Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Time debate

  1. Aug 18, 2003 #1

    ddr

    User Avatar

    the article is on page:

    www.geocities.com/dr_physica/tip.htm

    have fun discovering time!
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Aug 18, 2003 #2
    Care to explain to me how that works?
     
  4. Aug 19, 2003 #3

    ddr

    User Avatar

    I can just give you a clue:
    your watch has time t, periods n and frequency f related in n=ft.
    pick two events, for instance event1=(0r,1r/s,0s) and event2=(1r,1r/s,1s).and find the parametar equations for n,f,t.just have in mind that the normal vector doesn't have the equation presented on my page. it is (1r,t*(r/s)/s,f*s/(r/s)).
    the equation of the plane will be:
    (ft,f,t)=a(1r,1(s/s)*(r/s),1(r/s)*s*(s/r))+b(1r,0(s/s)(r/s),1(r/s)*s*(s/r));

    solve 'b' thru 'a' and 'a' is the pure quantum of time. assign seconds to 'a' and you have time('a'*sec=inner time of the watch<>t).
     
  5. Aug 19, 2003 #4
    And what does that prove? The fact that we measure time?

    Wow... this is.... absolutely groundbreaking.......
     
  6. Aug 20, 2003 #5

    ddr

    User Avatar

    No the time you measure is proportional with the inner time of your watch and it doesn't apply on any other system cause every system more precizely every trajectory in every system has it's own time.

    It says that in order to come up with time:
    -you have to have a law or a regulation equation for some system,
    -trajectory which is set of consequential legel events,
    -parametar equations dependent on pure number which happened to be the very quantum of time;
    -finally, time is not just free variable like space is but it depends on the conditions in the system you want to come up with time for.
     
  7. Aug 20, 2003 #6
    So you're restating Einstein's discovery that Newton's 'universal clock' idea was wrong?
     
  8. Aug 21, 2003 #7

    ddr

    User Avatar

    you might say it's new discovery of time but it has nothing to do with Einstein's theories.
     
  9. Aug 21, 2003 #8
    Um..no.

    That all time is different to each object relative to everything else IS what Special Relativity an General Relativity is all about. You've discovered nothing new.
     
  10. Aug 22, 2003 #9

    ddr

    User Avatar

    my approach is slightly different from the Einstein's one. from my point of view time is a variable closesly dependent on the conditions in the observed system. in my approach you you won't find dilatiion or things. in einstein's approach you will not find the fact that time remains the same when the system remains only in one state.
    and things...
    i was expecting from you to argue about the normal vector on my page cause the way it is is wrong.but apparenly you didn't paid enough attention...
     
  11. Aug 22, 2003 #10
    Why are you putting poor data/incorrect calculations with your theories? It doesn't usually make people want to believe the things you have to say if your calculations are incorrect. They assume you don't know what you're doing and you're not worth the time, and the effort. I didn't bother paying much attention to the math on your page, but I got the ideas down, and it's basically the same as SR man.

    From Einstein's point of view, time was closely dependent on the conditions of the observed system. If the observed system is moving in unison with the observing system, neither of them notice any changes in time or measurements made, because their minds both shrink and slow down at the same rate. Within the system, there is no time dilation because all the measuring equipment slows down at the exact same rate. It is when the measurements are made outside the co-ordinate system that time slows down, and everything shrinks.
     
  12. Aug 22, 2003 #11

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Actually, your first sentence fits with relativity (sorta), your second doesn't, and your third does.

    You may want to read a little more on relativity and its implications. Relativity itself deals primarily with how the laws of physics work in different reference frames and its implications explain how it works BETWEEN different reference frames.

    IE, if all you are doing is observing motion in one reference frame, relativity doesn't do much for you except assure you that the laws of physics work.

    When moving between or comparing two different reference frames, then things like time dilation become important.
     
  13. Aug 22, 2003 #12

    ddr

    User Avatar

    My observation is fixed to the equilibrium points and since they carry no energy and no force acts upon them I'll have the simpliest view over the observed phenomena but...
    since the rest don't want to share my point of view I guees I should consider relativity or translating my self.
     
  14. Aug 23, 2003 #13
    Well, when you win a nobel prize, I will applaud you, but I'm doubtful that will happen with this theory. Sorry.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Time debate
  1. Work debate (Replies: 10)

  2. A Debate (Replies: 8)

  3. Debate About Photons (Replies: 46)

Loading...