From: Michael Moroney on
kenseto <kenseto(a)erinet.com> writes:

>Sigh......absolute time is the only time that exists. A clock second
>in the observer's frame represents a specific amount of absolute time.
>This amount of absolute time is represented by different clock
>readings on the observed clocks.

Two identical rockets pass each other in otherwise empty space at 0.866 c.

The first rocket's observer sees the second pass at 0.866 c and observes
that its clock runs slow. In fact, for every 2 seconds of the first
rocket, the first observer sees only one second pass on the second rocket.

The second rocket's observer sees the first pass at 0.866 c and observes
that its clock runs slow. In fact, for every 2 seconds of the second
rocket, the second observer sees only one second pass on the first rocket.

How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the first
rocket?

How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the second
rocket?

From: kenseto on
On Mar 26, 10:54 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
wrote:
> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> >Sigh......absolute time is the only time that exists. A clock second
> >in the observer's frame represents a specific amount of absolute time.
> >This amount of absolute time is represented by different clock
> >readings on the observed clocks.
>
> Two identical rockets pass each other in otherwise empty space at 0.866 c..
>
> The first rocket's observer sees the second pass at 0.866 c and observes
> that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the first
> rocket, the first observer sees only one second pass on the second rocket..
>
> The second rocket's observer sees the first pass at 0.866 c and observes
> that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the second
> rocket, the second observer sees only one second pass on the first rocket..
>
> How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the first
> rocket?
>
> How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the second
> rocket?

Sigh....the rate of passage of absolute time is independent of
relative motion or observers....That's why the GPS designers used
absolute time to synchronize the GPS clock with the ground clock by
making the redefined GPS second to have N+4.15 periods of Cs 133
radiation. The redefined GPS second will contain the same amount of
absolute time as the ground clock second which contains N periods of
Cs 133 radiation. I suggest that you read the paper in the following
link to gain more insight into this new concept.
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

Ken Seto
From: Sue... on
On Mar 27, 11:54 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
> On Mar 26, 10:54 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> > >Sigh......absolute time is the only time that exists. A clock second
> > >in the observer's frame represents a specific amount of absolute time.
> > >This amount of absolute time is represented by different clock
> > >readings on the observed clocks.
>
> > Two identical rockets pass each other in otherwise empty space at 0.866 c.
>
> > The first rocket's observer sees the second pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the first
> > rocket, the first observer sees only one second pass on the second rocket.
>
> > The second rocket's observer sees the first pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the second
> > rocket, the second observer sees only one second pass on the first rocket.
>
> > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the first
> > rocket?
>
> > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the second
> > rocket?
>
> Sigh....the rate of passage of absolute time is independent of
> relative motion or observers....That's why the GPS designers used
> absolute time to synchronize the GPS clock with the ground clock by
> making the redefined GPS second to have N+4.15 periods of Cs 133
> radiation. The redefined GPS second will contain the same amount of
> absolute time as the ground clock second which contains N periods of
> Cs 133 radiation. I suggest that you read the paper in the following
> link to gain more insight into this new concept.


http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

That is not a relativity theory. Its own violation
is stated on page 4.

<<The rate of a clock is dependent on the state
of absolute motion of the clock. The higher
is the state of absolute motion the slower is
its clock rate.>>
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_relativity

Sue...

>
> Ken Seto

From: kenseto on
On Mar 27, 2:11 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Mar 27, 11:54 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mar 26, 10:54 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
> > wrote:
>
> > > kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> > > >Sigh......absolute time is the only time that exists. A clock second
> > > >in the observer's frame represents a specific amount of absolute time.
> > > >This amount of absolute time is represented by different clock
> > > >readings on the observed clocks.
>
> > > Two identical rockets pass each other in otherwise empty space at 0.866 c.
>
> > > The first rocket's observer sees the second pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the first
> > > rocket, the first observer sees only one second pass on the second rocket.
>
> > > The second rocket's observer sees the first pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the second
> > > rocket, the second observer sees only one second pass on the first rocket.
>
> > > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the first
> > > rocket?
>
> > > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the second
> > > rocket?
>
> > Sigh....the rate of passage of absolute time is independent of
> > relative motion or observers....That's why the GPS designers used
> > absolute time to synchronize the GPS clock with the ground clock by
> > making the redefined GPS second to have N+4.15 periods of Cs 133
> > radiation. The redefined GPS second will contain the same amount of
> > absolute time as the ground clock second which contains N periods of
> > Cs 133 radiation. I suggest that you read the paper in the following
> > link to gain more insight into this new concept.
>
> http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf
>
> That is not a relativity theory. Its own violation
> is stated on page 4.
>
> <<The rate of a clock is dependent on the state
> of absolute motion of the clock. The higher
> is the state of absolute motion the slower is
> its clock rate.>>http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

Hey idiot computer....that's not a violation.

>
> See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_relativity

Hey idiot...The principle of relativiyt does not apply to the concept
of absolute time. IOW The PoR is not valid when absolute time is used
to do calculations.

Ken Seto

>
> Sue...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Ken Seto- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

From: Sue... on
On Mar 27, 2:43 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
> On Mar 27, 2:11 pm, "Sue..." <suzysewns...(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mar 27, 11:54 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Mar 26, 10:54 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> > > > >Sigh......absolute time is the only time that exists. A clock second
> > > > >in the observer's frame represents a specific amount of absolute time.
> > > > >This amount of absolute time is represented by different clock
> > > > >readings on the observed clocks.
>
> > > > Two identical rockets pass each other in otherwise empty space at 0..866 c.
>
> > > > The first rocket's observer sees the second pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > > > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the first
> > > > rocket, the first observer sees only one second pass on the second rocket.
>
> > > > The second rocket's observer sees the first pass at 0.866 c and observes
> > > > that its clock runs slow.  In fact, for every 2 seconds of the second
> > > > rocket, the second observer sees only one second pass on the first rocket.
>
> > > > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the first
> > > > rocket?
>
> > > > How many seconds of "absolute time" correspond to 1 second of the second
> > > > rocket?
>
> > > Sigh....the rate of passage of absolute time is independent of
> > > relative motion or observers....That's why the GPS designers used
> > > absolute time to synchronize the GPS clock with the ground clock by
> > > making the redefined GPS second to have N+4.15 periods of Cs 133
> > > radiation. The redefined GPS second will contain the same amount of
> > > absolute time as the ground clock second which contains N periods of
> > > Cs 133 radiation. I suggest that you read the paper in the following
> > > link to gain more insight into this new concept.
>
> >http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf
>
> > That is not a relativity theory. Its own violation
> > is stated on page 4.
>
> > <<The rate of a clock is dependent on the state
> > of absolute motion of the clock. The higher
> > is the state of absolute motion the slower is
> > its clock rate.>>http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf
>
> Hey idiot computer....that's not a violation.
>
>
>
> > See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_relativity
>
> Hey idiot...The principle of relativiyt does not apply to the concept
> of absolute time. IOW The PoR is not valid when absolute time is used
> to do calculations.

<< Einstein's relativity principle states that:

All inertial frames are totally equivalent
for the performance of all physical experiments.
>>
http://farside.ph.utexas.edu/teaching/em/lectures/node108.html

<<Certain principles of relativity have been widely
assumed in most scientific disciplines. One of the
most widespread is the belief that any law of nature
should be the same at all times; and scientific
investigations generally assume that laws of nature
are the same regardless of the person measuring them.
These sorts of principles have been incorporated into
scientific inquiry at the most fundamental of levels.

Any principle of relativity prescribes a symmetry
in natural law: that is, the laws must look the
same to one observer as they do to another. According
to a deep theoretical result called

--> Noether's theorem, <--

any such symmetry will also imply a conservation law
alongside. For example, if two observers at different
times see the same laws, then a quantity called energy
will be conserved. In this light, relativity principles
are not just statements about how scientists should write
laws: they make testable predictions about how nature
behaves. >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_relativity#Basic_relativity_principles

>> * invariance with respect to time translation gives
the well-known law of conservation of energy >>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem#Applications

So you are leading up to the perpetual motion
machine in your basement?


Sue...


>
> Ken Seto
>
>
>
> > Sue...
>
> > > Ken Seto- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>