Recent content by UglyEd

Another way to say my theory is that. Maybe the Universe always existed. Just all the matter in it was compressed into an infinitely or very small space. With the BB the matter exploded out, and continues to expand to fill the void it is in. So what is normally thought of as the Universe is...

Does it depend on what someone considers the Universe to be? To make this less confusing I will make up a couple terms. SMALL UNIVERSE= All matter was in an infinitely small space then exploded and started expanding. So that the Universe is steadily getting bigger, as the...

I mean as in. When ever the universe started. Say with th BB. One clock never moved. The other was launched out at near C. Like I said this is hypothetical. Also is it true or do I have a misunderstanding? That if something moves at C time stops for it?

This is totally hypothetical, but what if at the start of the universe there were 2 clocks. One clock was launched at and continued to move close to the speed of light. The other clock remained totally stationary. Then after a long period of time, the time on the 2 clocks were checked. Of...

How do we know this? How do we know that what we consider to be the universe. Isnt just an explosion in a great void. The universe is steadily expanding and taking up more and more space (area) what space is it taking up?

I know that the faster something moves the slower relatively it experiences time. As in if i had a twin brother and at birth he was put into a spaceship traveling at half the speed of light, and I stayed on Earth moving a lot slower. When I reached 30yrs old. My brother would have only aged...

Could the Universe be expanding simply because it is in a giant vacuum? When the universe was an infinitely small point. It was in some sort of space. A giant void? Infinite void? So after the BB the Universe is steadily expanding to fill the vacuum of the void. So then wouldn't it expand...

Alex, you are saying that Light is Time? I don't fully understand how that is. Is this your theory? Or is this something that has been proven, if it is could you point me to a site I could read more about it? Does that mean there is no Time in complete darkness? As far as my answer to the...

Ok sounds good. One more thing we have to keep this friendly. Like I have said this is how I understand Time to be. I could be wrong but just haven't seen that I am yet. My theory is. Time is constant, objects just experience times passage at different rates. This is true and false...

Nereid for you to even go there with the link to the crackpot post is not cool. I listed a chain of statements and thoughts as to how I saw them. I just want to know if I am wrong at what point to I go wrong at. Alexi said my 1st statement. Was incorrect as I showed in the previous post...

Alexi I don't think anything like that at all. I really do want to know what the truth is. I also really appreciate your input on this. I feel bad and am sorry if I have upset you. If I am wrong I can except it. I just want to know where I am going wrong. You said that I was wrong on all...

I thought I answered it here. I didnt do the math on it. I used 5 mins as an example. The point is that no matter how fast the disc spins. A clock on the outer edge of the disc will show less time than a stationary unattached clock. It would also show less time than any other clock on...

After 100 yrs on the center or a separate clock. Also after the disc has turned 1,524,240,000 rotations at 29 RPMs that would take 100 yrs. Just stop the disc. Walk out to the clock and check it. This is a what if question. I don't see how something like how would I check the clock matter...

I had never heard of the Lorentz Contraction. I checked a site about it. Isn't it more of an observed contraction, than an object actually contracting? The site mentioned a spaceship flying past an observation post at near C. From the ship the observation post would look contracted. From...

I very well could be not catching on to something. Given the facts that I know are true. This is the conclusion that seems to work. It is true that a clock that is moving will show a slower passage of time compared to a stationary clock. Like the experiment that was done with the 2 clocks...