There is no time dilation or physical length contraction.
in [Relativity]
|
From: mpc755 on 12 Nov 2009 20:20 On Nov 12, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 12, 5:08 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 7:47 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 3:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:45 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:50 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 12:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 10:36 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no time dilation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Clocks in different frames runs at different rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks are tiking away right now everywhere else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I meant to say was: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with time. Clocks > > > > > > > > > > > > all tick in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > Rates are determined by the time of the force of gravity and the time > > > > > > > > > > > of motion of energy. Both rates are in one time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > Force of gravity is the force of the displaced aether pushing back on > > > > > > > > > > the matter which displaced the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Motion of energy is motion of the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. > > > > > > > > > > > There is only the present.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > This is flow science. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > It is Aether Displacement where aether is an elastic medium and is > > > > > > > > displaced by matter and pushes back in an attempt to return to a state > > > > > > > > of rest. The pushing back is gravity. Light propagates at 'c' relative > > > > > > > > to the aether, just like any wave does in any medium. If you want to > > > > > > > > call the motion of the aether flow science, go for it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > I have because it is a better concept than motion. > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Yes, the concept of motion, but what of the aether being the elastic > > > > > > medium which pushes back against the matter which displaces it being > > > > > > gravity?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Aether has no shape. It fills space. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Except for where it has been displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Everything is in the aether. The immaterial cannot be displaced by the > > > material. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Aether is material. Aether is matter in its basic form. No two > > materials can exist in the same point in three dimensional space > > simultaneously. The aether is displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > No. Einstein said it had to be immaterial in his Leiden lectures. And > I agree with him. It cannot be displaced. Energy is in the immaterial. > > Mitch Raemsch Einstein had to say it was immaterial in order for Einstein to say "the idea of motion may not be applied to [aether]". Einstein had to say that or two frames of reference occupying the same three dimensional space would not have the aether at rest relative to both frames. What Einstein was incorrect about is two frames moving relative to one another cannot have the aether be motionless relative to both. It is physically impossible. When you say everything exists in the aether, that is exactly right. Matter exists in the aether. Matter has displaced the aether which would otherwise exist where the matter is.
From: mpc755 on 12 Nov 2009 20:22 On Nov 12, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 12, 5:08 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 7:47 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 3:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:45 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:50 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 12:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 10:36 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no time dilation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Clocks in different frames runs at different rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks are tiking away right now everywhere else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I meant to say was: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with time. Clocks > > > > > > > > > > > > all tick in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > Rates are determined by the time of the force of gravity and the time > > > > > > > > > > > of motion of energy. Both rates are in one time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > Force of gravity is the force of the displaced aether pushing back on > > > > > > > > > > the matter which displaced the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Motion of energy is motion of the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. > > > > > > > > > > > There is only the present.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > This is flow science. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > It is Aether Displacement where aether is an elastic medium and is > > > > > > > > displaced by matter and pushes back in an attempt to return to a state > > > > > > > > of rest. The pushing back is gravity. Light propagates at 'c' relative > > > > > > > > to the aether, just like any wave does in any medium. If you want to > > > > > > > > call the motion of the aether flow science, go for it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > I have because it is a better concept than motion. > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Yes, the concept of motion, but what of the aether being the elastic > > > > > > medium which pushes back against the matter which displaces it being > > > > > > gravity?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Aether has no shape. It fills space. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Except for where it has been displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Everything is in the aether. The immaterial cannot be displaced by the > > > material. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Aether is material. Aether is matter in its basic form. No two > > materials can exist in the same point in three dimensional space > > simultaneously. The aether is displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > No. Einstein said it had to be immaterial in his Leiden lectures. And > I agree with him. It cannot be displaced. Energy is in the immaterial. > > Mitch Raemsch Einstein had to say it was immaterial in order for Einstein to say "the idea of motion may not be applied to [aether]". Einstein had to say that or two frames of reference occupying the same three dimensional space would not have the aether at rest relative to both frames. What Einstein was incorrect about is two frames moving relative to one another in shared space cannot have the aether be motionless relative to both. It is physically impossible. When you say everything exists in the aether, that is exactly right. Matter exists in the aether. Matter has displaced the aether which would otherwise exist where the matter is.
From: mpc755 on 12 Nov 2009 20:45 On Nov 12, 8:22 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 12, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:08 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 7:47 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:45 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:50 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 12:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 10:36 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no time dilation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Clocks in different frames runs at different rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks are tiking away right now everywhere else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I meant to say was: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with time. Clocks > > > > > > > > > > > > > all tick in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rates are determined by the time of the force of gravity and the time > > > > > > > > > > > > of motion of energy. Both rates are in one time. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > Force of gravity is the force of the displaced aether pushing back on > > > > > > > > > > > the matter which displaced the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > > Motion of energy is motion of the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. > > > > > > > > > > > > There is only the present.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > This is flow science. > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > It is Aether Displacement where aether is an elastic medium and is > > > > > > > > > displaced by matter and pushes back in an attempt to return to a state > > > > > > > > > of rest. The pushing back is gravity. Light propagates at 'c' relative > > > > > > > > > to the aether, just like any wave does in any medium. If you want to > > > > > > > > > call the motion of the aether flow science, go for it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > I have because it is a better concept than motion. > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > Yes, the concept of motion, but what of the aether being the elastic > > > > > > > medium which pushes back against the matter which displaces it being > > > > > > > gravity?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Aether has no shape. It fills space. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Except for where it has been displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Everything is in the aether. The immaterial cannot be displaced by the > > > > material. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > Aether is material. Aether is matter in its basic form. No two > > > materials can exist in the same point in three dimensional space > > > simultaneously. The aether is displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > No. Einstein said it had to be immaterial in his Leiden lectures. And > > I agree with him. It cannot be displaced. Energy is in the immaterial. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Einstein had to say it was immaterial in order for Einstein to say > "the idea of motion may not be applied to [aether]". Einstein had to > say that or two frames of reference occupying the same three > dimensional space would not have the aether at rest relative to both > frames. What Einstein was incorrect about is two frames moving > relative to one another in shared space cannot have the aether be > motionless relative to both. It is physically impossible. > > When you say everything exists in the aether, that is exactly right. > Matter exists in the aether. Matter has displaced the aether which > would otherwise exist where the matter is. Einstein also said the state of the aether is dependent on its connections to the matter and the state of the aether in the surrounding space. What is the 'state' of the aether if it isn't its state of displacement?
From: mpc755 on 12 Nov 2009 20:54 On Nov 12, 7:47 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 12, 3:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 2:45 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:50 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 12:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 10:36 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no time dilation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Clocks in different frames runs at different rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks are tiking away right now everywhere else. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > What I meant to say was: > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with time. Clocks > > > > > > > > > > all tick in the present. > > > > > > > > > > Rates are determined by the time of the force of gravity and the time > > > > > > > > > of motion of energy. Both rates are in one time. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > Force of gravity is the force of the displaced aether pushing back on > > > > > > > > the matter which displaced the aether. > > > > > > > > > Motion of energy is motion of the aether. > > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. > > > > > > > > > There is only the present.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > This is flow science. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > It is Aether Displacement where aether is an elastic medium and is > > > > > > displaced by matter and pushes back in an attempt to return to a state > > > > > > of rest. The pushing back is gravity. Light propagates at 'c' relative > > > > > > to the aether, just like any wave does in any medium. If you want to > > > > > > call the motion of the aether flow science, go for it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > I have because it is a better concept than motion. > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > Yes, the concept of motion, but what of the aether being the elastic > > > > medium which pushes back against the matter which displaces it being > > > > gravity?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Aether has no shape. It fills space. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Except for where it has been displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Everything is in the aether. The immaterial cannot be displaced by the > material. > > Mitch Raemsch Einstein had to say it was immaterial in order for Einstein to say "the idea of motion may not be applied to [aether]". Einstein had to say that or two frames of reference occupying the same three dimensional space would not have the aether at rest relative to both frames. What Einstein was incorrect about is two frames moving relative to one another in shared space cannot have the aether be motionless relative to both. It is physically impossible. When you say everything is in the aether, that is exactly right. Matter exists in the aether. Matter has displaced the aether which would otherwise exist where the matter is. Einstein also said the state of the aether is dependent on its connections to the matter and the state of the aether in the surrounding space. What is the 'state' of the aether and the 'state' of the surrounding aether if it isn't its state of displacement?
From: mpc755 on 12 Nov 2009 20:55
On Nov 12, 8:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 12, 5:08 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 7:47 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 12, 3:52 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:50 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:45 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 5:32 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 2:21 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 1:50 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 4:48 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 12:28 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 3:13 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 11:46 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 12, 10:36 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no time dilation. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Clocks in different frames runs at different rates. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks are tiking away right now everywhere else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What I meant to say was: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clocks ticking at different rates has nothing to do with time. Clocks > > > > > > > > > > > > all tick in the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > Rates are determined by the time of the force of gravity and the time > > > > > > > > > > > of motion of energy. Both rates are in one time. > > > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > > > Force of gravity is the force of the displaced aether pushing back on > > > > > > > > > > the matter which displaced the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Motion of energy is motion of the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > Time is a concept. > > > > > > > > > > > There is only the present.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > This is flow science. > > > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > > > > It is Aether Displacement where aether is an elastic medium and is > > > > > > > > displaced by matter and pushes back in an attempt to return to a state > > > > > > > > of rest. The pushing back is gravity. Light propagates at 'c' relative > > > > > > > > to the aether, just like any wave does in any medium. If you want to > > > > > > > > call the motion of the aether flow science, go for it.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > I have because it is a better concept than motion. > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > Yes, the concept of motion, but what of the aether being the elastic > > > > > > medium which pushes back against the matter which displaces it being > > > > > > gravity?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Aether has no shape. It fills space. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Except for where it has been displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Everything is in the aether. The immaterial cannot be displaced by the > > > material. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Aether is material. Aether is matter in its basic form. No two > > materials can exist in the same point in three dimensional space > > simultaneously. The aether is displaced by matter.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > No. Einstein said it had to be immaterial in his Leiden lectures. And > I agree with him. It cannot be displaced. Energy is in the immaterial. > > Mitch Raemsch Einstein had to say it was immaterial in order for Einstein to say "the idea of motion may not be applied to [aether]". Einstein had to say that or two frames of reference occupying the same three dimensional space would not have the aether at rest relative to both frames. What Einstein was incorrect about is two frames moving relative to one another in shared space cannot have the aether be motionless relative to both. It is physically impossible. When you say everything is in the aether, that is exactly right. Matter exists in the aether. Matter has displaced the aether which would otherwise exist where the matter is. Einstein also said the state of the aether is dependent on its connections to the matter and the state of the aether in the surrounding space. What is the 'state' of the aether and the 'state' of the surrounding aether if it isn't its state of displacement? |