Prev: Boltzmann Brains Invade CERN Causing Havoc!
Next: FORBIDDEN LOGIC IN EINSTEINIANA
From: BURT on 6 Aug 2010 20:02
Let us say you are a twin on a high speed train. You are passsing the
station and its clock is out in the open. When you pass the station by
SR you are supposed to see its clock going slow. But if this were true
show when it has an oportunity to age more. Surely it cannot be mutual
all of the time and what needs to be defined is when it is not.
Otherwise you don't have a workable theory.

Mitch Raemsch


From: artful on 6 Aug 2010 23:11
On Aug 7, 10:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> Let us say you are a twin on a high speed train. You are passsing the
> station and its clock is out in the open. When you pass the station by
> SR you are supposed to see its clock going slow. But if this were true
> show when it has an oportunity to age more. Surely it cannot be mutual
> all of the time and what needs to be defined is when it is not.
> Otherwise you don't have a workable theory.
>
> Mitch Raemsch

So .. you still don't get it. Neither clock is running slow .. both
are keeping perfect time.

They are MEASURED as slower by moving observers.

Eg. if a passenger at the font of the train looks at the time on the
station clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and a
passenger at the rear of the train looks at the time n the station
clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and then if they
compare what times they saw on the station clock .. they would say
that the station clock is running SLOWER. HOWEVER, a parson standing
at the station clock, and looking at the clocks of the two passengers
as they pass, would conclude that time was running FASTER for the
train passengers (not slower). There is no contradiction in what they
observe.

If you reverse the situation (two observers at each end of the
platform and a clock in the middle of the train) you'd get the two
observers on the platform deciding that the train clock is SLOWER, and
an observer at the train clock would see the two people on ends of the
platform's clock running FASTER.

Its a difference in clock sync for the passengers relative to the
station clock that make the rate of time appear faster or slower.
From: BURT on 6 Aug 2010 23:17
On Aug 6, 8:11 pm, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 10:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Let us say you are a twin on a high speed train. You are passsing the
> > station and its clock is out in the open. When you pass the station by
> > SR you are supposed to see its clock going slow. But if this were true
> > show when it has an oportunity to age more. Surely it cannot be mutual
> > all of the time and what needs to be defined is when it is not.
> > Otherwise you don't have a workable theory.
>
> > Mitch Raemsch
>
> So .. you still don't get it. Neither clock is running slow .. both
> are keeping perfect time.
>
> They are MEASURED as slower by moving observers.

So all I have to do is move and I can slow down clocks around me?

> Eg. if a passenger at the font of the train looks at the time on the
> station clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and a
> passenger at the rear of the train looks at the time n the station
> clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and then if they
> compare what times they saw on the station clock .. they would say
> that the station clock is running SLOWER.  HOWEVER, a parson standing
> at the station clock, and looking at the clocks of the two passengers
> as they pass, would conclude that time was running FASTER for the
> train passengers (not slower).  There is no contradiction in what they
> observe.
>
> If you reverse the situation (two observers at each end of the
> platform and a clock in the middle of the train) you'd get the two
> observers on the platform deciding that the train clock is SLOWER, and
> an observer at the train clock would see the two people on ends of the
> platform's clock running FASTER.
>
> Its a difference in clock sync for the passengers relative to the
> station clock that make the rate of time appear faster or slower.

If the passengers in front and back of the train see the station's
clock running slow then how will that station age more than them?

Mitch Raemsch
From: artful on 6 Aug 2010 23:35
On Aug 7, 1:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 6, 8:11 pm, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 7, 10:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Let us say you are a twin on a high speed train. You are passsing the
> > > station and its clock is out in the open. When you pass the station by
> > > SR you are supposed to see its clock going slow. But if this were true
> > > show when it has an oportunity to age more. Surely it cannot be mutual
> > > all of the time and what needs to be defined is when it is not.
> > > Otherwise you don't have a workable theory.
>
> > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > So .. you still don't get it. Neither clock is running slow .. both
> > are keeping perfect time.
>
> > They are MEASURED as slower by moving observers.
>
> So all I have to do is move and I can slow down clocks around me?

No. Don't you read? You moving does NOTHING AT ALL to the other
clocks. NEITHER clock is running slow.

> > Eg. if a passenger at the font of the train looks at the time on the
> > station clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and a
> > passenger at the rear of the train looks at the time n the station
> > clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and then if they
> > compare what times they saw on the station clock .. they would say
> > that the station clock is running SLOWER.  HOWEVER, a parson standing
> > at the station clock, and looking at the clocks of the two passengers
> > as they pass, would conclude that time was running FASTER for the
> > train passengers (not slower).  There is no contradiction in what they
> > observe.
>
> > If you reverse the situation (two observers at each end of the
> > platform and a clock in the middle of the train) you'd get the two
> > observers on the platform deciding that the train clock is SLOWER, and
> > an observer at the train clock would see the two people on ends of the
> > platform's clock running FASTER.
>
> > Its a difference in clock sync for the passengers relative to the
> > station clock that make the rate of time appear faster or slower.
>
> If the passengers in front and back of the train see the station's
> clock running slow then how will that station age more than them?

No. Don't you read? Both are ticking at the same correct rate ..
neither ages more than the other. It is differences in clock sync
that mean you would calculate other clocks as apparently ticking
slower or faster.
From: BURT on 6 Aug 2010 23:42
On Aug 6, 8:35 pm, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 7, 1:17 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 6, 8:11 pm, artful <artful...(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 7, 10:02 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Let us say you are a twin on a high speed train. You are passsing the
> > > > station and its clock is out in the open. When you pass the station by
> > > > SR you are supposed to see its clock going slow. But if this were true
> > > > show when it has an oportunity to age more. Surely it cannot be mutual
> > > > all of the time and what needs to be defined is when it is not.
> > > > Otherwise you don't have a workable theory.
>
> > > > Mitch Raemsch
>
> > > So .. you still don't get it. Neither clock is running slow .. both
> > > are keeping perfect time.
>
> > > They are MEASURED as slower by moving observers.
>
> > So all I have to do is move and I can slow down clocks around me?
>
> No.  Don't you read?  You moving does NOTHING AT ALL to the other
> clocks.  NEITHER clock is running slow.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > Eg. if a passenger at the font of the train looks at the time on the
> > > station clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and a
> > > passenger at the rear of the train looks at the time n the station
> > > clock (compared to his own clock) as he passes it, and then if they
> > > compare what times they saw on the station clock .. they would say
> > > that the station clock is running SLOWER.  HOWEVER, a parson standing
> > > at the station clock, and looking at the clocks of the two passengers
> > > as they pass, would conclude that time was running FASTER for the
> > > train passengers (not slower).  There is no contradiction in what they
> > > observe.
>
> > > If you reverse the situation (two observers at each end of the
> > > platform and a clock in the middle of the train) you'd get the two
> > > observers on the platform deciding that the train clock is SLOWER, and
> > > an observer at the train clock would see the two people on ends of the
> > > platform's clock running FASTER.
>
> > > Its a difference in clock sync for the passengers relative to the
> > > station clock that make the rate of time appear faster or slower.
>
> > If the passengers in front and back of the train see the station's
> > clock running slow then how will that station age more than them?
>
> No.  Don't you read?  Both are ticking at the same correct rate ..
> neither ages more than the other.  It is differences in clock sync
> that mean you would calculate other clocks as apparently ticking
> slower or faster.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

One twin ages more than the other. If the twin on the train sees the
station twin time running slow then when does it happen that the
station twin ages more? In the end one ages more so there is no mutual
time dilation for the twins.

Mitch Raemsch
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: Boltzmann Brains Invade CERN Causing Havoc!
Next: FORBIDDEN LOGIC IN EINSTEINIANA