dad

On 5/30/2015 at 7:11 PM, Mordred said:

This question is amongst one of the most commonly asked questions in relativity.

I guess the answer is science doesn't know. Why guess?

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

WOW!

Citation please!

Project much? 

I'm not sure what you mean, your sentence makes no sense... 

 

Who says they did? 

Prove it... 

Prove it... 

Since you say nothing your post, what can I say? The idea that nature was the same on earth in the past is not a fact or real knowledge or science. It is a belief.

I suspect that in the former nature (different according to history and scripture records) evolving occurred to living animals and man. I suspect that most animals on the planet and mankind could not leave remains, therefore no fossilized remains. That means that stringing together what life existed using the fossil record is a joke. It also means genetica vcannot trace back to the former world and time. That means you have nothing but religion pal.

1 hour ago, beecee said:

Quote

The usual unsupported rhetoric. When will you support what you claim?

 

My claim is that we do not know what nature was like (laws and forces) on earth in the far past. That is supported by your fail to be able to support a claim it was the same. I win.

 

Quote

The theory of evolution is fact. There is no doubt in that regard 

Not true. TOE is a foolish fable based on beliefs and ignorance and misinterpreting the fossil and genetic records etc.

Quote

 

 

Many scientific theories are so well-established that no new evidence is likely to alter them substantially

 

 

Don't try and ride the coattails of actual science or knowledge. The theory of evolution is neither. Yes evolving did and does happen. No, we do not share ancestors with flatworms.

 

Quote

. For example, no new evidence will demonstrate that the Earth does not orbit around the sun (heliocentric theory),

This is news?

 

Quote

or that living things are not made of cells (cell theory),

That does not help your fable.

18 minutes ago, beecee said:

Quote

I support that which is backed by the observational and experimental evidence.

Then start anytime pal. I see nothing yet that even relates to what time is like in the distant universe.

 

Quote

It's a model, that is overwhelmingly  supported by four main observational pillars. The fantasy I leave for you. TIP: Learn some science and how and why theories are constructed. 

You have ONE observation point in all the universe. Nothing supports that time is the same in the whole universe, and you have posted nothing.

 

Quote

If you did some research, you would know it was a Belgian priest who is known as the father of the BB.

You serious?? That is not news and who cares?

 

 

Quote

Again, perhaps you need to research what a scientific theory really is, and how it gains in certainty, as it continues to match the observational and experimental data...eg: GR and the discovery of gravitational waves from billions of L/years distant. In fact that certainty is now fact with the evolution of life. Are you doubting the theory of gravity? Because its still "only" a theory. 

There is light that gets bent out there. Apparently it seems like it must be gravity that had to have bent it. Nothing out there exists that could bend light eh? As for gravity, we need to know actual distances to stars to get the size and mass etc. That way we might have some inkling as to how much gravity is actually at work! Sorry, your religion is circular and belief based. Sorry you thought it was actual science.

 

Quote

The case for space and time is a logical, common sense application of the BB, and GR, 

 

In other words you try to apply fishbowl time to the unknown universe. You also try to apply fishbowl space. Neither are known to exist in all the universe that is only believed. Period. As for GR that is relative to the fishbowl only. It doesn't even deal with what time actually is in any event!

 

Quote

and what we know has transpired since. As mentioned before Intervals of space and time considered separately are not the same for all observers, due to the consistency/invariance of the speed of light.

You have only one observer. One observation point in all the universe. You have just projected!

 

Quote

Yes, we have evidence to support that, GPS satellites for one and the allowances made in line with GR. 

Irellevant since the fishbowl is not in question or how space and time here work here!

 

Quote

We again have no reason, or application of logic to doubt that time will always pass at 1 second per second within any FoR, when observed from that frame. Learn some science, would be great for you and your attitude.

 

In other words you have no clue whatsoever about any time out of the fishbowl. No fishbowl logic or doubt or belief matters!

 

Quote

The laws of physics are indisputable.

Show how time is a law of physics!? Get real.

 

Quote

No space exists observationaly everywhere we look...the space between stars and planets etc.

? No space exists? What would you call where the stars are...strawberry custard?

 

Quote

You have already been told about proof in science.

You have been told to stop peddling your beliefs as science. Of course no proof exists that time is the same in all the universe. Your problem is that no evidence exists either. No tests. No observations!

 

Quote

So far the observable universe is around 94 billion L/years in diameter of space,

Foolish dream and unsupportable religion.

 

Quote

and we have absolutely no reason to doubt that allowing for time dilation and length contraction, that the space at our observable horizon is the same as the space between Earth and Mars.

No one cares what you doubt or believe! The issue is whether you know time is the same in all the universe. You do not. Period.

On 5/22/2019 at 1:50 PM, beecee said:

Here is a recent article on that matter........

https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/news/863/nasa-study-reproduces-origins-of-life-on-ocean-floor/

NASA Study Reproduces Origins of Life on Ocean Floor:

 

Scientists have reproduced in the lab how the ingredients for life could have formed deep in the ocean 4 billion years ago. The results of the new study offer clues to how life started on Earth and where else in the cosmos we might find it.

A time-lapse video of a miniature hydrothermal chimney forming in the lab, as it would in early Earth's ocean. Natural vents can continue to form for thousands of years and grow to tens of yards (meters) in height. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Flores

Astrobiologist Laurie Barge and her team at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, are working to recognize life on other planets by studying the origins of life here on Earth. Their research focuses on how the building blocks of life form in hydrothermal vents on the ocean floor.

To re-create hydrothermal vents in the lab, the team made their own miniature seafloors by filling beakers with mixtures that mimic Earth's primordial ocean. These lab-based oceans act as nurseries for amino acids, organic compounds that are essential for life as we know it. Like Lego blocks, amino acids build on one another to form proteins, which make up all living things.

more at link.....

Big news: Scientists place several pieces off spaghetti on table and envision how the spaghetti monster may have formed billions of imaginary years ago. Wow.

On 5/22/2019 at 11:24 AM, Moontanman said:

The evidence is in the fossil record and the genetic record.

No it is not. Your beliefs imposed and foisted onto the record are all that you considered evidence. The fossil record is not known to have been laid down in the present nature. Nor are genes today known to have existed the same in the past.

On 6/20/2019 at 3:54 AM, Polinski said:

How come a peterbilt 18 wheel semi has cylinders just like a smart car.  Are they decended from a common ancestor or did their creators just use the most logical best working parts.

 

Face it  mammals are machines just like cars, only they were designed to reproduce and better themselves without further help from the builder.

 

There is zero possibility of hundreds of thousands of dna lines happening in the mud randomely to form the simplest protozoan

 

Why do people believe in mathematical impossibility

Because they have chosen lies.

On 6/19/2019 at 8:41 PM, Moontanman said:

Neither but both do at some point have a common ancestor, probably back in the triassic or jurassic 

False.

34 minutes ago, beecee said:

Quote

I don't indulge in fables, myths or conspiracy no matter how warm and fuzzy it makes me feel inside.

Then feel free to support the claims as science.

 

Quote

The BB was the evolution of space and time, as we know them, and what transpired since.

Nice story. You have seen no time but in the fishbowl. No space either. In both cases you do not even know what they are! Your claim they 'evolved' in some fantasy far away and long ago is a fable and unsupportable.

 

Quote

So  much so, that even the Catholic church has seen the need to recognise the BB along of course with the theory of evolution of life.

Meaningless. Like we'd ask a priest, a plumber a politician or a pedophile?

Quote

One of the first things you learn in science is that all theories, while being the model that best suits all the available evidence at that time, are never set in concrete and always open for changes, modifications, and/or scrapping altogether. It aligns with our observational and experimental data at any one time, not just faith.

 You should learn how to say I don't really know.

Quote

Wrong! Your religion as I suggested, simply has you ignoring all the evidence and the scientific methodology and logic that goes with it.

Nothing to ignore. You have not shown that time is the same in the far universe. Why pretend?

1 hour ago, MigL said:

You made a promise on Apr 15, 2016...

"Because of biased unfair lying mods I am closing my profile account now."

And you've broken that promise.
Very un-Christian of you.

We don't come to your Christian forum and argue without faith
Why do you need to come to our Science forum and argue with no  evidence.

Changed my mind. You have another chance. four years  is a long time.

32 minutes ago, swansont said:

Quote

As you have admitted, we know the rules “in the fishbowl” i.e. there is nothing about local spacetime that would change the behavior of the signal. If anything happens in transit, we should see it.

In other words you admit knowing what time is like here, but not anywhere else. Yout approach and special appeal is basically 'hey, it is like that in the fishbowl so it golly gee must be the same in all the universe;.

 

Quote

What we don’t see is a change in behavior while in transit that’s inconsistent with the laws being universal.

Forget laws, we were talking about time. You cannot see time.

So make no claims that time is the same everywhere.

 

Quote

Show us the math.

Easy. Here it is..  ?=? Now admit it.

 

Quote

All the evidence is that time and space are homogeneous 

Except you forgot to post...any at all! So what we should believe blindly what you believe??

1 hour ago, MigL said:

You made a promise on Apr 15, 2016...

"Because of biased unfair lying mods I am closing my profile account now."

And you've broken that promise.
Very un-Christian of you.

We don't come to your Christian forum and argue without faith
Why do you need to come to our Science forum and argue with no  evidence.

By the way I find it just as easy to get cowardly liars and phonies to ban me rather than doing the work myself.  They like to call anything out of their belief system personal views or whatever. That is because they cannot honestly debate and have no case and can'r debate worth a darn, and are biased and ignorant while pretending they represent knowledge or actual science.

13 minutes ago, beecee said:

Quote

What do you  mean forget space? It is not made up, it is what evolved with time at t+10-43 seconds. 

Or what was created...whatever. Believe what you like. I happen to know the reasons that that fable exist, so you can preach elsewhere.

 

Quote

By the way, space is interchangeable with time..

Prove it.

 

Quote

.Intervals of space and time considered separately are not the same for all observers...that's relativity.

All observer sare in one tiny speck in the universe, so you have no observers anywhere else. (our solar system area)

 

Quote

You also seem rather hostile to any and all reasonable answers given to you. 

You thought your religion got to define what reasonable was? Ha.

1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

Quote

It's not so much a claim as predictions based on observation that have worked in every testable situation.

Except that by basing models on the belief it is a claim if you say the models are correct. You have also not tested what time was like in the far universe in any test. Face it. Otherwise, cite the test.

 

Quote

Theory is about the best available explanation, not about what is "known".

Well, theories can be tested. Beliefs can't. (at least science beliefs). Name the test for what time is like in far space?

 

Quote

If observation doesn't match the theory, the theory is changed.

What theory?! There is no theory that has been offered here that deals with time and the nature of time in the far universe.

 

Quote

But why change it when it works?

Anything that ever worked, or works is in the fishbowl. Nowhere else. Admit ignorance where it is appropriate.

1 hour ago, MigL said:

No I didn't make it up.
You brought it up in your quote from Wiki; which you don't seem to understand.
( I suggest re-reading and letting it sink in; or should I not bring up anything you don't understand )

Sorry, it is you that lacks understanding unlesss you demonstrate otherwise.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Quote

But you didn’t say you don’t know. You insinuated that momentum isn’t conserved.

Hey, you claimed it applies and I asked for support. No wiggling.

 

Quote

Anyway, since there is nothing “in the fishbowl” that would affect the light, then anything that happens to it must happen in deep space, or it must be different at the source

 

 

 

We do have time here in the fishbowl actually. It very much affects all we see. the speed of light, for example!

By the way, you claim that if time was different how do you propose that you would observe this!?

Quote

Where does time appear in a parallax measurement?

 

Time should appear but does not! They call is space or distance only. You see they take a huge swath of this fishbowl (solar system area) and then try to imagine it does not involve or include time! They draw a line to a star as if time and space were homogeneous. Unless they are, the measure is worthless. Since you don't seem to be able to prove that time is the same out there (or space) the claimed distances to stars and sizes etc are worthless.

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

You didn’t answer the question.

Again: the burden of proof is yours

 

There is no burden of anything for 'I don't know' Only those claiming they do know bear that puppy!

And I did answer the question. You see all light here in the fishbowl from anywhere.

You see, unless time existed the same out there, and space, there are no distances to any star known! So you are in posiyion to discuss from where.

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

Any physical space.
If it holds for differentiable symmetries over you street block, It holds everywhere the conditions are met.
And I suggest you read on about time translation symmetry.

Forget physical space you made that up.

You don't know what space is either!

I suggest you tell us how anything about time translation symetry applies to deep space. Otherwise do not bring it up again. Define 'physical' space and then prove it also exists in the fringes of the universe?

4 minutes ago, swansont said:

Where do photons we detect from distant galaxies come from, and do they traverse deep space?

 

Please learn how to use the quote function

You detect them from the fishbowl. Always.

3 minutes ago, swansont said:

You questioned conservation of momentum, which is equivalent to that symmetry.

So then, show us the experiment in deepest space that shows it is the same?

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

Because we can observe farther than we can send probes, see outside the fishbowl. I don't think you understand how relativity works, and I don't think you understand the predictive power of scientific methodology.

Yea, one light day. Big deal. By the way, if you think relativity tells us what time is, don't accuse others of not being familiar with it!

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

Noether's theorem ( look it up ) is a mathematical relationship.
Would you question if 2+2=4 in deep space ????

In wiki it mentions this regarding that theorem.

"This theorem only applies to continuous and smooth symmetries over physical space."

Need I point out that it does not even address time in deep space?

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

We've never observed spacetime behaving differently. Until we do, the null hypothesis states that physics doesn't behave fundamentally differently in different parts of the universe

You do realize you live here in the fishbowl? Why would time NOT behave the way it does here?

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

Quote

We send probes to places where we haven’t been before, and the laws of physics have held up just fine.

Yes time is the same in the fishbowl. You have sent probes no further that that!

Quote

You made the claim. It’s up to you to back it up, not up to me to prove you wrong.

To tell the truth, you mentioned the 'spatial translation' thing. I have only pointed out that we do not know what time is like in the rest of the universe. I never claimed it was any certain way.

2 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

 

Quote

These questions quickly then to get metaphysical.

Science gets into the metaphysical then, unless it knows!

 

 

Quote

Of course there could be an unknown and undetectable deity adjusting the laws of physics so that we observe just seems to match the models we have. For instance General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. But I do not think such speculations does not have much scientific value. 

You assume time is a physical value. No. That is a guess.

 

Quote

Since we can measure light and other electromagnetic radiation from all directions in space we know that the laws of physics seems to be consistent within the observable universe

Irrelevant.  All measures and observations are HERE IN the fishbowl in our time! That does not tell us what time is like anywhere else. If, for example, we observe that a decay seen in spectra takes 52 days of our time, that does not mean it involves that amount of time there. This is only assumed/believed.

 

 

Quote

. It seems unlikely that the universe is tuned in such a way that we on earth are in a unique position where the all the rest of the universe just looks to be predictable using a single set of laws. At this time it is more probable that the laws are the same in deep space, in every direction, as here.

If we establish that it is not known what time is like out there, whatever you deem likely loses all value.

 

Quote

AFAIK the measurements from LIGO will further strengthen this view; black hole mergers for instance, taking place millions of light years apart, also seems to follow one set of physical laws. 

No it won't. How would this even address what time itself out there is like!?

Quote

Voyager is also pretty far from earth at this time and I have seen no news that new physical laws are needed to explain what's happening out there.

Yes it is far, but still less than one little light DAY! That is the size of the fishbowl, and how far we can say we know about as fas as time.

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

Why does it have no bearing?

Because the area where man has been or sent probes toit could only have bearing if time were uniform and the same in all points in the universe. That is not known to be true. No observer has ever left the fishbowl! (the area where man has been, or has sent probes to)

Quote

Why would spatial translation symmetry not hold there?

Why would it, exactly?

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

A dimension.

12 minutes ago, swansont said:

A dimension.

OK, but that is something arbitrarily set. Time is not like length. Science does not know what time itself is.

11 minutes ago, beecee said:

I believe MigL has answered that.

No. He didn't. You see speed is basically something that happens in time. It tells us how much time is involved to move through space. If time were not the same out there, then we could not expect anything to take the same amount of time.

25 minutes ago, beecee said:

Just a correction....C is the symbol for Carbon. "c" is the symbol for the speed of light, or ceritis, the latin word for speed.

On your assumption....I'm pretty sure that the speed of light has been tested in a vacuum, and I'm pretty sure the result was "c"...So why do you suggest that this would change in deep space? 

Fair enough.

The problem is that whatever time is involved in light travel here where we test has no bearing to deep space...unless time there is the same. It does not prove time is the same it is just a clock in the fishbowl here.

The issue is not whether it should or should not be the same. The issue here is whether we know it is.

1 hour ago, MigL said:

A common misconception among people who don't understand science.
How do we know that there is air, if we don't see it ?
How do we know that microbes and virus ( virii ? ) cause disease if we don't see them ?

The various conservation laws ( mass-energy, linear and angular momentum, charge, etc. ) are a result of deeper symmetries.
If time didn't 'behave' the same ( within certain parameters ) at great distances, mass-energy would not be conserved.
And if moving through a distance caused a change in how things behave, we would not have momentum conservation.

 

Great. So, you know there is momentum conservation is deep space because..?

On 12/22/2019 at 8:22 AM, swansont said:

In physics, time is not a force that causes things to happen.

What would you say that time is in the realm of physics?

Or perhaps someone here thinks we do know C in deep space? If so, how?

To know any speed we need to know time. What time is like. On earth and the area of the solar system we do know that. We have probes that have gone almost one light day from here. Beyond this we do not really know what time is like. So, if time were not the same as here in this 'fishbowl', how we we know? We see and experience all things here in our time (and space_. Bottom line is that it is only assumed and believed that time is the same out in the distant universe.

One implication of this would be that nothing in the universe could be said to have taken millions or billions of our years to get here!

Fine with me, too.

link removed

.

 

Your bizarre brand of immature nihilism is totally unproductive and a complete waste of time. But if that is what makes you happy. <shrug>

 

Your belief in a same state past is a bizarre brand of immature nihilism is totally unproductive and a complete waste of time. Religion.

..

.. bizarre brand of immature nihilism is totally unproductive and a complete waste of time.

 

It's a shame some folks have to come into a discussion with such a chip on their shoulder. They pretend their ideas are what is offensive instead of their behavior. All we want to talk about are the ideas, but their attitude makes everything personal.

 

I hate seeing minds go to waste like this. Perhaps this is the perspective he learned from his "dad'? I don't think it's working.

Try proving the same state past or stop claiming one. No attitude needed. It is a belief with zero proof.

 

The problem with most so called skeptics isn't that they believe in evidence but that they believe in all the extrapolations and interpolations of that evidence. Reality exists within experimental results not in our models.

 

Most "skeptics" seem to believe what they're told even when the science behind it is "soup of the day".

If we want pagan philosophy we'll cal you I guess. I was hoping someone would try to evidence prove or support the same state past used by science and believed by science.

We have no reason to suspect that the laws of physics or chemistry have changed since the days of the early earth. We also have no evidence that the moon is made of green cheese, that dogs play poker (that one painting not withstanding) or that rats escape from test labs and form secret underground societies.

 

 

Or the same. Go figure. Why even talk if you can't take a position and defend it?

This is not a position based on faith, but rather a position based on a lack of evidence.

 

 

In the absence of evidence, the proper position to take as a scientist is that of the skeptic.

 

The absence of evidence is for the same state past.

link removed

Because of biased unfair lying mods I am closing my profile account now. You are fired.

When you knowingly break rules to which you agreed up front, it should come as no surprise when consequences ensue. Bye.

There can be no dealing with evil liars and would be bullies. Ignoramuses in disguise. They knowingly lied. They can go to hell.

I was lied to again by the mods and asked to not speak about time? Ha.

I prefer truth and honest to evil repression. Kids...run for you lives from here!!!

Very well, lets assume you're right.

Lets assume time passes at different rates in different areas of the universe, and could even be non-existent in some.

Lets examine the consequences.

 

We receive radiation from vast distances, the same spectral lines are common to this radiation other than it is red-shifted. That means the same elements are present in these far away galaxies, and we know how they react to give off this radiation.

Differing rates of time passage would inhibit these reactions, as we are not talking about relativistic time dilation but differing rates measured in that distant frame. We see the same spectral classes of stars ( and pulsars, and type 1A supernovae ) in distant galaxies as our own. We see no difference.

 

Areas where time is non-existent would exhibit very noticeable boundary effects as everything would be trapped at the boundary. Any and all particles, light included, would reach said boundary and stop as no time implies no events. Eventually these particles would accumulate around this boundary and begin to glow from the radiation heating. We notice no such effects.

 

Maybe next you'll advance the notion that stars and galaxies aren't really far away. They're actually close by but much smaller...

At least you're thinking. Now if time thinned in degree in some way as we got away from earth, we could not tell here. Here time is 'thick' or normal to us. Everything that comes in out time fishbowl has to obey OUR time space rules! No way to tell that way.

As for galaxies being small, since you cannot know the size anything goes. Why not? Big small, I could go with evidence if there was any.

Yeah right I forgot your the role model to higher learning and good behavior LMAO.

 

I'm done wasting my time have a good life

Thank you God. Let's hope you learned how little you know at least.

Why are we talking about angels lol.

Honestly the shows yet again a lack in your willingness to learn.

 

We were looking for something that might not follow normal rules out in the unknown, that you like to pretend is known.

 

 

The math works with observational evidence plain and simple. You can choose to deny that fact all you want.

 

No it does not. Only in little imaginary mind games. If there was no time your math is garbage. Useless. Off topic. The T in your formulas isn't there!

 

So quite frankly insulting me with regards to children makes you extremely petty.

 

No, I prefer kids get taught truth. So far you pretend to know it all and try to sound smart but are ignorant and preachy and zealous for beliefs..