EvanF

When did you get the idea that I wasn't talking about the speed of light in a vacuum? In the so called "vacuum" of outer space there are particles (as well as who knows what else) that the so called constant speed of light collides with and changes the light speed.

a. By using "invariant" you were referring to Einstein's c, which of course stands for the constant speed of light in a vacuum. Einstein's Relativity relies on the constant speed of light. Since it's been proven recently that the speed of light is not always constant then math based on Einstein's relativity may not always be accurate. b. Even if that were true, that's fine with me because my original post was not intended to be an argument anyways. You created this thread, not me.

The speed of light isn't necessarily constant though. https://www.sciencenews.org/article/speed-light-not-so-constant-after-all http://www.livescience.com/29111-speed-of-light-not-constant.html

No. I simply said they were repeating something they heard from someone else. I never said they were deliberately lying. "Relativistic" includes Pre-Einstein classical mechanics. Einstein was not the first person to come up with "relativistic" math. But anyways...This OP quote from me about Time Dilation was never meant to be an absolute position on my part. My opinion on Time Dilation is neither here nor there, I simply have questions about it and need a better understanding of it. It seems that 'mini time travel' although somewhat insignificant, would still be quite a supernatural phenomenon that I simply question the reality of. (Not saying time travel is impossible.)

Thanks for adding your opinion. Our whole theory on human evolution is based on just a few fossil fragments and when we are lucky we find some well preserved skulls. By your logic the whole theory of human evolution is "extremely fallacious"... Many times we can only discover one or two well preserved skulls of a species that go that far back in time, just because they are so hard to find to begin with...(A well preserved skull is a significant piece of evidence. Idaltu was not as well preserved as Cro magnon 1.) But in this thread I have already suggested that more archeology be done looking for more Cro magnons. And yes, I will have to correct you, because I never said Cro magnon's larger brain=evidence of higher intelligence (even though you could make an argument for that being the case.) I wouldn't necessarily argue that point because like I have mentioned, Neanderthals had larger brains than the average modern day human, but that doesn't necessarily equal larger intelligence...You have to look at the structure of the brain itself, and a large % of neanderthal's brain was used for vision and movement processing, while modern day human (including Cro magnon) brains have more 'complex' brain structure. Modern day humans may have a smaller general brain size than neanderthals, but there are certain parts of the brain in modern humans that are actually larger...(http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2013/03/13/neanderthal-brains-show-fatal-lack-of-social-skills/#.WATMaMnTanM) Yes, I sight the tool and cultural complexity of around 50,000 years ago as evidence of Cro magnon's behavioral modernity/cognitive ability making them closest to true 'modern humans,' but this is quite standard. From my understanding there's really no other definitive evidence we could go on to get an idea of an ancient group's cognitive abilities outside of the tools they used/things they created. This is one of the key parts of my argument though, is our modern capacity to accomplish all of our amazing feats of intelligence, largely manifested through advanced technology, is something that makes us unique from other primates/ hominids of the past (including archaic humans.) Trying to calculate an ancient species' IQ is of course just speculation. Idaltu simply having the same general brain size does not mean they had the same cognitive ability as modern day humans, as they were anatomically 30% different from H.S. sapiens. Despite their larger brain size, Cro magnon was likely much closer to many modern day human IQs than Idaltu (though of course IQ varies among populations and even more greatly among individuals.) But besides that, it's still actually really cool that you did those IQ calculations for me. Even though it's insignificant whether we did or not, I never said 'we' didn't "come from Africa." Cro magnons likely originated from North and North east Africa, it's just that Cro magnon 1 was found in France, and most of their culture and remains are found in and around Europe.

I don't know why anyone would be insulted unless your identity itself is based on Relativity specifically... What I mean is that people in the science world will repeat this line that "GPS is dependent on Einstein's relativity," when GPS works fine with classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory. They of course need to be accurate and account for certain factors, but GPS works fine on Pre-Einstein classical relativity (Newtonian mechanics.)

Perhaps your calculations based on relativity are inaccurate. Or maybe I interpreted Henry F. Fliegel's quote wrong, but I swear I thought he said, " the effects of relativity where they are different from the effects predicted by classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, are too small to matter-less than one centimeter for users on or near the Earth....in practice, neglect of relativity does not now contribute measurably to the GPS error budget, as the OCS software is currently configured." I've heard this GPS relativity line regurgitated by people in mainstream "science" many times, (that 7 nanoseconds= a large amount of GPS measurement error.) But I don't know if that's accurate based on the data I just posted from The Aerospace Corporation. They tell us that satellites are around 20,000 miles from earth, and radio waves travel at the speed of light, so the information is getting to earth instantly anyways... Nanoseconds would of course be more significant if you had to send radio waves over the course of like a million miles from earth or something.

Interesting... Do you have any thoughts of your own on this matter? Micro seconds huh... Logically, do you really think that would make any difference with GPS? It would only make a very tiny difference in GPS location. My opinion on Time Dilation is neither here nor there...I don't necessarily think it is literally 'mini time travel,' I think it's possibly just tiny mechanical/physical variation under certain gravitational forces. http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/1996papers/Vol%2028_16.pdf Taken from Henry F. Fliegel of The Aerospace Corporation in California: "The Operational Control System (OCS) of the Global Positioning System (GPS) does not include the rigorous transformations between coordinate systems that Einstein's general theory of relativity would seem to require...There is a very good reason for the omission: the effects of relativity where they are different from the effects predicted by classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, are too small to matter-less than one centimeter for users on or near the Earth....in practice, neglect of relativity does not now contribute measurably to the GPS error budget, as the OCS software is currently configured."

Well then...You've had quite a knee jerk reaction to me saying that haven't you.

Yes, but what I'm trying to figure out is the atomic clock experiments specifically...

I'm not necessarily concerned with what physicists theoretically propose gravity actually is...I'm simply trying to figure out how a clock being changed is actually evidence of time itself being 'dilated' as it were, or if it's simply the clock's mechanics that are changing. It seems to me that time cannot be truly "measured"...It seems like "time" is not an absolute physical property (in space-time.) "Time" exists but we don't actually measure t (time), but rather an object’s speed or frequency.

The only way you could tell the difference is with some kind of literal time travel experiment. But let me put this another way...I need someone to explain to me how gravity is affecting "time" instead of simply affecting the mechanics of the clock...

Does a clock measure time, or does a clock measure itself? To me it makes sense that gravity simply affects the clock in these experiments, gravity isn't effecting "time" itself.

Maybe it's just me, but I've never really followed the logic behind this experiment. (They also did another experiment like this but with the atomic clocks inside of planes that flew around the world.) It seems like theoretically the only way you could make "time" go faster is if you went into a dimension that has a different set of 'laws' than this reality, and then transitioned back to this dimension...As in you would spend 1 day in the other 'dimension' of time and space, then come back and it would be 10 years later in this reality.

There's no point in running from the truth.

My % amount that I'm trolling is really small. I'm just expecting some kind of honesty from you at this point man. (*even though you have essentially already agreed with me.)

But you just admitted H.S Adaltu is not really an AMH...It looks like you're going against "mainstream science"... It's not against mainstream science in any way to consider Cro Magnon an AMH.

Cro magnon is already considered an AMH/ early modern human by mainstream science.

Well then Idaltu certainly can not be considered an AMH. Do you understand my argument now?

My mistake. I scanned over it forgetting Herto= H.s. Idaltu. Once again, Thank you for providing this data for me Pavel. Cro magnon is not 100% similar to Modern day humans, I never claimed so and explained that for you, if you remember... The theory is that they are the first 'modern humans', or rather the oldest skull that has been found that represents the closest similarity to our modern species. I believe my theory is quite solid at this point.

I think you might be missing the point... This beloved "data" you are referring to is just (as Pavel admits) arbitrary measurements that unsurprisingly already show you with minute measurements that Cro magnon is anatomically the closest to modern humans. This is of course obvious and is what I've already been telling you. So let's clarify here. -The all so important "data" in the form of measurements is provided by Pavel, which only confirms my own theory. - I have provided Archeological and DNA evidence. So what exactly are these "facts" that you are assuming I don't care about?

I have provided data, many different kinds as well. (DNA+archeological) The reason I haven't provided specific measurements though, is simply because I couldn't find any measurements of the Idaltu skull from searching google. I do appreciate Pavel giving those specific measurements of Cro magnon 1 though, because, of course, it simply confirms the theory I've already put forth... (that Cro magnon is more similar to H.s. sapiens than any other skull found, and is thus most qualified to be termed the oldest modern human.)

Thanks for the information Pavel. However simply posting a small amount of data does not amount to a counter argument if it's not contradictory to my own argument. I believe I've already made you aware of the fact that Cro magnon had a few features that are outside the average for modern humans, like the larger cranial capacity. However, taken from your second link... (pg.6) "The analyses show that Cro magnon 1 is the most similar in these variables to H.s.s. (88% of variables fall within H.S.S range of variation.") Again, I appreciate you supplying even more data to support my argument. Cro magnon is indeed the most similar to Modern humans, because it is arguably the first modern human. You say that I can't just just say "one is flattened and one is not"...Why is that the case? Homo erectus and Neanderthal have a projecting mouth, while Cro magnon has a flat mouth...It's not rocket science. If I had all the skulls in front of me I could give you precise measurements of all of them, but I don't. I wasn't able to find measurements of Homo Sapiens Idaltu, and unfortunately the data you provided me doesn't have Idaltu in it either. The closest looking skull to Idaltu in your chart was the Kabwe Skull. However, you can do a sort of theoretical measurement with the picture I posted by measuring how the faces of Australopithecus, Homo Erectus, and Neanderthal are all about the same length, while Cro magnon's is significantly shorter.

I appreciate you adding your opinion to this discussion, DrP. The only skull that has a flattened mouth is the Cro magnon. The Cro magnon has no similar features to the others. The first three represent any easy to see 'progression' of features over millions of years, while the Cro magnon shows what I call an anatomical deviation from the rest. -Australopithecus is almost identical to a chimp skull, the mouth is very protruding. The homo Erectus and neanderthal represent a progression but their mouth angles are still very similar to Australopithecus, they just lost the large front teeth bones that make the mouth look more projecting in Australopithecus. -The Neanderthal actually does have very thick bones around the eyesockets and zygomatic arch almost identical to Homo Erectus, you just can't see it well in that picture. -Australopithecus is almost identical to a chimp, so yes it's teeth are more 'animal' like. But Homo Erectus and Neanderthal had quite different teeth than modern humans. Apart from being much larger, neanderthal teeth were situated at completely different angle than modern human teeth. -None have a flat face or a short face except Cro magnon. The face of Australopithecus is not that much longer than Homo Erectus and Neanderthal. In fact, you can do a measurement right now. To measure the face, start from the top of the eye to the bottom of the teeth...the first three have almost the same face length.

Well, I don't think anyone realized you were such a qualified individual...