JohnLesser

We observe things in their past? With great respect you can not suggest the above then not consider what we actually mean by the above. Do we see into the past like Einstein suggests or not?

Are you saying the observer with the slower rate of time does not experience a time dilation? This as been proved many,many times in experiment. It is exactly noon on my ground state clock, what time is it on the slower dilated clock?

Then you again are being contradictory. You say that we observe objects in the past but then deny setting a vector to the object is not travelling into the past. I am viewing this from 3 observers perspective. Twin 1 Twin 2 A distant star.

Quite clearly you would not have put ''so what is your point?'' if you understood the subject. The point is quite obvious and in plane English.

You don't seem to understand that you see the receding object in the past also.

Do you even understand time dilation? Time slows down , therefore the observer with the slower rate of time falls behind in time relative to the ground state observer. If you say the observer does not, then you are saying time is an invariant going against mainstream. So you are now saying we don't observe objects in their past and contradictory to the nature of light.

I did not invent the physics, the physics is mainstream.

A person can not travel at c. Are you going against mainstream and saying there is no time dilation?

You are quite wrong, this is physics and relativity and well known knowledge. You are incorrect, it is mainstream that we observe/see things in past position, by time the information reaches you, the object is displaced from where you observe it to be.

This is Einsteins work, I have just related the two things of observing things in the past and time dilation. The object is moving away from you, let us use the travelling twin for thought experiment. Twin one ground state Twin two ground state Both twins perceive they are in the present locally and time is constant and simultaneous for both in the inertia ground state reference frame. ok so far? At ground state both twins observe each other in the present, the time light takes to reach each other being negligible.

When time is dilated for an observer , time ''ticks'' slower, effectively the observer becomes behind in time relative to the ground state observer. You have not considered the time dilation part. The other way around.

Then that would be contradictory to the nature of light. Nobody has mentioned an infinite speed so I do not see your point. Putting this into perspective: Observer (A) Observer (B) (A) observes (B) in the past. (A) travels to (B) (A) must therefore be travelling into the past. added: (A)'s rate of time slowing to allow the object to become behind in time to go into the past.

Interesting, so when time slows down for an object moving away from an observer, effectively putting the object behind in time, we also observe this object travelling into the past, being behind in time, by the relayed information delay?

Would it be true that the present only exist's locally to an observer because of the nature of light and its finite speed only allowing delayed images of observation?

Thank you for such great effort in this thread. However I can't get my head around it. Could you please help to learn me about Planck starting slow? What is Planck time ? What is a Planck length?

They are not random, governments control you, religion controls governments. No religion, no need for a divided planet , no need for passports. Free men.

Religious books were written by man, the best narcissists ever. Religion keeps the world divided.

My mind will always be free.

It means resistance is futile ''they'' already run the joint. Yes , everybody can have hope, everyone could agree we all hope there is more than just this.

We can have hope without the need to make up things and preying to imaginary ears.

There is no argument in the absolute truth, God is a thought manifestation of hope.

The imaginary virtual existence of hope.

Ok, obviously you are religious. I will now drop a spanner in the ''works'' Define God? Religion worships virtual.

I can prove a rock exists,

Religion never lost a war and even today they still ''own'' our Earth.