Char lie Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 If the man in the rocket suffer no more acceleration, then, it's the same as if he was the one resting and the other moving from him. Twins... that maintain both of them into the same space-time dimension. But in this case, when the movement stops, they should have the same age... to this we must notice that one his actually moving. Giving a direction... as universe is expanding at various speeds, the maximum being light speed, the one moving at light speed would actually slow down his time to 0 when light speed max is reached. Common mistake about light speed is to consider a max for it. Max if Inifinity. We can only observe a range of speed I would call material light speed. Universal time variation= 0 We suffer time because we are not able to consider light speed! To have a conscious of it... so our universe expand slower than the real universe. That difference gives us "time". Time is just the consequence of an error between the real universe and what we can perceive of it. The more you can see, the slower time goes. And that counts for everyone. We re living in the same space time, but, depending on your intellectual skills, time stretches from one to the other. Cheers. Charles Rouffilange -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 If the man in the rocket suffer no more acceleration, then, it's the same as if he was the one resting and the other moving from him. Twins... that maintain both of them into the same space-time dimension. But in this case, when the movement stops, they should have the same age... to this we must notice that one his actually moving. On the contrary, if one of them stops they must accelerate and this breaks the symmetry of the time dilation in the two frames. The accelerating person can no longer claim to be/have been at rest, and so their clock is the one which will have run slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Char lie Posted January 4, 2017 Author Share Posted January 4, 2017 First, before answering or emmitting any comments, it should be understood the topic. No offense, but, your answer just is the consequence of the frustration to not understand it because you're u can't. It's not because you cannot understand something that some one else cannot... So, when you say there is a max speed of light, you are already showing a lack of logic. First, it has to be specified "in an empty space". Second, as you still seems to wonder about what space is made of, how could you possibly take it as a reference for any debate. The max speed you are talking about is just the max measurable speed. The soeed in the material domain. Kind of like aerodynamics with compressible and uncompressible. You saying these make me think a lot of the people who told once to Galilée that he was wrong, and as well people thinking at the time that max speed would be 100km/h... or even max speed is the speed of sound... Howcome we are still stuck with this obvious things? So, demonstrate me the max soeed of light any domain and if you are right, i ll be happy too, because you will have tought me something new... But i doubt it. Humbly and sincerely honest. No offense. I don't speculate and that's my curse. Regards. -2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 (edited) So, demonstrate me the max soeed of light any domain and if you are right, i ll be happy too, because you will have tought me something new... "c is the maximum speed at which all matter and hence information in the universe can travel." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_light Now how about you show some support for these things you are making up? Edited January 4, 2017 by Strange Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Char lie Posted January 4, 2017 Author Share Posted January 4, 2017 Why are you so offensive? This just theory. Let's take it easy, and enjoy new perspectives.. that's funny that such a thing makes you so angry... Might be because only the truth can hurt.. sorry about that. Didn't mean to. So I retract my theory and let you enjoy the dark. Regards. And yes you can block me. But think about it: "what would you be showing if you would?" -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 No offense. I don't speculate and that's my curse. Pray, are you cursed with supporting your claims with evidence? That would be a nice thing about now. As opposed to the fallacy of shifting the burden of proof, which is what you've cursed us with. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Char lie Posted January 4, 2017 Author Share Posted January 4, 2017 I'll do my best. But, looks like there is a whole education to be redone with you, so, I won't waste my time. All you learned came from other people. Communication isn't perfect so by definition, you cannot get the full idea someone wants to transmit. So your knowledges you try to play with don't belong to you. And you think you understand??? Ok. Good bye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Why are you so offensive? This just theory. Because you offend with this statement. It's like telling a professional athlete how he should compete and then asking why he's so offended since it's just a game. Theory isn't guesswork. Theory is the highest form of scientific explanation. You don't understand what theory means in science if you can say, "This just theory". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Why are you so offensive? I'm sorry if you find it offensive to have your errors exposed. But .... well, tough. that's funny that such a thing makes you so angry... What makes you think I am angry? I see nothing to get cross about. (People come here and post nonsense all the time. No point getting excited about it.) This just theory. Let's take it easy, and enjoy new perspectives.. It is not a theory. A theory is a detailed mathematical description that is confirmed by multiple lines of evidence. A false assertion that things can go faster then light is almost the exact opposite of a theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 ! Moderator Note Note: split from http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/102113-time-dilation/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now