveled 4,769,044,371,000
20/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,445,663,780,000 the photon has traveled 5,135,893,938,000
21/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,567,946,969,000 the photon has traveled 5,502,743,505,000
22/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,690,230,158,000 the photon has traveled 5,869,593,072,000The photon has traveled 1 light year in 16/24's of a light year. Which is impossible if you are correct that the photon is aproaching me at the speed of c and then leaving me at the speed of c.23/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,812,513,347,000
24/24 of the first light year of my journey = 2,934,796,536,000 the halfway point of my trip.If the speed of light is 186,000 mps, which we are told it is.The math and the theory are at odds.If you are right explain where the math is wrong.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

every physics department in the world say it does, but old-man ICANT says it doesn't. Hell, I'm convinced Unlimited arrogance and infinite stupidity - what a fantastic combination

But but but.......Something isn't accelerating unless it is getting faster!!
Time is measured by the Earth going round the Sun and atomic clocks accurate to 1 second within 3.7 billion years are incapable of measuring time accurately if you move them from one altitude to another.
And it is the force of gravity on clocks that makes these incredibly accurate clocks so incredibly inaccurate.
And there is an absolute time that ICANT knows but which no clock can accurately measure.And and and......And so we go on (and on and on and on and on...)

Hello ICANT,It isn't your math that is wrong. It's your physics that's way off. The short answer is that you haven't considered all of the implications of the constancy of the speed of light. I will note that the math in your message 334 is incompatible with that in your message 307. Your wive can in fact witness your entire trip. So Taq did indeed point out some errors in your math.I'd be willing to show you where your science goes wrong. Doing so would require quite a detailed post (possibly two posts) in which I demonstrate the implications of the speed of light being constant for you and your wife. Not much more than a constant speed of light is needed to demonstrate that time is experienced differently by you and your wife.The demonstration would require a appreciable effort on my part, so I need some assurance that you are actually interested in the answer. Quite frankly, I don't believe your request to show your error is sincere, but here's your opportunity to demonstrate otherwise.So, should I bother ICANT or are you just blowing smoke?Edited by NoNukes, : grammar

Hi cavediver, Then be Mr. Fantastic and show where the math is wrong.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I can honestly say that, regardless of ICANT's intellectual honesty, there are others of us who would likely benefit from a lengthy post or two on relativity as it actually works with mathematical examples.

Hi Strraggler, Clocks do not measure time.Clocks measure duration of events or duration between events.I have never said atomic clocks can not measure duration of events or duration between events to a pretty precice measurment. It is just man's concept of what that time is that I say the clock can't measure properly.And yes, according to the folks that build the clocks gravity does affect their ability to keep correct time.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."