Leaderboard

The issue with time dilation descriptions like the one with the train and embankment is that they often miss a critical point, since they generally focus on the embankment observer alone. So let's consider both observers. We start with two colocated light clocks, 1 stationary to our reference frame and one in motion. In these animations, the yellow dot is the pulse of light bouncing between the mirrors. The expanding circles are radiating outward at c, and act as reference showing that each pulse is moving at c relative to the frame of reference. Animation 1 is the from the frame in which the red clock is stationary. As can be seen, the red light clock ticks faster than the blue clock. If, for instance, the round trip for the red clock takes 1 micro second, it takes longer than that for the blue clock to complete one round trip. But what if there were someone "riding along" with the Blue clock? What would be happening according to them? This is what Animation 2 shows Since light travels at c in all inertial reference frames, In this frame, it is the Blue clock that takes 1 microsecond per round trip, and the red clock that ticks slower. Keep in mind, we have changed nothing from the previous animation other than switching observers. And there is no reason to prefer Red's perspective of events over Blue's or vice-versa. Both are equally valid. The two frames just measure time differently. This is the essence of Relativity.

I acquiesce that DrmDoc and myself are seldom in agreement on matters related to mind. And here is another "crackpot" intervention of mine; this time on molecular and evolutionary biology "Technical advances have brought an accelerating flood of data, most recently, giving us complete genome sequences and expression patterns from any species. Yet, arguably, no fundamentally new principles have been established in molecular biology, and, in evolutionary biology, despite sophisticated theoretical advances and abundant data, we still grapple with the same questions as a century or more ago." The point being made is that we easily remember what is right, but seldom acknowledge what is wrong with our well established scientific models.

I find jokes like that to be divisive.

According to your friendly neighbourhood conspiracy theorists, the solar eclipse on Monday 8 April will also mark the end of the world, and it will all start in Carbondale illinois. https://news.sky.com/story/armageddon-in-illinois-nefarious-scientists-warning-signs-from-god-marjorie-taylor-greene-alex-jones-and-influencers-peddle-conspiracy-theories-about-solar-eclipse-13110035 Why there you may ask ? Well it’s quite simple. The predicted path of the solar eclipse will pass over at least six places called Nineveh (modern day Mosul in Iraq), which is an ancient city mentioned in the bible where the prophet Jonah once preached against the wickedness of its inhabitants, and called for its total destruction. When combined with the path of the US eclipse in 2017, the path of totality on Monday will form a cross with its centre located on Carbondale Illinois - so If you live in Carbondale, that means you will be lucky enough to see the full eclipse twice in seven years. According to influencers on TikTok, it also means doomsday starts in your city - quite obvious really.

! Moderator Note Your thread was locked. You don’t get to bring it up again.

Not sure how you define instantaneous as rates of change in the EM field have been measured to extremely small units of measure. Also not sure on what your referring to on strong disagreement with relativity with regards to heat. However you may may not experimental evidence however there may be possible research and experiments already done you can draw upon via arxiv. It's common practice to draw upon other lines of research and experiments done by others as supportive evidence provided those lines of research are applicable.

It's just a flesh wound!

Doesn't really work. Only the impurity atoms on the outside are exposed to the acid; the rest are effectively protected by being "gold plated". Density is a better option. Even this is pretty good. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touchstone_(assaying_tool) On a completely pointless pedantic note, there's (at least) one acid which will attack gold.

That reminds me, are you interested in joining my professional hide-and-seek team. Turns out, good players are hard to find.

Thank you for the input Here is my point of view. The gamma factor at v=c is infinity. Here is drawing of set up to measure time dilation using Newtonian physics . from this we can see that this is actually one turn of helix trayectory this mass is moving on shown in 2D we do not have to use lotentz transformation. From angle Alfa -angle where tan angle Alfa =v/c from this we can find components for length of helix for 360 degrees - one turn of trayectory. The v tangent velocity of mass moving around observer . From angle Alfa we can find components of linear and angular speed of velocity v from these two components we can calculate the angular and linear momentum of mass moving relative to the observer If you do that you will se that relativistic mass is actually not increase of mass - it is the increase of angular momentum overlooked . Newtonian physics will do this part faster . but theory of relativity does everything else better . That is why I said that theory of relativity will be borderline acceptable (it was joke) If this idea is looked over by somebody competent .

I wonder, are you being deliberately obtuse? I said thinking... Why would I do that? Thanks mate, that lil ol neg is acknowledgment that you've run out of steam on this thread (which kinda makes me right, go me...).

You know, you are wasting our times with silly questions what shows you really don't take enough attention in what we are discussing. The discussion is becoming useless now this way. I never said there is no conduction. I agree in heat transferring by conduction, convection and radiation. I think your idea about what I think is wrong in something. I maintain total agreement with the mathematical definitions of those concepts. If the cup is filled with hot coffee it doesn't stay cool, it warms with T superior to the environment T. Depending on the cup considered it warms more or less but it warms and if the cup is not a so good insulator its radiation can be sensed by finger or face at some proper distance.