On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Edgar L. Owen <edgaro...@att.net> wrote:

> Liz,
>
> We'll let Jason judge whether I answered him or not.
>
>
You did answer, but your answer is that you did not know (you said it what
was whatever relativity predicts, but relativity also has no answer without
a defined reference frame).

However according to P-time, Sam must be doing *something *at the exact
moment Pam arrives at her destination. Is that something celebrating his
fifth birthday or not?

If there is some certain thing he is doing at that instant (which I think
follows from P-time), your P-time theory ought to have some mathematical
way of providing an answer that question, should it not? If it does not,
then what is the advantage of P-time over special relativity?

Jason


>
>
> On Thursday, January 2, 2014 4:14:02 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote:
>
>> On 3 January 2014 10:00, Edgar L. Owen <edga...@att.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Liz,
>>>
>>> I answered Jason directly. See that post.
>>>
>>
>> By not answering, yes.
>>
>>>
>>> There is no preferred CLOCK time frame. There is a shared common present
>>> moment they both share which is 'preferred' in that sense. Again you are
>>> confusing clock time and Present moment time. See my response to Jason for
>>> one more approach that might make it understandable.
>>>
>>
>> It is preferred in the sense that it defines an inertial frame. From what
>> you have said so far that frame is the Earth's rest frame (or let's say the
>> rest frame of the CMB, which seems more physically plausible - they are
>> fairly close from the point of view of relativistic travel). Saying that a
>> frame of reference is special - e.g. that it computes reality - should have
>> observable consequences, probably for dispersion in high energy cosmic
>> rays. Have you worked out what those are, so they can be tested
>> experimentally? So far your theory appears to be just words, and from the
>> response you've had so far, not very convincing ones. It needs a
>> mathematical underpinning, as I requested way back but haven't yet seen,
>> before it can really be called a theory.
>>
>> Or if you prefer to stick with just words, please try to show some
>> reason, any reason, for anyone to think that P-time actually exists and
>> does some useful work in explaining reality. Just saying it's "obvious",
>> and "no one understands you" isn't enough (well, not unless you're a
>> teenager, at least.)
>>
>> See everyone's responses to your posts, but especially Jason's, for any
>> number of approaches that might make this understandable.
>>
>>  --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to