Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Edgar, The structure of Minkowski spacetime is explained here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minkowski_space Once one decides on a coordinate system, every point can be assigned a unique x,y,z,t position. Hence the meeting of two observers to compare clocks can be assigned a unique x,y,z,t position.

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 7 January 2014 01:55, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Brent, > > No it's not "an observation that the two twins are together at particular > spacetime coordinates" because the spacetime t coordinates are different. > They are only very slightly different. I think you're talking about the clock time of

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 7 January 2014 01:46, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > Yes, of course it is "quite hard to understand" what NOT meeting in the > same present moment would be like. That's because it's impossible and > self-contradictory. That is why they must meet in the same present moment. > > Well, it's your

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 7 January 2014 01:55, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Brent, > > No it's not "an observation that the two twins are together at particular > spacetime coordinates" because the spacetime t coordinates are different. > > Since the spacetime t coordinates are different WHEN are they together? > Certainly

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:03 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. > Any clock in my rest frame measures my coordinate time. > It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. > > What's the difference? > In relativity,

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/6/2014 7:03 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. What's the difference? The difference is that you imagine that Present time is a unique global coordinate time (just

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning > to sound just like another name for Present time. > Hmmm... A Casio? Does your theory feature some primitive God clock for "present time"? Does it run on

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, What clock measures your coordinate time? Apparently none. It's beginning to sound just like another name for Present time. What's the difference? Edgar On Monday, January 6, 2014 9:47:36 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:55 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" > > wrote: > > Brent,

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:55 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Brent, No it's not "an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates" because the spacetime t coordinates are different. Their proper times are different, but not their coordinate times. A clock time

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 6, 2014, at 6:50 AM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, I'll stick with my definitions, which are quite clear and obvious. Okay then please define for us: Event Present Simultaneous Clock time P-time Proper time Coordinate time Space time If we don't have common definitions we cannot c

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Brent, No it's not "an observation that the two twins are together at particular spacetime coordinates" because the spacetime t coordinates are different. Since the spacetime t coordinates are different WHEN are they together? Certainly not in a simultaneous clock time as proved by their diffe

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, I'll stick with my definitions, which are quite clear and obvious. The present moment is the most basic experience (and therefore the most basic verifiable and repeatable empirical observation) of our existence. 99.999% of all humans on earth understand this clearly and unambiguously,

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Liz, Yes, of course it is "quite hard to understand" what NOT meeting in the same present moment would be like. That's because it's impossible and self-contradictory. That is why they must meet in the same present moment. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 7:08:02 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 6

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Liz, Of course there is no reason that can't meet up to compare clocks. No one said there was. The point is that they can meet up to compare clocks and they always do it in the shared present moment. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:29:29 PM UTC-5, Liz R wrote: > > On 6 January 2014 10:16, E

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/5/2014 12:00 PM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a "label". It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment. The

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Edgar, It might help if we all used consistent language for "present", "event", "simultaneous", etc. I recommend we use the definitions which Einstein works out (starting on page 2 of his paper): http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/specrel.pdf It would avoid a lot of confusion I thin

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 6 January 2014 12:45, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present > moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment > when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock > times which

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Liz, Yes, of course you are correct. They do it all the time but in the present moment rather than any clock time simultaneity. Without a present moment when do they meet up and compare? Certainly not in their individual clock times which are different. Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:29:2

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 6 January 2014 10:16, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > What is explained quite well by relativity is the differing clock times. > The fact they differ in the same present moment is not even recognized nor > explained by relativity It's a basic but totally unexplained > assumption > > Th

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Liz, What is explained quite well by relativity is the differing clock times. The fact they differ in the same present moment is not even recognized nor explained by relativity It's a basic but totally unexplained assumption Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 4:00:57 PM UTC-5, Liz R wro

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 6 January 2014 09:00, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Brent, > > No, the present moment is NOT just a "label". It's an empirically > verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on > that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same > shared present m

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Brent, No, the present moment is NOT just a "label". It's an empirically verifiable observation (measurement). And not only that both twins agree on that measurement, namely that they have different clock times in the same shared present moment. There is simply no way around that Edgar

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/5/2014 9:23 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment "Yes, it's not a clock time." I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first p

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/5/2014 4:33 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same "present place" when their clocks don't agree. Yes. So why don't you recognize that "present place" is just a label, exactly like a latitude and longitude - and then th

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 05 Jan 2014, at 16:18, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image depe

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Hi Edgar, On 05 Jan 2014, at 13:41, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Bruno, You say of the present moment "Yes, it's not a clock time." I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? It is the set of computational states on which a first person is associated as a sort of "hero"

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Edgar, FWIW, from my lurker's perspective, the people on this list are giving you what you need - criticism. They are actively engaging you on your theory, which is so much better than being ignored. Better still, the quality of the criticism on this list is likely to be of the same caliber as you

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, Liz, Brent, Pierz, et al, Boy it's amazing how heavily personally invested you guys are in your belief system. You respond as if someone was daring to challenge the quasi-religous core orthodoxy your very existence and self-image depends upon. As I said before, "Lighten up guys, these a

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 10:34 PM, LizR wrote: > On 5 January 2014 17:10, Jason Resch wrote: > >> On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR wrote: >> >> On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch < >> jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb < >>> meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Bruno, This is wrong on all points. I've already shown why SR requires a present moment and falsifies block time. Because the fact that everything continually travels through spacetime at the speed of light requires everything to be at one and only one point in time and that time is the presen

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Bruno, You say of the present moment "Yes, it's not a clock time." I agree, then what is the present moment if it isn't a clock time? Edgar On Sunday, January 5, 2014 3:07:10 AM UTC-5, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > > On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Jason, > > If you don't agree w

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Brent, No, that's the exact opposite of what I said. I said they ARE at the same "present place" when their clocks don't agree. Now a question for you. What is this "present place" they are in? Edgar On Saturday, January 4, 2014 10:01:02 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote: > > On 1/4/2014 5:44 PM, Jaso

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:39, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:16, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own experience. All these

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 04 Jan 2014, at 21:20, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 04:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. However, a theory does have to be

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:42, Richard Ruquist wrote: On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fac

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 04 Jan 2014, at 19:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? Before I read Jason answer, let me tell you in three words: the ind

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 20:19, meekerdb wrote: > > I don't think he needs an excuse. I've given up on him. > > Yes, well, thereby showing more wisdom than most of us ... but in the end I hope I too will let go of the tar baby and get back to sensible discussions. -- You received this message because

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 20:21, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/4/2014 7:56 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch wrote: > >> On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb wrote: >> >> You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the >> world and the fact that you put diff

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 7:56 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch > wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the world and the fact that you

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 7:53 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:16, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: Not really as a Feynman diagram. Those are always drawn in momentum space (because energy/momentum is what's conserved) and are assumed to occupy only a negligible space. I alwa

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 7:29 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb > wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch > wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 7:10 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:03, meekerdb mailto:meeke...@verizon.net>> wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a single block time structure that encompasses all even

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 17:10, Jason Resch wrote: > On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR wrote: > > On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch < > jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb < >> meeke...@verizon.net> wrote: >> >> You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:56 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb wrote: You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the world and the fact that you put different t-labels on events at the same (x y z) does

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

And once you've answered Gabe's questions, you can show us the maths!!! I'm not saying I will understand it myself, but there are people around here who will. I've already asked this (god knows how many times) from Mr "Of course I respect women scientists" who yet again seems to be refusing to ans

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 16:29, Jason Resch wrote: > On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb wrote: > > You don't really have to say it's an illusion. It's a description of the > world and the fact that you put different t-labels on events at the same (x > y z) doesn't undo the fact that there are differ

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Edgar, I asked three simple true/false questions about what your theory says. You didn't even fucking anwer "false, because the concept isn't quite right, but you'd do better by asking XYZ". If you simply won't answer basic questions about whether your theory entails something, then you proba

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 16:16, meekerdb wrote: > > Not really as a Feynman diagram. Those are always drawn in momentum space > (because energy/momentum is what's conserved) and are assumed to occupy > only a negligible space. > I always assumed they were similar to worldlines for fundamental particle

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 4, 2014, at 9:16 PM, meekerdb wrote: On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I thin

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 6:37 PM, LizR wrote: On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch > wrote: What is moving if it's not time? Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I think the above

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 16:03, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: > >> 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a >>> single block time structure that encompasses all events when clock times >>> progress faster or slower for different observers? >>> >> Th

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 6:01 PM, Jason Resch wrote: 4. If block time corresponds to clock time, then how can there be a single block time structure that encompasses all events when clock times progress faster or slower for different observers? This corresponds to different objects having different veloc

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/4/2014 5:44 PM, Jason Resch wrote: On Jan 4, 2014, at 5:36 PM, "Edgar L. Owen" > wrote: Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is "an event" as if that explained something. I use that word in t

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 15:46, Jason Resch wrote: > Edgar's assertion that we "wouldn't feel like we are moving through time" >> unless time "really moves", contradicts computationalism, which his theory >> supposedly assumes. >> > I believe about 400 years ago similar arguments were being made to show

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:37 PM, LizR wrote: > On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch wrote: > >> What is moving if it's not time? >> >> Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. >> > > Jason, > > I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I think the > above one cou

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 15:01, Jason Resch wrote: > What is moving if it's not time? > > Our minds are, from one slice in spacetime to the next. > Jason, I agree completely with all your other replied to Edgar, but I think the above one could be misleading. I know what you mean (it's similar to the f

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 4, 2014, at 6:48 PM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? See wheeler-dewitt equation or Feynman diagrams. With block time all quantum events from big bang to e

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Jan 4, 2014, at 5:36 PM, "Edgar L. Owen" wrote: Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is "an event" as if that explained something. I use that word in the usual relatavistic (and traditional) sense. As something with

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 13:48, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. > > 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? > With block time all quantum events from big bang to end of the universe > have already occurred, haven't t

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, PPS: More questions about your theory of block time. 1. How do you keep Quantum Theory from being contradicted by block time? With block time all quantum events from big bang to end of the universe have already occurred, haven't they? If so then what happened to quantum randomness? 1a.

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 12:33, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Assume block time for a moment. You still haven't answered my question > about how your theory of the present moment works. > There is no present moment in block time. Block time explains how someone *feels* that there is a moving presen

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, PS: And don't tell me the twins meeting with different clock times in the same present moment is "an event" as if that explained something. Of course it's an event. Everything that happens in the entire universe is an event. But what is the nature of that event from your perspective? Ed

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, Assume block time for a moment. You still haven't answered my question about how your theory of the present moment works. What determines which moment of Caesar's life he thinks is the present moment? What determines which moment of your life you experience as the present moment? And

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

I'm afraid we're reached the point where I throw my hands up and resort to parody. Not that Edgar doesn't deserve it for his deeply patronising tone, often verging on downright insults... Of course he could easily recover the situation at any moment simply by making a post that actually explains h

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Edgar, If I explain something according to my understanding, and you reply that I am wrong, without explaining how or why, then we are doomed to go in circles without making any progress. I am left with no way to further my understanding, and you, believing me to be wrong, also will not advance i

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

"CAT theory" by Liz R! That has a ring to it. I can feel a book coming on, a follow up to "It's all done by invisible pink unicorns". -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails fr

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 04:16, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Hi Gabe, > > These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them > > 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better > descriptor) order of events in their own experience. All these events > always occur in their P

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

"Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light!" -- 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

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 04:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Pierz, > > It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and > Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects > of reality. > > However, a theory does have to be consistent with observation. So f

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 5 January 2014 07:32, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your > theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our > actions within? > My theory is that there isn't one. Mind you, it isn't really my th

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

2014/1/4 Edgar L. Owen > Jason, > > If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your > theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our > actions within? > > It clearly is not a clock time simultaneity since Pam and Sam shake hands > and compare

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Bruno Marchal wrote: > > On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Pierz, > > It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and > Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects > of reality. > > Reality

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, If you don't agree with my theory of the Present moment, then what is your theory of this present moment we all experience our existence and all our actions within? It clearly is not a clock time simultaneity since Pam and Sam shake hands and compare watches in the same present moment a

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 04 Jan 2014, at 16:36, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Pierz, It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. Reality subsumes physics, if you want to define physics as just what

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Pierz, It may not be "physics" by your definition but both the Present moment and Consciousness are certainly part of reality, in fact they are basic aspects of reality. Reality subsumes physics, if you want to define physics as just what is mathematically describable. Not all of reality is m

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Hi Gabe, These questions are ill formulated but I'll take a shot at them 1. For every observer there is a uniquely true (actual is a better descriptor) order of events in their own experience. All these events always occur in their Present moment. The rate at which these events occur is co

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Apparently we are not talking about the same scenario here somehow. > > Only acceleration/gravitation effects produce permanent clock time > differences that both observers agree to when they meet up again. > This contradicts esta

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, No, in your example when James (why do you keep confusing things by changing the names?) whizzes by us at 80%c that is not a 'meeting'. A meeting is when there is NO relative motion. In your example for that to happen James would have to experience a massive decelleration which would ch

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, Apparently we are not talking about the same scenario here somehow. Only acceleration/gravitation effects produce permanent clock time differences that both observers agree to when they meet up again. The same amount of acceleration, no matter where or when (or an equivalent gravitation

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

It's hard to stop arguing with an irrational person, isn't it? I've already offered Edgar $100 to tell me any experiment that could be carried out to falsify or validate his "theory" (that two separated events occur in only one absolute order), but he immediately stopped talking to me. An unfal

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 03 Jan 2014, at 23:06, LizR wrote: On 4 January 2014 04:31, Gabriel Bodeen wrote: (I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) The "P-time" notion, if it means anything at all timelike, says that there exists some uniquely correct ordering of events across space. Consider these events: Pam

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 4 January 2014 04:31, Gabriel Bodeen wrote: > (I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) > > The "P-time" notion, if it means anything at all timelike, says that there > exists some uniquely correct ordering of events across space. > > Consider these events: Pam's 3rd birthday party and Sam's 4t

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Sorry I got a bit heated and didn't check my grammar, I meant to say: So are you saying that from now on you will answer questions without trying > to analyse the motives of the person asking them, as you have done > previously, and without adding the patronising comments? (which in any case > jus

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 4 January 2014 04:06, Jason Resch wrote: > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Lliz, Brent and Jason, >> >> Actually Liz is correct here, by GR it is the acceleration. That is the >> physical cause of the clock time differences of the twins. >> > > In my experiment, lets

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 4 January 2014 03:14, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > This is of course complete nonsense I have immense respect for many > female scientists, thinkers and artists. Emmy Noether is one who comes to > mind. > > Yes she's one of my heroes, along with Lisa Randall and Alice in Wonderland. So

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 4 January 2014 03:06, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Liz, > > The common present moment is not something I "need". It's the way nature > works... > > We don't know how nature works, we only have theories. You have a theory about how nature works. Why does your theory need a common present moment? What

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

But it does matter how long you coast between accelerating away from Earth and the braking maneuver in which you accelerate back toward Earth. If you don't coast at all there is only a small effect. If you wait a long time, 10yrs, there is a big effect - which is easily seen in terms of the di

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/3/2014 8:10 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Jason, Thanks for your several posts and charts. You really made me think and I like that! I'm combining my responses to your multiple recent posts here. First though there are two ways to analyze it, GR acceleration, as opposed to SR world lines, is

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 3:11 PM, meekerdb wrote: > On 1/3/2014 7:24 AM, Jason Resch wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > >> Jason, >> >> If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the >> same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalen

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 1/3/2014 7:24 AM, Jason Resch wrote: On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen > wrote: Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the principle of equi

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Hi Edgar, That response does not at all address the contradiction I asked out. However, if you'd like to make your meaning crystal clear, you could give direct answers to the following logical questions. A direct (non-evasive) answer includes, at a minimum, picking one of "true" or "false" fo

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Gabriel, See my long most recent response to Jason for an analysis of how this works and why this contradiction doesn't falsify Present moment P-time. Best, Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:31:59 AM UTC-5, Gabriel Bodeen wrote: > > (I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) > > The "P-time

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > Come on Jason. Of course not. You have to have EQUAL amounts of > acceleration to produce the same effect. But doesn't matter where in space > it is. > There are equal amounts of acceleration in both cases: 4 minutes worth. Wha

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On 03 Jan 2014, at 15:14, Edgar L. Owen wrote: Liz, This is of course complete nonsense I have immense respect for many female scientists, thinkers and artists. Emmy Noether is one who comes to mind. Gauss said the same on Noether, and then add: " --but that one is probably not re

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, Come on Jason. Of course not. You have to have EQUAL amounts of acceleration to produce the same effect. But doesn't matter where in space it is. Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:24:26 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen > > wrote: > >>

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

(I'm expanding on the comment by Jason.) The "P-time" notion, if it means anything at all timelike, says that there exists some uniquely correct ordering of events across space. Consider these events: Pam's 3rd birthday party and Sam's 4th birthday party The "P-time" notion says that either (A)

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Jason, > > If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the > same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the principle of > equivalence) it could be standing 'still' in a strong gravitational field. > > Edg

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Jason, If the acceleration is the same, the slowing of clock time will be the same... Doesn't matter where it is. Or equivalently (by the principle of equivalence) it could be standing 'still' in a strong gravitational field. Edgar On Friday, January 3, 2014 10:06:08 AM UTC-5, Jason wrote:

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > Lliz, Brent and Jason, > > Actually Liz is correct here, by GR it is the acceleration. That is the > physical cause of the clock time differences of the twins. > In my experiment, lets say the acceleration lats for a total of 4 minutes: one

Re: Another stab at the universal present moment - a gedanken..

Lliz, Brent and Jason, Actually Liz is correct here, by GR it is the acceleration. That is the physical cause of the clock time differences of the twins. It is true the effects can also be analyzed just by spacetime paths as others have suggested, but it is actually the acceleration (or equival

  1   2   3   >