@sqwale7 Yes. But in order to travel significatly into the future you would need to travel very very fast round something with a very large mass, such as a pulsar or black hole. then if you sat on your spacecraft for say 10 years travelling at close to the speed of light... when you return to earth it will be maybe 100 years into the future.
time dilation is the most stupidest idea ever along with the mass dilation and length contractions. people have to stop taking everything they hear as a fact and think outside the box and no...einstine didnt thin outside the box. if you really think about it, its the circuits and its elements that are running the clock on the plane. Have they ever thought about looking into that and how maybe a gravitational field effects circuits and hence the time delay?
@ThePariky -If mass dilation isn't real, why do particle accelerators have to ramp up the magnetic field strength in a ratio to the mass of the particle being accelerated and it's increase in velocity. It's increased inertia is as if it's mass had increased, indistinguishable from one another.
@ThePariky Every GPS in the world is proof that relativity does work. When they build them they have to take relativity into account, if they didn't, they wouldn't be accurate.
But of course, a YouTuber can destroy in a single comment, what scientists have proven over decades of experiments. You really think they didn't take those things into account when performing this experiment?
Still think you're right? Explain "its the circuits and its elements that are running the clock on the plane."
Time dialation theory doesnt prove time is not constant it just proves that nothing is constant enough to use as an accurate measure of even intevals of time. Time is a concept. It is consistent because we make it consistent. It doesnt matter that atomic particles decay slower when moving at a faster rate of speed. This just means speed is somehow effecting how fast it decays. The same amount of time has passed at atomic particles at rest.
Moving an "ATOMIC CLOCK" from one gravitational field through another effects the atomic decay! NOT TIME ITSELF! (Look up GRAVITATIONAL FEILD DISTORTION on google) To actually prove Time Dilation, you would have to approach 186,000 miles a second!!!! A MERE hundred miles an hour is UN - RECORDABLE. You all are being duped!!! Time does not move or change. It is only our personal perspective relative to the object. High school science is 60 years out-of-date!!!
The first time anyone got a real sense of the speed of light is when they monitored how long it took light to reach one of the planets in our solar system after it came out of a direct eclipse from its moon, then using geometry they were able to closely narrow it down to what we know the speed of light is today!and the only time they say light goes slower is in the case of n=c/v "light through a meterial" this is also known as refractive index, look up Ole Romer
light has a speed and the speed of light is calculated by distance over time so therefore light is bound by the same priciples of time that we are all bound by! case closed, now we can stop wasting money!
To have a time dilation (even in the billionth of a second) you would have to move at near the speed of light! What happened in video is gravitational fluctuation. The change in atoms moving in a magnetic field! THE ATOMS MOVED. NOT TIME!
@braxinIV It has to do with the different space-time frames of the objects. Those objects when moving through the same amount of space, move through a different amount of time and when moving through a same amount of time, move through a different amount of space.
Go look up special relativity online. There are many tutorials.
@Aviatorsmith Time is a constant! Our perspective of time changes by outside influence (gravitation and magnetic) This experiment was discarded as false. Science books should be updated!
@nohumanchips Relativity has never been proven false. Time is not a constant. A constant is something with the same quantity in all fields of perception.
@nohumanchips Depends on how you define "time is a constant". Yes, time can be a constant inside if you say that you are travelling at constant speed in an airplane, without relative comparisons to things which is different from the situation I've mentioned . No, time is not a constant if you compare it relatively to, let's say, something which is moving and something which is not moving. And also to add, "perspective of time changes" is judged by the brain(bored=time slow, happy=time fast).
@deshaebeasley When they say the speed of light, they are referring to a number. 3x10^8 m/s. speed of light is a speed limit. Their not talking about light its self.
Here's a paradox for all you believers....you say the faster you travel in a, lets say a spaceship, the more "time" slows down.....I say....that doesn't necessarily mean that a "person" traveling in that spaceship ages less...!?!?!?
The person in the spaceship does not experience the effects of time dilation. If you are traveling at 99% of the speed of light relative to the earth, people on earth will observe you moving 7 times slower than you would on earth. You also weigh (approx) 7 times more, you also contract 7 times (flatten like a pancake). But you, inside the spaceship, don't feel any difference unless you accelerate. Its just like when you're in a car, you don't feel anything unless you accelerate.
Excuse me but you never enlightened me on how you (or anyone else) know what the speed of light is and whether or not it is "always" "going" the same speed....lol....there is absolutely no proof of how fast light "travels" and what dictates it's speed and/or it's maximum speed ("C" supposedly) , there's no way at all to measure it........please humor me and explain !!!
You're like a perpetual bullshit machine. You somehow manage to include something absolutely wrong in every single comment. Were you bred for trolling in some secret lab? The speed of light isn't important, it just happens to travel at C, so its used as a visual aid in explanations about what happens when something approaches C. What dictates the speed of light? Good question, but there isn't a good answer. Its just the way the universe works, some cosmological speed limit.
@SpeakingSerpent You're like debating the authenticity of the bible with someone so narrow minded they use quotes from the bible to prove it's genuinely true, that is ridiculous, just like you using all these figures and "assumed correct data" you are using all this data that someone fabricated out of the blue, no proof what so ever to back up any of these theories, you don't satisfactorily answer any of my questions, you just start spouting off shit. Who & how was the speed of light measured.
Lets talk evidence, shall we? What evidence do you have that the universe has a constant time, different than the dilation that Einstein explained and scientists proved? Yet, you, without a shred of evidence, are absolutely convinced that time dilation is impossible? Why don't you provide evidence that shows that? How about starting with this video. Why did the clocks lose sync? How did Einstein predict it? You're fanatically delusional with "I'm right, the experiments are wrong".
@SpeakingSerpent I simply ask for any shred of proof of anything you believe....you can't provide any so your kind get extremely frustrated....just like talking to a thumper about his bible beliefs vs evolution.....they do the same thing, their beliefs are totally illogical but they believe it no matter what......actually they're too scared to even consider any other possibility.....they're fanatics / extremists...very dangerous (hence: witch hunts) very scary like Muslims !!!
Measuring the speed of light is pretty much just about the same as measuring the speed of your car. A bit more complex but same theory. It's 299792.458km/s and it's more than 100y/o news.
Obviously you have no idea about physic. It's called physic is becuase it's physical. Dah! You make a physical observation and you try to explain why.
No one's asking you to believe with blind faith but do your own research. If you can learn physic on Youtube why would people go to college.
@Sonobody123 I wasn't trying to learn anything.....I was trying to enlighten people like you....hoping you would start thinking logically instead of following the rest of the sheep....right over the cliff. I'm not even sure that light "travels" anywhere, depending on how long the universe has been in existence, no one nows how many stars there are out there that we can't see do to them burning out, omitting no light at all and right next to a star we can see.
Judging by the amount of things you don't know, can I assume you slept through your science classes in high school?
Sure they don't show you those papers about how they found out the temperature/size/mass of stars across the universe. But how light works is like grade 7-8 stuffs. Like those simple reflection and refraction experiments. And how telescope works. Then you have wavelength and spectrum further on. Did u sleep throught all that?
@Sonobody123 Why don't you humor me and briefly explain how the speed of light was measured......not how strange my theories are or how ignorant I must be or how smart people like you "college drunks" are....just simply explain to me in factual terms of how anyone measured the speed of light....!! Not some fantasy chit or that's just what a professor told you.......or you read somewhere......actual factual documentation. It can't be done and you know it, or should !!
@jhhwingnut astronauts have attached a mirror to a rock on the moon; scientists on earth can aim a laser at this mirror and measure the travel time of the laser pulse--about two and a half seconds for the round trip. (The idea behind this experiment is not so different from Galileo's, if you think about it...) And anyone who measures the speed of light, at any time, using any method, always gets the same result: just slightly less than 300,000 kilometers per second.
@kurozaki45 You like everyone else say they all come up with the same figure for the speed of light.....but you all fail to answer my question "how can you measure the speed of light" . Who are these "anyones" you say have measured the speed of light, and what are "all these methods" used to do it you mentioned. Do you really believe an astronaut left a mirror on the Moon that we can hit with a laser......we don't even have a laser beam dense enough to travel that distance and hit a mirror !
@jhhwingnut youre just embarrassing yourself by replying back seriously your logic is very flawed this anyones are scientists and engineers and if you have no clue of the subject just investigate yourself and do your own research and your own experiments if youre weary of these "anyones" you will see that you will get the same result because for something to become a constant like the speed of light people have to be able to reproduce it and get the same result did you not go to college?
@kurozaki45 Well you must be a real whizkid, although your writing wouldn't confirm that, if it's so simple to "reproduce it" like you suggest.....why can't you enlighten us all and explain how you simply do that....it's because you can't, you a real whizkid "wanabe", you haven't got a clue how it could be done......because it can't.
@jhhwingnut Equipment required A PC with PicoScope installed An ADC-200/50 or ADC200/100 PC based oscilloscope A fibre optic transmitter and receiver unit with a method of high frequency square modulation in the region of 250 kHz to 1 MHz. Suitable leads and connectors. Ready made fibre optics apparatus is manufactured by Lascells Ltd and is available as product 280-216 from: Technology Supplies Ltd. Phoenix House, Tern Hill, Market Drayton, Shropshire, UK. Tel. +44 1630 637300
@jhhwingnut This apparatus contains the transmitter and receiver with internal modulator together with monitoring sockets for the oscilloscope. Also included are a 5 m and 20 m fibre optic cable.
A solid state, square wave oscillator running at 1 MHz will produce a signal with a 1µs period and a square pulse lasting 0.5 µs. If this signal is used to modulate a light beam which passes along a fibre optic cable we get a pulse of light lasting 0.5 µs. A phototransistor can detect the pulse at the other end of the cable and convert it back into a pulse of electricity. The two electrical pulses (the original and the received one) can then be
@jhhwingnut be displayed on an oscilloscope screen. Since the light takes a finite amount of time to reach the receiver the second signal will be delayed in time (dt) and the received pulse will be shifted along the timebase axis. If we measure this shift it will tell us how long the light pulse took to travel the length of the fibre optic cable and hence the speed of the light can be calculated if the cable length is known.
Since light travels at about 300 million metres per second in air if our fibre optic cable is 30 m long we would be looking for a time delay of 0.1 µs. A 50 MHz (or better) oscilloscope is required.
When we monitor the electrical pulses we are measuring the delay between transmitted and received electrical signals not the light pulses. If there is any time required for the conversion of light to electricity or vice versa then this would
@jhhwingnut introduce errors into the calculation.
At high frequencies “square waves” become rounded due to stray capacitances and non-linear responses of the converters. The precise edge of the pulses is often lost.
Arrange the fibre optic system to transmit a high frequency modulated light beam along the cable which should be about 5 m or so in length. Couple the receiver unit to the cable. Monitor the transmitted pulse at Channel A on the Pico ADC and the received pulse at Channel B.
The photograph shows the LASCELLS equipment connected as described and the results given later were taken from this apparatus.
Switch on both the transmitter and receiver and select GO on the oscilloscope screen. Adjust the amount of pre-trigger and reselect GO until a trace is obtained which shows the “square” transmitted pulse and the received, much more rounded, pulse shifted to the right. When you are familiar with the pulse shapes, reset the timebase to as short a time possible to display the two leading edges of the pulses or the two trailing edges. Save and
@jhhwingnut Switch off both units and replace the 5 m cable with a 2 0m cable. Switch on again and repeat the experiment making timebase adjustments as required. Save and print again. You should find that the second print-out, with the longer cable, has a larger delay between the two pulses. (PicoScope rulers or automated measurements can be used here to help with the time measurement).
If there are time delays in any part of the electronics then these delays should be the same for both experiments with the 5 m and 20 m cables. The only difference between the two experiments is that the light had to travel a further 15 m in the second case. If we measure dt from each print-out then subtracting one from the other should give the amount of time taken to travel the extra 15 m.
How does this result compare with the speed of light in air?
Investigate the definition of the term Refractive Index and see whether you can calculate an approximate value for the expected speed of light along the fibre optic cable. (The Refractive Index of the polymer used is about 1.6)
@kurozaki45 Very interesting.....I'm surprised there is any equipment that could measure that precisely given the extreme speeds and using such a small length of fibre optic cable, At those speeds your calculations seem extremely slow, when you figure that it has been said light travels to the Moon and back in approximately 2.5 sec. hummm.....and in your excersize you say you're comparing the the difference between 5m & 20m. Refraction is kinda like the "resistance" in electric wire right ?
I don't know which century you're born in but equipments like that's been around for quite a few decades. Our society is built around these very equipments and the "theories" you are denying now. Ever wonder how Youtube works? You probably own an iphone. What do you think it operates with analog signals?
PS: Refraction is nothing like resistance in electric wire. If you struggle with these grade 5 science, you're not quite ready for relativity.
@Sonobody123 Obviously you missed the point, it is quite simple to send and measure radio waves, but it is quite another task to measure something of that awesome speed....I have to disagree....measuring the speed of light is know ordinary "excercise".....and I don't believe you can do it with an oscilloscope and 20' of fiberoptic cable, just like I don't believe Armstrong & "Buzzyboi" brought back 100lb's of "moon rocks" in that tiny tinfoil & papermache spacecraft wanabe...!!
Obviously YOU missed the point, mate. Just because you haven't seen one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I pointed out the example of an iphone cos' it's a gadget of the day and you obviously have seen one. Microwave is a form of light. So is boardband. Your computer or iphone sends and picks up billions of signal per second and you still think scientist don't have equipments to detect light within a microsecond? Like I said, it's over 100y/o news.
What do you specialise in misinterpreting people's words? What I mean is your computer operates at a few GHz. Do you understand what that means? It means it does one calculation within a fraction of a nanosecond. So stop questioning if it's possible to detect light with an accuracy of a microsecond.
Let's take a GPS for example. It record the time difference between electromagnetic signal, aka light, received from different satelites. By simple trigonomatry you can calculate your own location.
Without the knowledge of the speed of light, or if it's true you suggested light doesn't even travel at all, there wouldn't be a GPS.
@Sonobody123 LOL....GPS has nothing to do with light or the speed of it.......it simply plots your position by measuring the changing lengths of time it takes for a radio wave signal to make a round trip from satelite to GPS back to satelite, only when there are more than two sats. available, this is called "triangulation" and has been used for centuries in one form or another, for navigation of aircraft and sea going vessels.
A GPS is like a sonar that uses light waves instead of sound. But I double you even know what a "radio wave signal" is.
Either you're being a total smart as' or you're just a total dumb as'. Do you seriously think you're the only person in the world to realise that speed of light is a lie.
Please save yourself the embarrassment and finish high school before you argue about relativity.
@Sonobody123 You idiot...oscilloscopes have been around since the early 1900's used for measuring electrical impulses mainly, electrical current wave changes......my phone operates on microwaves (radio waves)....what does yours operate on.....a hand crank.....or mind control like your alien buddys.....lol....refraction is very simular to resistance in as much as it changes a properties oringinal data......whether speed or color !!
How do the results compare when trailing edges are used in the calculation?
No mention has been made of errors in the measurements. Estimate the errors in all measurements and establish the estimated accuracy of the final result.
@SpeakingSerpent Your really important statement here is this one : "Good question, but there isn't a good answer. Its just the way the universe works, some cosmological speed limit." <<This is what I'm talking about, when you back a Theoretical physicist" into a corner for just a shred of tangible proof....they can't.....they just say like you just did "Its just the way the universe works"....(he really means, "that's what I've been told") .
You conveniently skipped my OTHER really important statement, "The speed of light isn't important". Atomic clocks don't rely on how accurately we define the speed of light. And even if they did, we know the speed of light to such an accuracy it wouldn't even matter.
And this is what I'm talking about, when you back a moron in a corner that cites a lack of evidence (with a video proving Einstein was correct, mind you) they leap to desperate defenses when presented with them.
@SpeakingSerpent This video proves nothing.....I could come up with a bunch of hairbrain statements just like anyone else......"last summer I secretly built a small spaceship in my basement, very complex & highly sophisticated (alien technology).......one night I flew it to the Moon and back, about three times the speed of light, the faster I went the greener my feet got......I guess it had something to do with hi-speed light waves, just a theory.....but you surely believe me......right...!?!
The above statement / theory is stupid and totally "unproveable" just like the ones you believe about Einsteins time warping/dilation.......by the way.....people like you will shit your pants when you find out alien ships travel much faster than light beyond our atmospere.....actually what you believe is childs play...!!!
The first Postulate of Relativity is that the laws of physics are the same for all uniformly moving observers. That means a constant velocity (not accelerating). The second Postulate of Relativity is that the speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion relative to the source.
Read about the Michelson–Morley experiment in 1887. Or find a comic book or cartoon, whatever you learn from.
You seem to be enjoying ignorance, I hope I'm not ruining your fun. Actually, the Michelson-Morley experiment was an attempt to prove a different hypothesis, one that turned out to be false by their definition. So in fact, they didn't make their "theory" more believable, they totally debunked it. And that fact is what Einstein used in his research papers. That was in 1887, what century do you live in? You're the most ignorant person I've ever spoken with. Such denial, incredible...
MY punctuation??? Look at yours! what's with all the ellipses? Yeah, I know omitting capital letters ath the beginning of the sentence, but that has NOTHING to do with not knowing where a sentence ends, i just hate pressing shift every time i begin a new sentence, i am to lazy and impatient for that. That's all! now, the error you keep repeating in your shitty comments CANNOT be considered a typo or any other coincidence- what the fuck is "grammEr". You've wrote TWICE in ONE day!
Also GPS receivers uses the equations of relativity to account for the effects of relativity. The GPS receiver must be tuned to a slightly higher frequency 10.23 MHz than the frequency emitted by the satellites in orbit ~10.22999999543 MHz. This isn't a controversial topic anymore. So let's all stop with the bullshit. Einstein is right about our space-time fabric.
@jhhwingnut as an addition to my previous comment, the Bible is bullshit. it's full of lies and crap that's been shoved down my throat up to now. i've been reading a lot of physics books and articles recently. They are convincing and i refuse to believe in fairy-tales anymore.
@rhillner What...? What do you think changes about time.....this should be interesting.....please feel free to explain to me why time would change......no one can explain that to me....thats because "time" doesn't change.....it is an intangible on going property of our existence.....we simply "choose" to measure it......these theorys are as silly as saying time will stop if i remove all the clocks in my house.....if I can't "see" the time...then it must be stopped....how silly...!!!
@rhillner Study what.....Einsteins theory says that the faster you go the more "time" slows down.....one of the professors said on one of these videos said that if he was away in a space ship for 10 years, he would have only aged 9 years......THAT is bullchit...!!! And the professor never said anything about how fast the ship was going the entire time.....what if you only traveled for a couple days, stayed there for 10 years, then returned to earth.....maybe you can explain it ??
You don't experience time dilation relative to yourself. If you fly in a ship for 99% of the speed of light relative to the earth for 1 year, you will have aged and experienced only 1 year. But the people on earth will say that you were gone for 7 years.
@jhhwingnut time is a dimension, you don't just travel in a direction in 3 dimensional space, you also travel in time. The faster you go, the greater the time dilation is measured by an observer.
All of "that" is irrelevent, you do not travel thru "time", time can not be seen or measured with a yard stick, when you travel, you travel thru space not time, time passes while you are traveling and time passes at a constant rate and it doesn't matter what speed you are going and time passes the same for the one in the ship or the observer, why do you people think the time that passed would be any different for the two, first define "observer" why would the observer
Time is constant and the same whether you are moving or standing still.....the observer factor is a pathetic hypothetical.......a ridiculous assumption or theory....
space and time are called "space-time" for a reason. I actually understand all of this, clearly you do not. There is nothing wrong with not understanding it, but there is something wrong with pretending you do. If you want to understand this, ask questions and I will answer them. But i'm not here to argue with you. Theres over 100 years of evidence for relativity. I don't think any theory has been better established than it, THAT is how accurate it is.
@SpeakingSerpent And I don't think there has ever been so much false belief put into a totally "unproven" theory, you people think this is true because you have been told it is true, it has never been proven and frankly it is totally "illogical", and I understand quite well, it is you believers who do not, 1) you say there is a 100 years of "evidence", which is ?? You believers pretend to understand these theorys simply because you believe you are of some kind of higher intelligence,....wrong !!
Holy fuck, did you watch the god damn video? What do you think they just did? Its proved everyday with GPS. Its proved everyday in Atom Smashers accounting for the mass increase as particles approach the speed of light. If Einstein's theory is wrong, HOW did it predict the answer to 40 BILLIONTHS of a second!? If its wrong, why are GPS still accurate because they all use Einstein's equations! Why are atom smashers still functioning? You're a lunatic.
@SpeakingSerpent I am truly sick of hearing the BS about the GPS satelites......Geezzz....they have got to compute the time it takes for all those sats to send and recieve radio wave signals....not because time is moving at a different rate.....the faster "re-draw" speed of a given GPS unit dictates how accurate a GPS is to the user, there again that doesn't have anything to do with the speed the GPS is acquiring it's data. We experience this "lag time" when we listen to news broadcasts allot.
@SpeakingSerpent Oh and by the way, I believe Hawking is a joke....he is just an Einstein wanabe.....and has failed miserably, his "theory of everything" is just short of "stupid". One needs to remember that as far as modern man knows at this point, all things adhere to basic physics,,,at least in our solar system !!
@SpeakingSerpent I bet the accuracy of those clocks were no better than 1/millionth if a second......they couldn't come close to measure down to the 1/billionth of a second let alone 40/billionth's.......geeezzz you need to start thinking about this realistically....opps...better not it will scare you to find out how much of these theories are wrong that we base so much of our physics on today....!!!
@SpeakingSerpent Ohhh, and by the way, if you haven't figured it by now. I'm very dubious that man has ever set foot on the Moon.....but that's another topic....!!
@SpeakingSerpent I thoroughly believe in evolution....evolution is the only logical way we exist. Global warming is a fact, but all these 'doomsdayers" conveniently forget to remind everyone that the earth has been constantly warming since the last ice age......without that we wouldn't exist !! We may be warming at a slightly higher / disproportional rate than say the turn of the century.....due to....you guessed it....primarily the use of fossil fuels & many other contributors...!!
This is what you need to understand - Time is relative: this means that two people will measure "time" at a different amount depending on how quickly one is moving 'relative' to the other. Each person is called an "observer". They are in something called a "reference frame", or "frame of reference". This means, their speed relative to the object. For example, lets say you have a gun/bullet that fires at 500mph. If your on a 500mph train and fire the gun forward or backward,-
@SpeakingSerpent 2) for one thing these theorys lose any credibility because they keep switching scenarios and compare "apples & oranges".....you are corrrect about one thing, Light & bullets are totally different and can not be expected to adhere to the same laws of physics. Bullets are made up of physical properties, where light is not,, bullets must adhere to physics, they are affected by weight (gravity), wind resistance etc. Light does not. How do you know what the speed of light is ??
@SpeakingSerpent How do you know if light speed is consistant, answer : you don't know that, if you say it has been measured and we know what speed that is, I'll ask you how it was measured, you know as well as I do there is know way to do that, simple to measure radio waves but not light. Your train example, 1) this is totally unacceptable be cause it is an impossibilty, "most" trains don't go over 70 mph & "most" bullets go over 2000 ft. per sec. but using "your" theory, answer this :
@SpeakingSerpent According to your theory and an outside observer (according to you)....if the train were, as you said, moving @ 500mph and a bullet was fired out the back of the train that was traveling at 400mph, the bullet would be going backwards @ 100mph.....which you know is bullchit . And, given no gravity, if the bullet were fired out the front, the train would actually impact the bullet in a given distance, just like an airplane hitting a duck that is flying straight away from it.
@jhhwingnut Actually after thinking about it (the speeds are totally unrealistic of course) when the bullet was fired out the front the bullet would actually never leave the gun barrel.....according to your theory..LOL !!
You will measure the bullet moving at 500mph in either direction. You are observer 1. If somebody is standing out side the train, as the train passes by at 500mph - and you fire bullets forward and backward, the second observer, outside the train, will measure the speed of 1 bullet at 1000mph and the other bullet will fire from the gun and fall straight down to the ground at 0mph, at his feet. HOWEVER, if you do the same experiment with a beam of light, it is amazingly the same speed for both.
You might wonder "how is this possible"? Light traveling unobstructed (in a vacuum like space, not water, air) will always travel at the same velocity to ALL observers. There isn't anything special about light, it just happens to travel at the comic speed limit, called "c" or 'constant". When you understand that light doesn't behave as bullets, you'll see that something "has to give". It ends up being "time". Time is a phenomenon of space, different to each observer. That is why its space-time!
Another example of what an observer is- the clock aboard the plane is 1 observer and the clock on earth is the other. A clock on mars would be also different. Now if you think this is weird, hold on to your seat.. Observer 1 would measure the weight of the clock on the plane being heavier! The faster something moves relative to you, the more it weighs! Not only that, but Observer 1 will also see the clock compressing in the direction its moving! Its called the Lorentz contraction.
When I explained the bullet experiment, I want to be clear- it isn't exactly 1000mph in one direction.. its very close too it, but it isn't exact. Its complicated to explain, but if it were true, you'd have trouble if two objects were traveling at exactly half the speed of light.. Nothing can accelerate to the speed of light. Einstein spent about 10 years on this to explain it. Its complicated for youtube chat though =)
It would be like debating whether or not a falling tree makes any sound in the forest if there are no witnesses to hear it......with this exception, logic tells us that the tree would still make the same noise witnessed or not, your experiments in time dilation (warping) our simply....illogical !!!
This is soooo Bullchit.....the clocks errors or just the resistance in all that wiring would make that much difference.....time is time...doesn't matter how fast you're going....sorry...all these "theoretical phycisists' are a joke......they do this to avoid working for a living.....thats why they come up with all this fantasyland chit....to make people believe they're actually more intelligent than the rest of us, which again is a joke.....but they keep getting taxpayers grants....shame !!!
@jhhwingnut special relativity isn't even a theoretical concept anymore. it's been proven with the most accurate clocks on earth...atomic clocks. They've flown one of these clocks in a Pan am jet and left one atomic clock stationary on the surface of the Earth, and then compared the clocks. The clocks actually differed by the same amount of time Einstein said they would. This is not a controversial topic anymore. So just drop it and stop with your bullshit.
@FallofDarkness55 Sorry he was / is wrong.....that PamAm jet is nothing but a joke and you people fell for it...!!!
How far did they fly during that little experiment....?? You actually believe that.....explain what exactly would cause time to slow down while you're flying in a jet....lol...that theory like many many others are unproven...they are still simply speculation . No one can seem to explain what would make time "slow down".....wonder why...!?!?
@jhhwingnut time doesn't slow down per se. it's obvious that you are uneducated about special relativity. time slows down RELATIVE to another frame. the laws of physics including time itself remains the same in all frames of reference. The difference is that time slows down in the spaceship frame going near the speed of light RELATIVE to the stationary observer on Earth. I highly recommend you read how atomic clocks work and maybe that will give you insight on how accurate those clocks are.
@jhhwingnut and you're a prideful uneducated imbecile who likes putting physicists down just to make you feel more intellectual. Believe me, you're a moron. They know a lot more than you. They've done countless experiments and know a lot more math than you ever will. piss off idiot.
@FallofDarkness55 Well.....you certainly put me in my place...although you offer no proof...sorry you can't can you......embecile..@@...LOL....talk about pretending to be intelligent....you're a classic...!!!
@FallofDarkness55 BTW....you are correct in stating that "special relitivity" isn't even a theoretical concept anymore.....that's the scary part......all those college students have been so brainwashed that they don't even challenge the validity of some of these outlandish theory's......what's really scary is to think how many of our accepted beliefs and theorys are "based" on these incorrrect "theorys" !!!
@jhhwingnut additionally, scientific theories are based on observations, facts, and experiments. The Big Bang theory for example is a scientific theory. It is not any old guess. It is a scientific theory proposed by educated scientists who have gathered a lot of convincing data. I am a supporter of the Big Bang theory. It is convincing especially after the discovery of the CMBR. Special relativity is a scientific theory as well. refer to what i said about scientific theory. it is NOT a guess.
@FallofDarkness55 Excuse me.....that is precisely what a theory is in essence, and if a theory is not proven, it is simply a guess.....whether you call these people educated or not is irrelevent....the theory is still only a theory until proven to be factual & true, and many of these basic theory's are unproven but are taken as "common knowledge".......as in your case.....and this is a huge mistake to believe all these "theorys" without question and scrutiny...!!
@jhhwingnut i'm guessing you believe in god. to me god, is a wild guess invented by humans. i prefer scientific theories over a god. evolution is a theory too so in your case evolution is just a guess. lol. you must be a creationist. go pray to santa clause. lol.
@FallofDarkness55 You don't seem to grasp and understand the English language in it's literal form....in other words it seems you're kinda full of something besides just darkness !!!
@elendil77 You are confusing "having a logical theory" with "having faith"......creationists base their beliefs on sheer Faith.....an evolutionist bases his belief on "logic".....or....it boils down to what your belief is based on as to it's credibility....you can say a creationist believes a theory of creationism....it is based on faith not probabilty & logic. BTW.....I can almost always find errors in grammer in comments....and you're no exception....your punctuation is deplorable !!
To be fair, many people do spell grammEr, but those are usually GRAMMAR (or should I say grammEr?)school drop outs!
I stand behind my original comment, you're reasoning- the denial of wealth of evidence, is a practice most creationists resort to. You might not be one, but judging by your intelligence it's not beyond believable.
Your rejection of the theory of relativity is ALSO faith based, not on faith in the bible, but in your own greatness! You want to be "special" !
@elendil77 Nope your are wrong again.....don't be so concerned with one misspelled word.....everyone does that, some more than others...why aren't you addressing my comments with logic rather than ranting about grammer....you don't really make much sense anyway....."Your rejection of the theory of relativity is ALSO faith based, not on faith in the bible, but in your own greatness! You want to be "special" ! <~~ strange !!
@jhhwingnut Tell that to the people who run the GPS satellites. The satellite navigation system in your car would be useless if they did not send regular time corrections to the satellites to compensate for this very phenomenon that these experiments proved, because time is running at a different rate on the satellites than down here on earth. Not only is it not 'bullchit', but it has a very real effect on something we now take for granted in our everyday lives, and needs to be accounted for.
@ratmash I disagree...the time difference that you are refering to is caused by the transmission "lag" times...that is all.....an example would be like say ....watching fox news telecast in New York and interviewing say.....Sarah Palin in Wasilla, Al. or anyone else a distance away......the news anchor asks her a question and she doesn't respond for sometimes a second or more......that same "lag time" affects GPS satelite position reporting....when you consider most GPS's are tracking 6+ sats
@poedelschaap I have studied it....there is no tangible proof or real proof of this theory.....I'd be glad to see some for sure.....key word here is "proof"....!! "before you place suck a comment".....<~~~ what are you talking about...??
oke i typed suck wrong, if you still don't understand that phrase than it's not worth to explain it.
yes there is proof for these theory, or can i say physical law? especial the better experiments involved this subject all have the same measurable resault, that the time is delayed.
Back in the early days, people were told that nothing is true because they just don't understand what's happening.
@poedelschaap Sorry but I don't believe you have the intelligence required to successfully debate something of this magnitude.....you don't even have basic grammer skills....sorry !!
Omg, if you really going to criticize people by their language. Know why your so stupid? Becouse your from the US, it dont means everyone can speak english as good as you. lets talk in Dutch, my home language, i think i can handle that better than you.
spreek je nederlands?
Tu parle francais?
sprechen sie deutsch?
No you don't speak those languages becouse your'e an american and you think your the best. en going to criticize me of my gramar? Now you speak Dutch, and no mistakes!
Time is a form of measurement. Without counting you cannot measure time. Take away the ability to count, and time will cease to exist. So the the question is does time really exist or did we just make it up?
@blarson12 "time is a form of measurement" only if you choose to measure it, other wise time is a word we use to describe an existence...past, present or future and "time" does not change for any reason.....sorry Albert !!!
isnt this proof you can travel into the future?
sqwale7 2 months ago
@sqwale7 Yes. But in order to travel significatly into the future you would need to travel very very fast round something with a very large mass, such as a pulsar or black hole. then if you sat on your spacecraft for say 10 years travelling at close to the speed of light... when you return to earth it will be maybe 100 years into the future.
chrisbaker121924 2 months ago
time dilation is the most stupidest idea ever along with the mass dilation and length contractions. people have to stop taking everything they hear as a fact and think outside the box and no...einstine didnt thin outside the box. if you really think about it, its the circuits and its elements that are running the clock on the plane. Have they ever thought about looking into that and how maybe a gravitational field effects circuits and hence the time delay?
ThePariky 2 months ago
@ThePariky These theories are shown by many experiments and not just this video itself, they aren't empty ideas but proven ones.
btkw 2 months ago
@ThePariky -If mass dilation isn't real, why do particle accelerators have to ramp up the magnetic field strength in a ratio to the mass of the particle being accelerated and it's increase in velocity. It's increased inertia is as if it's mass had increased, indistinguishable from one another.
DemonDik 1 month ago
@ThePariky Every GPS in the world is proof that relativity does work. When they build them they have to take relativity into account, if they didn't, they wouldn't be accurate.
But of course, a YouTuber can destroy in a single comment, what scientists have proven over decades of experiments. You really think they didn't take those things into account when performing this experiment?
Still think you're right? Explain "its the circuits and its elements that are running the clock on the plane."
supertrinko 1 month ago
@supertrinko Please, show me. I would like to see these other experiments, thank you.
Brasharful 3 weeks ago
@Brasharful Go to the Wikipedia page called "Tests of general relativity".
supertrinko 3 weeks ago
look a dream. Time is relative - as Einstein said.
Nathan21122012 2 months ago
Time dialation theory doesnt prove time is not constant it just proves that nothing is constant enough to use as an accurate measure of even intevals of time. Time is a concept. It is consistent because we make it consistent. It doesnt matter that atomic particles decay slower when moving at a faster rate of speed. This just means speed is somehow effecting how fast it decays. The same amount of time has passed at atomic particles at rest.
pistolpeteblues 2 months ago
Moving an "ATOMIC CLOCK" from one gravitational field through another effects the atomic decay! NOT TIME ITSELF! (Look up GRAVITATIONAL FEILD DISTORTION on google) To actually prove Time Dilation, you would have to approach 186,000 miles a second!!!! A MERE hundred miles an hour is UN - RECORDABLE. You all are being duped!!! Time does not move or change. It is only our personal perspective relative to the object. High school science is 60 years out-of-date!!!
nohumanchips 3 months ago
So "Time Travel" is possible??? if you could travel faster then the light???
broku83 4 months ago
@broku83 IF you could, yes. But traveling faster than light isn't any less impossible.
m8cct 3 months ago
@jhhwingnut
You are a wingnut hi!
The first time anyone got a real sense of the speed of light is when they monitored how long it took light to reach one of the planets in our solar system after it came out of a direct eclipse from its moon, then using geometry they were able to closely narrow it down to what we know the speed of light is today!and the only time they say light goes slower is in the case of n=c/v "light through a meterial" this is also known as refractive index, look up Ole Romer
santirock69 4 months ago
light has a speed and the speed of light is calculated by distance over time so therefore light is bound by the same priciples of time that we are all bound by! case closed, now we can stop wasting money!
santirock69 4 months ago
FALSE and DECEPTIVE.
To have a time dilation (even in the billionth of a second) you would have to move at near the speed of light! What happened in video is gravitational fluctuation. The change in atoms moving in a magnetic field! THE ATOMS MOVED. NOT TIME!
(Public being lied to again!)
Time is relative to the viewer.
nohumanchips 5 months ago
@nohumanchips you're so wrong.
ItsNotEvenSunny 4 months ago
so there's a few places on earth now that are having to add 15mins to their clocks.. could it be that earth is revolving a bit quicker?
dellatheredxxx 5 months ago
@dellatheredxxx You are on the right track.
nohumanchips 5 months ago
@nohumanchips NO! dude stop telling people bullshit. you're spreading a lot of pseudo-scientific garbage.
ItsNotEvenSunny 4 months ago
...But why? Why does the time change?
braxinIV 6 months ago
@braxinIV It has to do with the different space-time frames of the objects. Those objects when moving through the same amount of space, move through a different amount of time and when moving through a same amount of time, move through a different amount of space.
Go look up special relativity online. There are many tutorials.
Aviatorsmith 6 months ago
@Aviatorsmith So objects can't move through the same space and same time? Thank you for clarifying :)!
braxinIV 6 months ago
@braxinIV They can if they are not moving relative to each other.
Aviatorsmith 6 months ago
@Aviatorsmith Time is a constant! Our perspective of time changes by outside influence (gravitation and magnetic) This experiment was discarded as false. Science books should be updated!
nohumanchips 5 months ago
@nohumanchips Relativity has never been proven false. Time is not a constant. A constant is something with the same quantity in all fields of perception.
Aviatorsmith 5 months ago
@nohumanchips Your an idiot, go back to school and get an education, stop posting shit like this.
Manoo62 4 months ago
@nohumanchips Depends on how you define "time is a constant". Yes, time can be a constant inside if you say that you are travelling at constant speed in an airplane, without relative comparisons to things which is different from the situation I've mentioned . No, time is not a constant if you compare it relatively to, let's say, something which is moving and something which is not moving. And also to add, "perspective of time changes" is judged by the brain(bored=time slow, happy=time fast).
qiankundanuoyi1 4 months ago
@nohumanchips If time is constant then why is it that atomic particles decay at a different rate when moving slowly then moving very fast?
This decay time changes exactly with predictions by Relativity.
Thats time dilation.
Texmurphy51 3 months ago
Comment removed
ivanpoll 8 months ago
how do we know light is the fastest thing? just curious
deshaebeasley 8 months ago
@deshaebeasley When they say the speed of light, they are referring to a number. 3x10^8 m/s. speed of light is a speed limit. Their not talking about light its self.
bluefire1929 8 months ago
Comment removed
ivanpoll 8 months ago
Very well done!
johnjaksic61 9 months ago
Here's a paradox for all you believers....you say the faster you travel in a, lets say a spaceship, the more "time" slows down.....I say....that doesn't necessarily mean that a "person" traveling in that spaceship ages less...!?!?!?
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
The person in the spaceship does not experience the effects of time dilation. If you are traveling at 99% of the speed of light relative to the earth, people on earth will observe you moving 7 times slower than you would on earth. You also weigh (approx) 7 times more, you also contract 7 times (flatten like a pancake). But you, inside the spaceship, don't feel any difference unless you accelerate. Its just like when you're in a car, you don't feel anything unless you accelerate.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent
Excuse me but you never enlightened me on how you (or anyone else) know what the speed of light is and whether or not it is "always" "going" the same speed....lol....there is absolutely no proof of how fast light "travels" and what dictates it's speed and/or it's maximum speed ("C" supposedly) , there's no way at all to measure it........please humor me and explain !!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
You're like a perpetual bullshit machine. You somehow manage to include something absolutely wrong in every single comment. Were you bred for trolling in some secret lab? The speed of light isn't important, it just happens to travel at C, so its used as a visual aid in explanations about what happens when something approaches C. What dictates the speed of light? Good question, but there isn't a good answer. Its just the way the universe works, some cosmological speed limit.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent You're like debating the authenticity of the bible with someone so narrow minded they use quotes from the bible to prove it's genuinely true, that is ridiculous, just like you using all these figures and "assumed correct data" you are using all this data that someone fabricated out of the blue, no proof what so ever to back up any of these theories, you don't satisfactorily answer any of my questions, you just start spouting off shit. Who & how was the speed of light measured.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Lets talk evidence, shall we? What evidence do you have that the universe has a constant time, different than the dilation that Einstein explained and scientists proved? Yet, you, without a shred of evidence, are absolutely convinced that time dilation is impossible? Why don't you provide evidence that shows that? How about starting with this video. Why did the clocks lose sync? How did Einstein predict it? You're fanatically delusional with "I'm right, the experiments are wrong".
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent I simply ask for any shred of proof of anything you believe....you can't provide any so your kind get extremely frustrated....just like talking to a thumper about his bible beliefs vs evolution.....they do the same thing, their beliefs are totally illogical but they believe it no matter what......actually they're too scared to even consider any other possibility.....they're fanatics / extremists...very dangerous (hence: witch hunts) very scary like Muslims !!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Measuring the speed of light is pretty much just about the same as measuring the speed of your car. A bit more complex but same theory. It's 299792.458km/s and it's more than 100y/o news.
Obviously you have no idea about physic. It's called physic is becuase it's physical. Dah! You make a physical observation and you try to explain why.
No one's asking you to believe with blind faith but do your own research. If you can learn physic on Youtube why would people go to college.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 I wasn't trying to learn anything.....I was trying to enlighten people like you....hoping you would start thinking logically instead of following the rest of the sheep....right over the cliff. I'm not even sure that light "travels" anywhere, depending on how long the universe has been in existence, no one nows how many stars there are out there that we can't see do to them burning out, omitting no light at all and right next to a star we can see.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut "knows"
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Judging by the amount of things you don't know, can I assume you slept through your science classes in high school?
Sure they don't show you those papers about how they found out the temperature/size/mass of stars across the universe. But how light works is like grade 7-8 stuffs. Like those simple reflection and refraction experiments. And how telescope works. Then you have wavelength and spectrum further on. Did u sleep throught all that?
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 Why don't you humor me and briefly explain how the speed of light was measured......not how strange my theories are or how ignorant I must be or how smart people like you "college drunks" are....just simply explain to me in factual terms of how anyone measured the speed of light....!! Not some fantasy chit or that's just what a professor told you.......or you read somewhere......actual factual documentation. It can't be done and you know it, or should !!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
It can't be done in 500 characters and you know it.
So go on wikipedia and add wiki/Speed_of_light.
If you're still not convinced, read the references too.
Done
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut astronauts have attached a mirror to a rock on the moon; scientists on earth can aim a laser at this mirror and measure the travel time of the laser pulse--about two and a half seconds for the round trip. (The idea behind this experiment is not so different from Galileo's, if you think about it...) And anyone who measures the speed of light, at any time, using any method, always gets the same result: just slightly less than 300,000 kilometers per second.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@kurozaki45 You like everyone else say they all come up with the same figure for the speed of light.....but you all fail to answer my question "how can you measure the speed of light" . Who are these "anyones" you say have measured the speed of light, and what are "all these methods" used to do it you mentioned. Do you really believe an astronaut left a mirror on the Moon that we can hit with a laser......we don't even have a laser beam dense enough to travel that distance and hit a mirror !
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut youre just embarrassing yourself by replying back seriously your logic is very flawed this anyones are scientists and engineers and if you have no clue of the subject just investigate yourself and do your own research and your own experiments if youre weary of these "anyones" you will see that you will get the same result because for something to become a constant like the speed of light people have to be able to reproduce it and get the same result did you not go to college?
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@kurozaki45 Why don't you people ever just simply say how they measure the speed of light......I know why.....but will you people admit it !?!?!/
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@kurozaki45 Well you must be a real whizkid, although your writing wouldn't confirm that, if it's so simple to "reproduce it" like you suggest.....why can't you enlighten us all and explain how you simply do that....it's because you can't, you a real whizkid "wanabe", you haven't got a clue how it could be done......because it can't.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut This apparatus contains the transmitter and receiver with internal modulator together with monitoring sockets for the oscilloscope. Also included are a 5 m and 20 m fibre optic cable.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
A solid state, square wave oscillator running at 1 MHz will produce a signal with a 1µs period and a square pulse lasting 0.5 µs. If this signal is used to modulate a light beam which passes along a fibre optic cable we get a pulse of light lasting 0.5 µs. A phototransistor can detect the pulse at the other end of the cable and convert it back into a pulse of electricity. The two electrical pulses (the original and the received one) can then be
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut be displayed on an oscilloscope screen. Since the light takes a finite amount of time to reach the receiver the second signal will be delayed in time (dt) and the received pulse will be shifted along the timebase axis. If we measure this shift it will tell us how long the light pulse took to travel the length of the fibre optic cable and hence the speed of the light can be calculated if the cable length is known.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Practical considerations
Since light travels at about 300 million metres per second in air if our fibre optic cable is 30 m long we would be looking for a time delay of 0.1 µs. A 50 MHz (or better) oscilloscope is required.
When we monitor the electrical pulses we are measuring the delay between transmitted and received electrical signals not the light pulses. If there is any time required for the conversion of light to electricity or vice versa then this would
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut introduce errors into the calculation.
At high frequencies “square waves” become rounded due to stray capacitances and non-linear responses of the converters. The precise edge of the pulses is often lost.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Experiment setup
Arrange the fibre optic system to transmit a high frequency modulated light beam along the cable which should be about 5 m or so in length. Couple the receiver unit to the cable. Monitor the transmitted pulse at Channel A on the Pico ADC and the received pulse at Channel B.
The photograph shows the LASCELLS equipment connected as described and the results given later were taken from this apparatus.
various pre-trigger values.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut The PC oscilloscope settings are typically:
Timebase 200 ns/div
Channel A and B input +5 V dc
Trigger single shot, rising to capture a pulse when GO is selected. Use a sensitivity of 400 mV or so at
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Carrying out the experiment
Switch on both the transmitter and receiver and select GO on the oscilloscope screen. Adjust the amount of pre-trigger and reselect GO until a trace is obtained which shows the “square” transmitted pulse and the received, much more rounded, pulse shifted to the right. When you are familiar with the pulse shapes, reset the timebase to as short a time possible to display the two leading edges of the pulses or the two trailing edges. Save and
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut print out the screen image.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Switch off both units and replace the 5 m cable with a 2 0m cable. Switch on again and repeat the experiment making timebase adjustments as required. Save and print again. You should find that the second print-out, with the longer cable, has a larger delay between the two pulses. (PicoScope rulers or automated measurements can be used here to help with the time measurement).
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Calculations and Theory
If there are time delays in any part of the electronics then these delays should be the same for both experiments with the 5 m and 20 m cables. The only difference between the two experiments is that the light had to travel a further 15 m in the second case. If we measure dt from each print-out then subtracting one from the other should give the amount of time taken to travel the extra 15 m.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
From the print-outs given using leading edges we get:
0.55 µs (-0.02) for the 5 m dt
0.64 µs (-0.01) for the 20 m dt
i.e. 0.57 and 0.65
The difference between these two values is 0.08 µs which is the time taken for the light to travel 15 m.
The speed of the light is Distance/Time which is 15/0.08 x 10 ^ -6 which gives 1.9 x 10 ^ 8 ms-1
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Questions and discussion of results
How does this result compare with the speed of light in air?
Investigate the definition of the term Refractive Index and see whether you can calculate an approximate value for the expected speed of light along the fibre optic cable. (The Refractive Index of the polymer used is about 1.6)
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@kurozaki45 Very interesting.....I'm surprised there is any equipment that could measure that precisely given the extreme speeds and using such a small length of fibre optic cable, At those speeds your calculations seem extremely slow, when you figure that it has been said light travels to the Moon and back in approximately 2.5 sec. hummm.....and in your excersize you say you're comparing the the difference between 5m & 20m. Refraction is kinda like the "resistance" in electric wire right ?
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
I don't know which century you're born in but equipments like that's been around for quite a few decades. Our society is built around these very equipments and the "theories" you are denying now. Ever wonder how Youtube works? You probably own an iphone. What do you think it operates with analog signals?
PS: Refraction is nothing like resistance in electric wire. If you struggle with these grade 5 science, you're not quite ready for relativity.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 Obviously you missed the point, it is quite simple to send and measure radio waves, but it is quite another task to measure something of that awesome speed....I have to disagree....measuring the speed of light is know ordinary "excercise".....and I don't believe you can do it with an oscilloscope and 20' of fiberoptic cable, just like I don't believe Armstrong & "Buzzyboi" brought back 100lb's of "moon rocks" in that tiny tinfoil & papermache spacecraft wanabe...!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Obviously YOU missed the point, mate. Just because you haven't seen one doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I pointed out the example of an iphone cos' it's a gadget of the day and you obviously have seen one. Microwave is a form of light. So is boardband. Your computer or iphone sends and picks up billions of signal per second and you still think scientist don't have equipments to detect light within a microsecond? Like I said, it's over 100y/o news.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 So you're saying our computers and phones operate at the speed of light......I don't think so..!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
What do you specialise in misinterpreting people's words? What I mean is your computer operates at a few GHz. Do you understand what that means? It means it does one calculation within a fraction of a nanosecond. So stop questioning if it's possible to detect light with an accuracy of a microsecond.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Let's take a GPS for example. It record the time difference between electromagnetic signal, aka light, received from different satelites. By simple trigonomatry you can calculate your own location.
Without the knowledge of the speed of light, or if it's true you suggested light doesn't even travel at all, there wouldn't be a GPS.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 LOL....GPS has nothing to do with light or the speed of it.......it simply plots your position by measuring the changing lengths of time it takes for a radio wave signal to make a round trip from satelite to GPS back to satelite, only when there are more than two sats. available, this is called "triangulation" and has been used for centuries in one form or another, for navigation of aircraft and sea going vessels.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
A GPS is like a sonar that uses light waves instead of sound. But I double you even know what a "radio wave signal" is.
Either you're being a total smart as' or you're just a total dumb as'. Do you seriously think you're the only person in the world to realise that speed of light is a lie.
Please save yourself the embarrassment and finish high school before you argue about relativity.
Sonobody123 9 months ago
@Sonobody123 You idiot...oscilloscopes have been around since the early 1900's used for measuring electrical impulses mainly, electrical current wave changes......my phone operates on microwaves (radio waves)....what does yours operate on.....a hand crank.....or mind control like your alien buddys.....lol....refraction is very simular to resistance in as much as it changes a properties oringinal data......whether speed or color !!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Further study
How do the results compare when trailing edges are used in the calculation?
No mention has been made of errors in the measurements. Estimate the errors in all measurements and establish the estimated accuracy of the final result.
kurozaki45 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent Your really important statement here is this one : "Good question, but there isn't a good answer. Its just the way the universe works, some cosmological speed limit." <<This is what I'm talking about, when you back a Theoretical physicist" into a corner for just a shred of tangible proof....they can't.....they just say like you just did "Its just the way the universe works"....(he really means, "that's what I've been told") .
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
You conveniently skipped my OTHER really important statement, "The speed of light isn't important". Atomic clocks don't rely on how accurately we define the speed of light. And even if they did, we know the speed of light to such an accuracy it wouldn't even matter.
And this is what I'm talking about, when you back a moron in a corner that cites a lack of evidence (with a video proving Einstein was correct, mind you) they leap to desperate defenses when presented with them.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent This video proves nothing.....I could come up with a bunch of hairbrain statements just like anyone else......"last summer I secretly built a small spaceship in my basement, very complex & highly sophisticated (alien technology).......one night I flew it to the Moon and back, about three times the speed of light, the faster I went the greener my feet got......I guess it had something to do with hi-speed light waves, just a theory.....but you surely believe me......right...!?!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
The above statement / theory is stupid and totally "unproveable" just like the ones you believe about Einsteins time warping/dilation.......by the way.....people like you will shit your pants when you find out alien ships travel much faster than light beyond our atmospere.....actually what you believe is childs play...!!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
The first Postulate of Relativity is that the laws of physics are the same for all uniformly moving observers. That means a constant velocity (not accelerating). The second Postulate of Relativity is that the speed of light in a vacuum is the same for all observers, regardless of their motion relative to the source.
Read about the Michelson–Morley experiment in 1887. Or find a comic book or cartoon, whatever you learn from.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent I suppose they make these postulates as they go right.....whatever they need to make their theories more believable....!!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
You seem to be enjoying ignorance, I hope I'm not ruining your fun. Actually, the Michelson-Morley experiment was an attempt to prove a different hypothesis, one that turned out to be false by their definition. So in fact, they didn't make their "theory" more believable, they totally debunked it. And that fact is what Einstein used in his research papers. That was in 1887, what century do you live in? You're the most ignorant person I've ever spoken with. Such denial, incredible...
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
100 years on an aircraft to be younger by 1/1000th of a second? SURE I'll take it!
lamReptar 10 months ago
@lamReptar LOL....where can I get a ticket on the first flight......LOL...I agree it's stupid...!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
MY punctuation??? Look at yours! what's with all the ellipses? Yeah, I know omitting capital letters ath the beginning of the sentence, but that has NOTHING to do with not knowing where a sentence ends, i just hate pressing shift every time i begin a new sentence, i am to lazy and impatient for that. That's all! now, the error you keep repeating in your shitty comments CANNOT be considered a typo or any other coincidence- what the fuck is "grammEr". You've wrote TWICE in ONE day!
elendil77 10 months ago
Also GPS receivers uses the equations of relativity to account for the effects of relativity. The GPS receiver must be tuned to a slightly higher frequency 10.23 MHz than the frequency emitted by the satellites in orbit ~10.22999999543 MHz. This isn't a controversial topic anymore. So let's all stop with the bullshit. Einstein is right about our space-time fabric.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 Bet you believe everything the bible says to.....!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut as an addition to my previous comment, the Bible is bullshit. it's full of lies and crap that's been shoved down my throat up to now. i've been reading a lot of physics books and articles recently. They are convincing and i refuse to believe in fairy-tales anymore.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
Time doesn't change at all......the only thing that changes is our measurement of it.....
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut Well this is just incorrect. Time does indeed change, rather than any particular properties of our equipment.
rhillner 10 months ago
@rhillner What...? What do you think changes about time.....this should be interesting.....please feel free to explain to me why time would change......no one can explain that to me....thats because "time" doesn't change.....it is an intangible on going property of our existence.....we simply "choose" to measure it......these theorys are as silly as saying time will stop if i remove all the clocks in my house.....if I can't "see" the time...then it must be stopped....how silly...!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut That's more like what you're saying actually, with time being only a form of measurement "only if you choose to measure it".
Study Special Relativity and you'll find the answers to your questions, I promise you.
rhillner 10 months ago
@rhillner Study what.....Einsteins theory says that the faster you go the more "time" slows down.....one of the professors said on one of these videos said that if he was away in a space ship for 10 years, he would have only aged 9 years......THAT is bullchit...!!! And the professor never said anything about how fast the ship was going the entire time.....what if you only traveled for a couple days, stayed there for 10 years, then returned to earth.....maybe you can explain it ??
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut I'm not going to explain it to someone who can't be bothered to go away and learn the basics of SR.
rhillner 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
You don't experience time dilation relative to yourself. If you fly in a ship for 99% of the speed of light relative to the earth for 1 year, you will have aged and experienced only 1 year. But the people on earth will say that you were gone for 7 years.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent
LOLOL.....do you really belive that.....omg.....!!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut time is a dimension, you don't just travel in a direction in 3 dimensional space, you also travel in time. The faster you go, the greater the time dilation is measured by an observer.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent
All of "that" is irrelevent, you do not travel thru "time", time can not be seen or measured with a yard stick, when you travel, you travel thru space not time, time passes while you are traveling and time passes at a constant rate and it doesn't matter what speed you are going and time passes the same for the one in the ship or the observer, why do you people think the time that passed would be any different for the two, first define "observer" why would the observer
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
experience time any differently than any one else......or why would the person traveling experience a "different" "amount" of time.....???
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
Time is constant and the same whether you are moving or standing still.....the observer factor is a pathetic hypothetical.......a ridiculous assumption or theory....
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
space and time are called "space-time" for a reason. I actually understand all of this, clearly you do not. There is nothing wrong with not understanding it, but there is something wrong with pretending you do. If you want to understand this, ask questions and I will answer them. But i'm not here to argue with you. Theres over 100 years of evidence for relativity. I don't think any theory has been better established than it, THAT is how accurate it is.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent And I don't think there has ever been so much false belief put into a totally "unproven" theory, you people think this is true because you have been told it is true, it has never been proven and frankly it is totally "illogical", and I understand quite well, it is you believers who do not, 1) you say there is a 100 years of "evidence", which is ?? You believers pretend to understand these theorys simply because you believe you are of some kind of higher intelligence,....wrong !!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Holy fuck, did you watch the god damn video? What do you think they just did? Its proved everyday with GPS. Its proved everyday in Atom Smashers accounting for the mass increase as particles approach the speed of light. If Einstein's theory is wrong, HOW did it predict the answer to 40 BILLIONTHS of a second!? If its wrong, why are GPS still accurate because they all use Einstein's equations! Why are atom smashers still functioning? You're a lunatic.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent I am truly sick of hearing the BS about the GPS satelites......Geezzz....they have got to compute the time it takes for all those sats to send and recieve radio wave signals....not because time is moving at a different rate.....the faster "re-draw" speed of a given GPS unit dictates how accurate a GPS is to the user, there again that doesn't have anything to do with the speed the GPS is acquiring it's data. We experience this "lag time" when we listen to news broadcasts allot.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent Oh and by the way, I believe Hawking is a joke....he is just an Einstein wanabe.....and has failed miserably, his "theory of everything" is just short of "stupid". One needs to remember that as far as modern man knows at this point, all things adhere to basic physics,,,at least in our solar system !!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent I bet the accuracy of those clocks were no better than 1/millionth if a second......they couldn't come close to measure down to the 1/billionth of a second let alone 40/billionth's.......geeezzz you need to start thinking about this realistically....opps...better not it will scare you to find out how much of these theories are wrong that we base so much of our physics on today....!!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Its amazing how you can pull the correct answers right out of your ass. Please, share with us how you know atomic clocks are not accurate enough.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent Didn't you read my post, it said ..."I bet" never said I new anything for sure about them.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent Ohhh, and by the way, if you haven't figured it by now. I'm very dubious that man has ever set foot on the Moon.....but that's another topic....!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
I'm not surprised. I also wouldn't be surprised if you thought evolution wasn't a fact. Or that global warming is made up.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent I thoroughly believe in evolution....evolution is the only logical way we exist. Global warming is a fact, but all these 'doomsdayers" conveniently forget to remind everyone that the earth has been constantly warming since the last ice age......without that we wouldn't exist !! We may be warming at a slightly higher / disproportional rate than say the turn of the century.....due to....you guessed it....primarily the use of fossil fuels & many other contributors...!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
This is what you need to understand - Time is relative: this means that two people will measure "time" at a different amount depending on how quickly one is moving 'relative' to the other. Each person is called an "observer". They are in something called a "reference frame", or "frame of reference". This means, their speed relative to the object. For example, lets say you have a gun/bullet that fires at 500mph. If your on a 500mph train and fire the gun forward or backward,-
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent 2) for one thing these theorys lose any credibility because they keep switching scenarios and compare "apples & oranges".....you are corrrect about one thing, Light & bullets are totally different and can not be expected to adhere to the same laws of physics. Bullets are made up of physical properties, where light is not,, bullets must adhere to physics, they are affected by weight (gravity), wind resistance etc. Light does not. How do you know what the speed of light is ??
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent How do you know if light speed is consistant, answer : you don't know that, if you say it has been measured and we know what speed that is, I'll ask you how it was measured, you know as well as I do there is know way to do that, simple to measure radio waves but not light. Your train example, 1) this is totally unacceptable be cause it is an impossibilty, "most" trains don't go over 70 mph & "most" bullets go over 2000 ft. per sec. but using "your" theory, answer this :
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent According to your theory and an outside observer (according to you)....if the train were, as you said, moving @ 500mph and a bullet was fired out the back of the train that was traveling at 400mph, the bullet would be going backwards @ 100mph.....which you know is bullchit . And, given no gravity, if the bullet were fired out the front, the train would actually impact the bullet in a given distance, just like an airplane hitting a duck that is flying straight away from it.
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut Actually after thinking about it (the speeds are totally unrealistic of course) when the bullet was fired out the front the bullet would actually never leave the gun barrel.....according to your theory..LOL !!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
You will measure the bullet moving at 500mph in either direction. You are observer 1. If somebody is standing out side the train, as the train passes by at 500mph - and you fire bullets forward and backward, the second observer, outside the train, will measure the speed of 1 bullet at 1000mph and the other bullet will fire from the gun and fall straight down to the ground at 0mph, at his feet. HOWEVER, if you do the same experiment with a beam of light, it is amazingly the same speed for both.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
You might wonder "how is this possible"? Light traveling unobstructed (in a vacuum like space, not water, air) will always travel at the same velocity to ALL observers. There isn't anything special about light, it just happens to travel at the comic speed limit, called "c" or 'constant". When you understand that light doesn't behave as bullets, you'll see that something "has to give". It ends up being "time". Time is a phenomenon of space, different to each observer. That is why its space-time!
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Another example of what an observer is- the clock aboard the plane is 1 observer and the clock on earth is the other. A clock on mars would be also different. Now if you think this is weird, hold on to your seat.. Observer 1 would measure the weight of the clock on the plane being heavier! The faster something moves relative to you, the more it weighs! Not only that, but Observer 1 will also see the clock compressing in the direction its moving! Its called the Lorentz contraction.
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@jhhwingnut
When I explained the bullet experiment, I want to be clear- it isn't exactly 1000mph in one direction.. its very close too it, but it isn't exact. Its complicated to explain, but if it were true, you'd have trouble if two objects were traveling at exactly half the speed of light.. Nothing can accelerate to the speed of light. Einstein spent about 10 years on this to explain it. Its complicated for youtube chat though =)
SpeakingSerpent 9 months ago
@SpeakingSerpent
What good is all these theorys if there is no observer.....none...they are meaningless !!! ( I believe they are anyway...!!!)
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
It would be like debating whether or not a falling tree makes any sound in the forest if there are no witnesses to hear it......with this exception, logic tells us that the tree would still make the same noise witnessed or not, your experiments in time dilation (warping) our simply....illogical !!!
jhhwingnut 9 months ago
This is soooo Bullchit.....the clocks errors or just the resistance in all that wiring would make that much difference.....time is time...doesn't matter how fast you're going....sorry...all these "theoretical phycisists' are a joke......they do this to avoid working for a living.....thats why they come up with all this fantasyland chit....to make people believe they're actually more intelligent than the rest of us, which again is a joke.....but they keep getting taxpayers grants....shame !!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut special relativity isn't even a theoretical concept anymore. it's been proven with the most accurate clocks on earth...atomic clocks. They've flown one of these clocks in a Pan am jet and left one atomic clock stationary on the surface of the Earth, and then compared the clocks. The clocks actually differed by the same amount of time Einstein said they would. This is not a controversial topic anymore. So just drop it and stop with your bullshit.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 Sorry he was / is wrong.....that PamAm jet is nothing but a joke and you people fell for it...!!!
How far did they fly during that little experiment....?? You actually believe that.....explain what exactly would cause time to slow down while you're flying in a jet....lol...that theory like many many others are unproven...they are still simply speculation . No one can seem to explain what would make time "slow down".....wonder why...!?!?
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut time doesn't slow down per se. it's obvious that you are uneducated about special relativity. time slows down RELATIVE to another frame. the laws of physics including time itself remains the same in all frames of reference. The difference is that time slows down in the spaceship frame going near the speed of light RELATIVE to the stationary observer on Earth. I highly recommend you read how atomic clocks work and maybe that will give you insight on how accurate those clocks are.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 That is a bunch of chit....!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut and you're a prideful uneducated imbecile who likes putting physicists down just to make you feel more intellectual. Believe me, you're a moron. They know a lot more than you. They've done countless experiments and know a lot more math than you ever will. piss off idiot.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 Well.....you certainly put me in my place...although you offer no proof...sorry you can't can you......embecile..@@...LOL....talk about pretending to be intelligent....you're a classic...!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut Look at you. You can't even spell. lol.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 BTW....you are correct in stating that "special relitivity" isn't even a theoretical concept anymore.....that's the scary part......all those college students have been so brainwashed that they don't even challenge the validity of some of these outlandish theory's......what's really scary is to think how many of our accepted beliefs and theorys are "based" on these incorrrect "theorys" !!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut additionally, scientific theories are based on observations, facts, and experiments. The Big Bang theory for example is a scientific theory. It is not any old guess. It is a scientific theory proposed by educated scientists who have gathered a lot of convincing data. I am a supporter of the Big Bang theory. It is convincing especially after the discovery of the CMBR. Special relativity is a scientific theory as well. refer to what i said about scientific theory. it is NOT a guess.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 Excuse me.....that is precisely what a theory is in essence, and if a theory is not proven, it is simply a guess.....whether you call these people educated or not is irrelevent....the theory is still only a theory until proven to be factual & true, and many of these basic theory's are unproven but are taken as "common knowledge".......as in your case.....and this is a huge mistake to believe all these "theorys" without question and scrutiny...!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut i'm guessing you believe in god. to me god, is a wild guess invented by humans. i prefer scientific theories over a god. evolution is a theory too so in your case evolution is just a guess. lol. you must be a creationist. go pray to santa clause. lol.
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@FallofDarkness55 You don't seem to grasp and understand the English language in it's literal form....in other words it seems you're kinda full of something besides just darkness !!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut Do you believe in God or not? Answer the fucking question!
FallofDarkness55 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
there you go! I guessed....hahaha...the very same "logic" called "just a theory" is used by creationists as well!
elendil77 10 months ago
@elendil77 You are confusing "having a logical theory" with "having faith"......creationists base their beliefs on sheer Faith.....an evolutionist bases his belief on "logic".....or....it boils down to what your belief is based on as to it's credibility....you can say a creationist believes a theory of creationism....it is based on faith not probabilty & logic. BTW.....I can almost always find errors in grammer in comments....and you're no exception....your punctuation is deplorable !!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
To be fair, many people do spell grammEr, but those are usually GRAMMAR (or should I say grammEr?)school drop outs!
I stand behind my original comment, you're reasoning- the denial of wealth of evidence, is a practice most creationists resort to. You might not be one, but judging by your intelligence it's not beyond believable.
Your rejection of the theory of relativity is ALSO faith based, not on faith in the bible, but in your own greatness! You want to be "special" !
PATHETIC!!
elendil77 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@elendil77 Nope your are wrong again.....don't be so concerned with one misspelled word.....everyone does that, some more than others...why aren't you addressing my comments with logic rather than ranting about grammer....you don't really make much sense anyway....."Your rejection of the theory of relativity is ALSO faith based, not on faith in the bible, but in your own greatness! You want to be "special" ! <~~ strange !!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@elendil77 Ohhh.....I call what creationists have...."flawed" logic...!!! You must fall into that category !! TROLL TROLL TROLL....
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut Tell that to the people who run the GPS satellites. The satellite navigation system in your car would be useless if they did not send regular time corrections to the satellites to compensate for this very phenomenon that these experiments proved, because time is running at a different rate on the satellites than down here on earth. Not only is it not 'bullchit', but it has a very real effect on something we now take for granted in our everyday lives, and needs to be accounted for.
ratmash 10 months ago
@ratmash I disagree...the time difference that you are refering to is caused by the transmission "lag" times...that is all.....an example would be like say ....watching fox news telecast in New York and interviewing say.....Sarah Palin in Wasilla, Al. or anyone else a distance away......the news anchor asks her a question and she doesn't respond for sometimes a second or more......that same "lag time" affects GPS satelite position reporting....when you consider most GPS's are tracking 6+ sats
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut retard
adrianlally 10 months ago
@adrianlally <<<< idiot !!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
omg! mate do you know what you're saying?
time dilation is true. it does exist. first go study on the subject before you place suck a comment
poedelschaap 10 months ago
@poedelschaap I have studied it....there is no tangible proof or real proof of this theory.....I'd be glad to see some for sure.....key word here is "proof"....!! "before you place suck a comment".....<~~~ what are you talking about...??
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
oke i typed suck wrong, if you still don't understand that phrase than it's not worth to explain it.
yes there is proof for these theory, or can i say physical law? especial the better experiments involved this subject all have the same measurable resault, that the time is delayed.
Back in the early days, people were told that nothing is true because they just don't understand what's happening.
poedelschaap 10 months ago
@poedelschaap Sorry but I don't believe you have the intelligence required to successfully debate something of this magnitude.....you don't even have basic grammer skills....sorry !!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
Omg, if you really going to criticize people by their language. Know why your so stupid? Becouse your from the US, it dont means everyone can speak english as good as you. lets talk in Dutch, my home language, i think i can handle that better than you.
spreek je nederlands?
Tu parle francais?
sprechen sie deutsch?
No you don't speak those languages becouse your'e an american and you think your the best. en going to criticize me of my gramar? Now you speak Dutch, and no mistakes!
poedelschaap 10 months ago
@poedelschaap It's all Greek to me.....lol....!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
because your'e stupid
poedelschaap 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
you've "studied" it? Where? In what way? besides, you ridicule someone's English skills and you can't even spell properly!
TROLL TROLL TROLL....that's all you are! A kid with delusions of grandeur!
elendil77 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut
this prooves quite enough! You remind me of those jerks who ask for direct proof for theory of evolution
elendil77 10 months ago
Time is a form of measurement. Without counting you cannot measure time. Take away the ability to count, and time will cease to exist. So the the question is does time really exist or did we just make it up?
blarson12 10 months ago
@blarson12 "time is a form of measurement" only if you choose to measure it, other wise time is a word we use to describe an existence...past, present or future and "time" does not change for any reason.....sorry Albert !!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
@jhhwingnut Yes i agree.
blarson12 10 months ago
So,when the Earth is (due to Milky way rotating) moving about 500 000 Mph,the time goes slower here then in outer space? (Sorry for my English)
Thx for reply
MrBooch007 10 months ago
@MrBooch007 Time goes slower on Earth than in a frame of reference that is motionless (or nearly so) relative to the Earth, yes.
cosmicharlie1970 10 months ago
that Einstein was a motherfucker though, wasn't he?
mozfan2436 11 months ago
Comment removed
8Libertine8 10 months ago
@8Libertine8 excuse me? because I like Einstein?
mozfan2436 10 months ago
@mozfan2436 Well he was consider retarded by many of his peers and often did calculations by himself. So yes he could be seen as a MoFo.
blarson12 10 months ago
@mozfan2436 Simply a patent clerk....!!!
jhhwingnut 10 months ago
Nomatter how expensive a pilot's watch, he would constantly have to correct the time. I wonder if pilots live longer than non travellers. ?
petestrat07 11 months ago
@petestrat07 It depends if the pilot drinks and smokes heavily.
blarson12 10 months ago