"Spirit of Truth" <juneharton@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:zke7m.11034$Jb1.4248@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com... > > "Whoever" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message > news:026d5af9$0$22120$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com... >> "Spirit of Truth" <juneharton@prodigy.net> wrote in message >> news:xmd7m.22684$iz2.16759@nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com... >>> >>> "Whoever" <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message >>> news:00780b0f$0$9718$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com... >>>> "Spirit of Truth" <juneharton@prodigy.net> wrote in message >>>> news:%eU6m.10991$Jb1.8457@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com... >>>>> >>>>> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:Bjx6m.781870$yE1.487073@attbi_s21... >>>>>> Spirit of Truth wrote: >>>>>>> Corrected typos: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:LJf5m.776484$yE1.160977@attbi_s21... >>>>>>>> Spirit of Truth wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The physical universe all around you is it's own experiment, you >>>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>>> have to open your eyes to see it. And no, my understanding is >>>>>>>>> completely >>>>>>>>> correct. Since things change, they change from an earlier >>>>>>>>> condition. >>>>>>>>> That condition has ceased to be. Similar to the future, it is yet >>>>>>>>> to be. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> When SR falsely posits lack of simultaneity _the universe_ >>>>>>>>> falsifies it. >>>>>>>>> There is no block universe which lack of simultaneity demands. >>>>>>>>> Your "experiments" are misconceived. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Spirit of Truth >>>>>>>> Dear Spirit-- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I would like you to watch... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The Mechanical Universe series. >>>>>>>> http://www.learner.org/resources/series42.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 42. The Lorentz Transformation >>>>>>>> If the speed of light is to be the same for all observers, then >>>>>>>> the length of a meter stick, or the rate of a ticking clock, >>>>>>>> depends on who measures it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and report back to me what the half-hour program says about >>>>>>>> simultaneity or the lack thereof. You can use email if you like. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -Sam >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yes, an excellent presentation. Yes, I was aware of all that. There >>>>>>> was >>>>>>> one mistake in verbiage when it was first mentioned that >>>>>>> simultaneneity >>>>>>> was out between the person at rest and the traveller, didn't make it >>>>>>> clear >>>>>>> that it was what one frame was thinking happened in the other frame. >>>>>>> The truth, as later noted, was that BOTH frames seeing themselves at >>>>>>> rest >>>>>>> see the light in their frames being received simultaneously, which >>>>>>> is what >>>>>>> I have posted often here. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> OK, Spirit, you looked at Lesson 42: The Lorentz Transformation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now if the speed of light is to be the same for all inertial >>>>>> observers (as indicated by the Michelson-Morley experiment) the >>>>>> equations for time and space are not difficult to find. But what do >>>>>> they mean? They mean that the length of a meter stick, or the rate of >>>>>> ticking of a clock depends on who measure it. >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you use the Lorentz Transformation to work problems relating >>>>>> time or space intervals in different reference frames? >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you give some of the hypothetical explanations put forward to >>>>>> account for the Michelson-Morley experiment? >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you discuss the concept of length contraction? >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you understand and use spacetime diagrams? >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you define and discuss the concept of simultaneity? >>>>>> >>>>>> o Can you define and discuss clock synchronization? >>>>>> >>>>>> Spirit, If you can't do these things, then you don understand the >>>>>> relevant material related to the Lorentz Transform. >>>>> >>>>> ................................................................................................... >>>>> .................................................................................................. >>>>> Sam, stop being so stubborn. Yes, I completely understand the >>>>> reason for time dilation, length contraction and the rest and Lorentz >>>>> and the rest. >>>>> >>>>> However, you need to confront that lack of simultaneity is FALSE >>>> >>>> Why .. how do you know? How would the universe be different if it were >>>> true? >>>> >>>>> and so, really, whether you realize it or not, YOU have a problem >>>>> with defense of the indefensible. >>>> >>>> You've not shown it to be wrong. >>>> >>>>> Obviously, a person who actually >>>>> understood as much as I understand would have to agree to a >>>>> blockhead universe and a zillion incarnations of himself >>>> >>>> No.. just one >>>> >>>>> and that >>>>> he was just a puppet of an bleak and barren universe. >>>> >>>> Its the same universe as we see now .. no more or less bleak or barren >>>> than what it is. >>>> >>>> You seem to have some odd misconeptions. >>> >>> .............................................................................................. >>> ............................................................................................... >>> >>> You appear to have trouble understanding the written word. >> >> None at all >> >>> Go back to basics and restudy.Make sure you get all the definitions >>> defined >>> clearly for yourself as you go. >> >> So you're playing for time and trying to distract from the questions >> >> How could you tell if the universe is block or not. What would you find >> different to what you see now if it was (or if it wasn't). > > You would be simply a blockhead, troll.
So all you can do is post insults. That would imply you have no valid logical reason for your position
> Spirit of Truth >> >> Unless you can answer that successfully, you have no logic behind you for >> claiming that it is manifest that the universe if not block. >> >> Are you able to support your claims?
Clearly the answer to my question is "no". You're no scientist, or philosopher, in that case. Just a rude person.
