Physics and our place in the Universe

[lesliedellow]

Except our time isn't really set from the stars, though we do use the movement of them to make a measure of how much has past.

Actually UTC is based upon a network of 500 atomic clocks, located around the world. I don't want to be pedantic, but I do want to cut the ground from under some of Dad's nonsense.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Actually UTC is based upon a network of 500 atomic clocks, located around the world. I don't want to be pedantic, but I do want to cut the ground from under some of Dad's nonsense.

I meant historically, we have used stars to tell time at night as a species. Of course we don't anymore.

 

[dad]

Actually UTC is based upon a network of 500 atomic clocks, located around the world. ...

That truly is silly..if you are suggesting time is defined by clocks?! Time itself is involved in how atoms do what they do and how long it takes. To merely look at things that involve time, would be like saying that time is set to when you got married. Yes it took time to get married for those who do, just like it takes time for the moon to move, or atoms decay. None of those things that mark time ARE time though, neither do they set how time is woven into spacetime.

 

[dad]

I meant historically, we have used stars to tell time at night as a species. Of course we don't anymore.

The concept studied in this thread is not the mere telling of time on earth from stars. It is how time is woven into our fabric and laws. Science has no clue at all. Right? They simply look at how it works, and go on their merry little way from there.

There are vibes in each star apparently. Stars do something....

"Writing in the journal Science, they discovered each star's sound had a regular repeating pattern, which indicated the entire entity is pulsating..."

The sound of space: Scientists reveal 'music' made by stars | Mail Online

 

[dad]

Your god could just as easily be one of these so called evil spirits you claim the others to be, prove definitively that it couldn't be true.

Jesus was God in the flesh, and we know what He was like!

 

[lesliedellow]

neither do they set how time is woven into spacetime.

And a fat lot you know about that. Could you write down the equation which relates observed time to proper time?

 

[dad]

And a fat lot you know about that. Could you write down the equation which relates observed time to proper time?

You need an equation to sort out what is cause and effect? This is a tacit admission you do not know what time is. Apparently you must think of time only in terms of earth, and area, and how things move and operate here?

If so, the very concept that time is somehow woven into our spacetime which of course determines motion rates and atomic realities, and forces, etc etc... seems beyond your range of though capabilities? Do let us know.

Meanwhile, those able to think out of the box might contemplate some of the fundamental issues involving time and space..


"But what if it turns out that space and time are not the fundamental infrastructure of our cosmos—what if they are themselves products of some deeper physics?
This idea is called emergence. ...


a hologram is anything—even an equation—that encodes an extra dimension’s worth of information. It turns out that you can write equations that describe our universe perfectly well using different combinations of spatial dimensions, creating mathematical holograms that are indistinguishable from reality.


Finally, physicists have known for some time that their descriptions of space start to break down when they’re applied to the strange-but-true environments inside black holes and close to the time of big bang. In such cases, the familiar equations start popping out infinities—nonsense answers that suggest that the equations are missing some essential machinery.


Letting go of space and time without ready replacements may seem like a surefire way to plunge into the abyss of abstraction. But it may be only by loosening our grip that we can come to grasp what is truly fundamental. "


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2012/03/are-space-and-time-fundamental/

 

[lesliedellow]

You need an equation to sort out what is cause and effect? This is a tacit admission you do not know what time is. Apparently you must think of time only in terms of earth, and area, and how things move and operate here?

Considering that it was a misunderstood newspaper article about General Relativity which started you on this nonsense, I wouldn't say that the equations of Relativity were altogether irrelevant.

Relativity, by the way, is applicable throughout the universe.

 

[dad]

Considering that it was a misunderstood newspaper article about General Relativity which started you on this nonsense, I wouldn't say that the equations of Relativity were altogether irrelevant.

In what way is the data from Nasa misunderstood?! This should be funny.

Relativity, by the way, is applicable throughout the universe.

Not at all, unless time was woven in exactly as it is in our solar system! Are you making a clear claim here, and plan to back it up, or blowing smoke up our posteriors?

 

[DogmaHunter]

Says you. Yet God and all the early civilizations knew better apparently. Go figure. You would need more than opinion.

No. Says history and every single culture on the planet.
Poseidon, Ra, Zeus, Jupiter, Thor, and thousands of others prove my point. None supports yours.

All these gods are associated with stars, tides, climate, the sun, thunder, lightning,... and a who myriad of other natural phenomena that once were attributed to gods because the underlying nature of these phenomena was unknown. Such arguments of ignorance are as old as human kind itself.

Great, and a cog moves in a clock...so?

"So?" ?
I don't know how this would need further clarification. If the solar system itself is in an orbit in the galaxy, it kind of speaks for itself that the stars we see in the sky would change position overtime. Well, from our perspective - off course, since it's the solar system itself that is changing it's view angle.

Well, if you knew real time and could talk about 5000 actual years rather than belief based years

1 year = the time it takes for earth to complete an orbit around the sun.
We can debate about what time is till the cows come home, but this is what we mean when we talk about a "year". It's the convention we base ourselves on every time we speak about time.

I have no clue why you call this "belief based years".
Your quotes are irrelevant.

Obviously if special things would happen that makes earth tilt or the orbit to slow down or speed up, whatever it may be, the outcome would be different. However, given that everything stays as it is, the starmap would change purely by the solar system orbitting the galaxy.

Hey, you haven't even shown any physics! Would you claim that time does not affect our laws, and is not part of 'our' spacetime???

Your strawmen are not an argument.

It seems to me that you have it backwards.

Space, time, gravity etc are in a complex dance with eachother. The laws of nature describe that dance and how they interact.

 

[lesliedellow]

Not at all, unless time was woven in exactly as it is in our solar system! Are you making a clear claim here, and plan to back it up, or blowing smoke up our posteriors?

I am claiming that you know nothing at all about Relativity. Would you care to prove me wrong? Could you write down the definition of a metric, for instance? Four brief statements will do. Also, in what way would a mathematician challenge a physicist's use of that word?

 

[dad]

I am claiming that you know nothing at all about Relativity.

Firstly, unless you have definitive proof that spacetime we know on earth exists in all the universe and where the stars are, that is not on topic even! Because of the limitations of science we have launched far beyond mere relativity in this thread, and into what the spacetime fabric consists of, especially the influences of time!

You seem to be on a hangover from another thread or something. In this thread, we accept, for all intents and purposes, for the sake of argument, that the solar system does consist of spacetime like earth. Of course, in some other thread one might have a discussion on relativity itself right here on earth. Not here, thanks. You see, they are still talking about one day being able to!!!!!!

"...The theory of relativity predicts that in a strong gravitational field, time should slow. Clocks such as NIST Boulder's should be able to detect that slowing… and whether that slowing is different on different places on Earth. "

The World's Most Precise Clocks: 100 Times More Precise Than Cesium Atomic Clocks | Popular Science

Ha. Hoo ha.

Now as far as your puny metric smetric stuff, remember this, that any points in a math equation must represent some reality! Until then, they are fishbowl, bubble math!



"In spacetime we can define an event as something marked by the 4 coordinates x, y, z, and t. (Note that an event may be uneventful.) What is the metric defining the distance between two events? Here's one in Euclidian geometry, from special relativity:
---

ds2=(c dt)2 - (dx2 + dy2 + dz2)


Let's go back to the cosmological principle: the universe is homogeneous and isotropic.

We need a metric that reflects this.."

http://burro.cwru.edu/Academics/Astr328/Notes/Metrics/metrics.html[SIZE=+2]


Ha. Hooo ha!

Now let's at least try to get on topic?
[/SIZE]

 

[PsychoSarah]

Jesus was God in the flesh, and we know what He was like!

Supposedly. Guess what, people lie, people exaggerate. You don't really know what Jesus was like.

 

[dad]

Supposedly. Guess what, people lie, people exaggerate. You don't really know what Jesus was like.

That assumes that He lied or was wrong when He said that if we ask we will recieve, if we ask for His Salvation, He comes in to our hearts and lives. Once He does that people get to know Him. It was those who knew Him that gave us an inspired record, guaranteed accurate by Christ, of what He was like on earth. Your perspective then, is that of an outsider, and the natural mind. WE can and do know what He is actually like! You can too. He paid the price and offers it to all who come to Him...who ask.

 

[PsychoSarah]

That assumes that He lied or was wrong when He said that if we ask we will recieve, if we ask for His Salvation, He comes in to our hearts and lives. Once He does that people get to know Him. It was those who knew Him that gave us an inspired record, guaranteed accurate by Christ, of what He was like on earth. Your perspective then, is that of an outsider, and the natural mind. WE can and do know what He is actually like! You can too. He paid the price and offers it to all who come to Him...who ask.

Jesus didn't write about what he did, other people did. Not Jesus's fault if they exaggerated.

 

[lesliedellow]

"...The theory of relativity predicts that in a strong gravitational field, time should slow. Clocks such as NIST Boulder's should be able to detect that slowing… and whether that slowing is different on different places on Earth. "

Quite right. So? I trust you realise just how strong that gravitational field would have to be to have any significant effect.

"In spacetime we can define an event as something marked by the 4 coordinates x, y, z, and t. (Note that an event may be uneventful.) What is the metric defining the distance between two events? Here's one in Euclidian geometry, from special relativity:

ds2=(c dt)2 - (dx2 + dy2 + dz2)

Only in flat spacetime. And that isn't Euclidean geometry by the way. Even if Wikipedia says so.

Let's go back to the cosmological principle: the universe is homogeneous and isotropic.

We need a metric that reflects this.."

http://burro.cwru.edu/Academics/Ast...2.) 3.) 4.) Care to fill in the other three?

 

[dad]

Jesus didn't write about what he did, other people did. Not Jesus's fault if they exaggerated.

Jesus is witnessed to have said that He would have His Spirit bring things back to remembrance actually, so that the record would be correct. So He did write about what He did. So did others, who were His friends and believers.

 

[dad]

Quite right. So? I trust you realise just how strong that gravitational field would have to be to have any significant effect.

You are thinking in the bubble! Time itself may not be set with gravity, for heaven sake. Gravity is merely one influence on spacetime here!

Only in flat spacetime. And that isn't Euclidean geometry by the way. Even if Wikipedia says so.

No, in any spacetime you dream up actually! If you have two points, (represent them with a y and z or any letter you want) where one is IN spacetime and the other is not, you cannot connect them in the way you may think. Period.

I didn't ask you for a copy and paste, I asked you for the definition of a metric.

I will give you a start:

Let μ be a metric, then

1.) μ(a, b) >= 0
2.)

If you can show that a metric must include a spacetime like ours, where time is woven in a certain way, and another time and space, then you may define it! Until then, you muddy the waters.
3.)
4.)

Care to fill in the other three?[/quote] If you can show that a metric includes spacetime as we know it here, and time and space where the stars are and beyond, then do it. Then you may define metric! Until then, you just muddy the waters.

 

[lesliedellow]

No, in any spacetime you dream up actually! If you have two points, (represent them with a y and z or any letter you want) where one is IN spacetime and the other is not, you cannot connect them in the way you may think. Period.

You are just displaying your ignorance of Relativity. No surprise there.

If you can show that a metric must include a spacetime like ours, where time is woven in a certain way, and another time and space, then you may define it! Until then, you muddy the waters.
3.)
4.)

You really don't know what a metric is, do you?

 

[dad]

You are just displaying your ignorance of Relativity. No surprise there.





You really don't know what a metric is, do you?

You missing the point on purpose? Is a metric in spacetime or not?