FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ?
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Romano Amodeo lessons on youtube
Next: strip-geometry-building as reversal of Calculus #4.28 & #243 Correcting Math & Atom Totality
From: bert on 27 Jul 2010 21:17 On Jul 27, 12:53 pm, dlzc <dl...(a)cox.net> wrote: > On Jul 27, 9:32 am, Hayek <haye...(a)nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote: > > > > > > > FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ? > > > Which belongs to fact and which belongs to fiction ? > > > The players : > > Ann - the stay at home twin - clock points at 2025 > > Betty's time is 2023. > > > Betty - the traveling twin - clock points at 2023 > > Ann's time is 2021 > > > Enter mutual time dilation and ftl : > > Ann sends ftl message to Betty, message arrives in 2003. > > Betty retransmits message to Ann, message arrives in > > 2001. Causality destroyed. > > > This is under the assumption that for Ann, Betty is > > still in 2003 and that for Betty, Ann is still in 2001. > > > There is another, much more simple explanation : they > > are still both in the same now, let us take the Earth's > > time as a reference, 2005, but Betty's molecules have > > just moved slower (imnsho because of higher inertia), > > just as she would have as being in some cryogenic system. > > > In this context : Ann ftl-calls Betty and realizes that > > her speech is gamma times slower, Betty notices that Ann > > speech is gamma times faster. Ftl works just fine, only > > the phone bills are too high. > > > What is the greater science fiction, ftl or mutual time > > dilation, the latter giving rise to time travel and > > causality breaches ? > > > Ftl does not breach causality, MTD (mutual time > > dilation) does. > > > MTD = Science Fiction. > > > Uwe Hayek. > > Your gibberish generator is still full on. FTL cannot be verified. > Therefore your "causality problem", isn't a problem. > > David A. Smith- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Messanger particles go at c Matter particles can't go to c That is reality TreBert
From: bert on 27 Jul 2010 21:20 On Jul 27, 1:00 pm, Surfer <n...(a)spam.net> wrote: > On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 18:32:44 +0200, Hayek <haye...(a)nospam.xs4all.nl> > wrote: > > > > > > > > >FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ? > > >Which belongs to fact and which belongs to fiction ? > > >The players : > >Ann - the stay at home twin - clock points at 2025 > >Betty's time is 2023. > > >Betty - the traveling twin - clock points at 2023 > >Ann's time is 2021 > > >Enter mutual time dilation and ftl : > >Ann sends ftl message to Betty, message arrives in 2003. > >Betty retransmits message to Ann, message arrives in > >2001. Causality destroyed. > > >This is under the assumption that for Ann, Betty is > >still in 2003 and that for Betty, Ann is still in 2001. > > >There is another, much more simple explanation : they > >are still both in the same now, let us take the Earth's > >time as a reference, 2005, but Betty's molecules have > >just moved slower (imnsho because of higher inertia), > >just as she would have as being in some cryogenic system. > > >In this context : Ann ftl-calls Betty and realizes that > >her speech is gamma times slower, Betty notices that Ann > >speech is gamma times faster. Ftl works just fine, only > >the phone bills are too high. > > >What is the greater science fiction, ftl or mutual time > >dilation, the latter giving rise to time travel and > >causality breaches ? > > >Ftl does not breach causality, MTD (mutual time > >dilation) does. > > That is a good reason to look for a preferred frame. Eg. > > Quantum preferred frame: Does it really exist? > EPL (Europhysics Letters) Volume 88, Number 1http://iopscience.iop.org/0295-5075/88/1/10005;jsessionid=52ED179FF30... > > Abstract: The idea of the preferred frame as a remedy for difficulties > of the relativistic quantum mechanics in description of the non-local > quantum phenomena was undertaken by physicists such as J. S. Bell and > D. Bohm. The possibility of the existence of a preferred frame was > also seriously treated by P. A. M. Dirac. In this paper, we propose an > Einstein-Podolsky-Rosentype experiment for testing the possible > existence of quantum preferred frame. Our analysis suggests that to > verify whether a preferred frame of reference in the quantum world > exists, it is enough to perform an EPR-type experiment with a pair of > observers staying in the same inertial frame and with use of the > massive EPR pair of spinone-half or spin-one particles.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - QM has a particle with up spin means its twin has down spin. That has been proven. No message has to be used. TreBert
From: bert on 27 Jul 2010 21:25 On Jul 27, 8:18 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 5:09 pm, "whoever" <whoe...(a)whereever.com> wrote:> >"Hayek" wrote in messagenews:4c4f0a2c$0$22935$e4fe514c(a)news.xs4all.nl... > > > >FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ? > > > FTL, no .. Mutual Time Dilation, yes > > > > Which belongs to fact and which belongs to fiction ? > > > FTL fiction .. there are no FTL devices > > Mutual Time Dilation happens. > > --- > > Space travel will be based on the opposite of mutual time dilation. > Acceleration of aether-wave energy through space slows time flow for > matter. By a slower clock you are traveling further through space. > There is more time at high speed for a slower clock's intervals by > comparison. This makes the time factor of space travel easier. You > would live loneger and travel further that way. > > Mitch Raemsch Black hole can have photons going though the event horizon,and they can not pick up speed. They just get bluer TreBert
From: BURT on 27 Jul 2010 21:45 On Jul 27, 6:25 pm, bert <herbertglazie...(a)msn.com> wrote: > On Jul 27, 8:18 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 27, 5:09 pm, "whoever" <whoe...(a)whereever.com> wrote:> >"Hayek" wrote in messagenews:4c4f0a2c$0$22935$e4fe514c(a)news.xs4all.nl... > > > > >FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ? > > > > FTL, no .. Mutual Time Dilation, yes > > > > > Which belongs to fact and which belongs to fiction ? > > > > FTL fiction .. there are no FTL devices > > > Mutual Time Dilation happens. > > > --- > > > Space travel will be based on the opposite of mutual time dilation. > > Acceleration of aether-wave energy through space slows time flow for > > matter. By a slower clock you are traveling further through space. > > There is more time at high speed for a slower clock's intervals by > > comparison. This makes the time factor of space travel easier. You > > would live loneger and travel further that way. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Black hole can have photons going though the event horizon,and they > can not pick up speed. They just get bluer TreBert- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - How much bluer? You know theory says infinite energy blueshift to light at event horizon? Mitch Raemsch
From: artful on 28 Jul 2010 03:30
On Jul 28, 2:32 am, Hayek <haye...(a)nospam.xs4all.nl> wrote: > FTL or Mutual Time Dilation ? Your argument seems to be We have SR (which, of course, is self consistent and models reality well .. eg predicts observed time dilation etc) Then you add FTL to it and find that SR + FTL results in errors of causality (so isn't right) You then take the illogical step of concluding this means the SR is wrong, and even more ridiculous that FTL is right. You need to reexamine your (lack of) logic. |