38
   

Why 7 days for Creation?

 
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Aug, 2017 11:49 pm
@cicerone imposter,
those are what the GPS systems use.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 08:09 am
@cameronleon,
Im not the time dilation guy. Im the guy who will clean your clock on chemistry, geology, genetics and evolution.
Conflation to confuse an issue is a favorite modus of the Creation clowns.
0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 08:35 am
@MontereyJack,
Quote:
Turns out that GPS satellites moving around the earth depend on very very very accurate cesium clocks. For thirty years they have known that those clocks, with respect ot earthbound clocks with which they are calibrated, show relativistic effects, which have to be factored in to get accurate results. It's not even controversial anymore, ecept with relativity deniers like cameronloon. It's simply hard-headed engineering based on repeated observation. They've had to do it to make sure you don't end up in Alaska rather than Florida when you're going on vacation with your GPS. They have been doing it for decades. It works


What a stupid thought of yours.

Lets see what an atomic clock is.

The atomic clock is a device that works in base of the vibration frequency of the atom of Cesium.

These vibrations create waves around the atom.

The atomic clock has a receiver which will detect the vibrations of the atom of Cesium and will count these vibration waves.

When the receiver counts 9,192,631,770 vibrations, this receiver will make a "tic". Another 9,192,631,770 vibrations, and the receiver will make another "tic", and so forth.

Every "tic" means one second. This is the famous "nanosecond".

______________________________________________

The atomic clock used today was invented by Louis Essen in 1955.

When this clock was invented, relativists came to this physicist asking for his consent to make some experiments with the atomic clock.

Louis Essen refuted the idea of time dilatation caused by motion and wrote:

"Einstein's relativity is invalidated by its internal errors...Einstein's use of a thought experiment, together with his ignorance of experimental techniques, gave a result which fooled himself and generations of scientists".

Louis Essen under a close scrutiny found out that the relativists claims supporting their theory were all false.

______________________________________

The atomic clock was tested under high and low temperatures and to pressure. After these tests, relativists spread the fake news with rumors that the atomic clock is "a perfect device that can't be affected by any means".

Relativists hid or never made tests with acceleration on atomic clocks.

Big mistake.

Acceleration is one of the causes of failure in the atomic clock's data.

As the device works by the sending of waves and receiving of the waves, acceleration of the device will interfere with the transmission. It will be minimum, but surely is detected when the data changes a single digit before or after 9,192,631,770 vibrations.

The discovery of the difference of data between the atomic clock in the satellite against the data of the atomic clock on ground zero was never predicted by relativity, such was a discovery that happened in a trial an error event.

It was found that atomic clocks give a small different data when they are in outer space, and to solve this problem nobody used relativity formulas but just to check how many nanoseconds of difference, the regular number of nanoseconds in the difference, and in base of this information another device was built: another receiver which will update the difference and translate it to accommodate the data in order to fit with the data given by the atomic clocks on ground zero.

Just by trial and error.

____________________________________________

Besides of motion as affecting the "transmission" (between the vibration frequency of the atom of Cesium and the internal receiver in the atomic clock) there is another phenomena that affect the atom of Cesium itself.

It happens that in the space station the astronauts discovered that everything -without exemptions- is affected when goes from earth to outer space.

For example, liquid metals can't be mixed on earth, but in outer space under a different gravity, the same liquid metals can be mixed.

This shows that a different gravity will affect matter. It does affect humans when astronauts return back with several health problems after staying in outer space for six months. They return with a sure advanced osteoporosis, distorted bodies, several other consequences. Lately, with a sensor, it has been discovered that the heart of the astronaut turns spherical in outer space.

The atom of Cesium is not an exemption to this rule, and this atom is affected as well by the change of gravity. The vibration frequency of the atom of Cesium will change when the clock is in outer space.

___________________________________________

Everything I just wrote, explains with simple physics, why the atomic clocks give a different data when are exposed to a different gravity and are exposed to acceleration.

The idea of a time dilatation is ridiculous, and as Rutherford said, Einstein (the main idiot) and his followers (the relativists) with his relativity will retard the rational development of science.

Admit it.

Those relativists made you an idiot.

0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 08:42 am
@dalehileman,
Quote:

I readily admit it's a relative phenom, it hasn't stopped to the pilot but to us watching from the ground. Of course he's welcome to assume that when he first fired up his rockets he'd been moving away from us, is now perfectly still while it's us passing by him, our clocks stopped. but this is conventional relativity, and my postin' is gettin' too long...

Again, almost none of the above relates to my 'Relative Relativity,' another subject entirely


You admitted that the assumed explanation given by such an idiot carries several steps and additions which definitively are not an explanation but several assumptions after assumptions.

You yourself with your inputs, have not provided the explanation of the mechanism.

Face it.

You are making of yourself the best idiot play in this discussion.

You can't provide the explanation of the mechanism acting in such assumed time dilatation.

At this moment, nobody in this planet can provide the explanation because time doesn't exist physically.

Stop being an idiot, wake up to reality.

You have been deceived.



Leadfoot
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 09:45 am
@cameronleon,
Quote:
So far, no observation at all suggest that such increasing of mass can happen with a macroscopic body. So, those ideas that it will also happen with a spaceship or a planet, star or a galaxy, such is lunacies, ideas invented by idiots.

Just curious. How do you account for the easily tested equation E = 1/2MV^2 ?

It takes much more energy to go from 20 to 40 MPH than from 0 to 20 in my car. Same delta V in both cases. This has been observed innumerable times.
dalehileman
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 10:16 am
@cameronleon,
Quote:
assumptions after assumptions.
Assumptions almost all verifiable

Quote:
have not provided the explanation of the mechanism.
No, like I said Cam, the present theory leaves the intuition helpless; whereas my own theory wojuld just take too long to detail here. As I'd offered, however, I could look up a few earlier postings that do go into some detail, if it's not too late, and provide a link or two


Incidentally, while clock slowing is apparently still somewhat controversial owing to its mutuality, 'mem' that near c, the slowing of a clock is more nearly absolute. If it were traveling 'at' c, its hands would be literally stopped
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 10:30 am
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
So, those ideas that it will also happen with a spaceship or a planet, star or a galaxy, such is lunacies
Lead, I think Cam is confused by the supposition that you can't see any change in the distant body moving away at high speed. I'm hardly an expert but I suppose it's 'cause the expansion is spherical. In other words, the galaxy looks the same as it did 'cause it.s moving very nearly 'straight away.' But if it was also rotating 'round us, we'd notice a foreshortening in the dir of rot

Thanks Foot for the observation about mass increase with the accelerating car. Much better than my settin' up that wall
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 01:03 pm
@cameronleon,
You don't understand how science works. Theories are developed with the best information that is observed, confirmed and repeated. The theory we understand today about our knowledge on our environment may change with new discoveries.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 01:05 pm
@cameronleon,
No. You must prove that time doesn't flow.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 01:08 pm
@cameronleon,
Evolution is based on chemistry and the environment.
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 01:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
'Flow...' Isn't it linguistic/definitive
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 03:30 pm
@dalehileman,
Flow pretty much describes our life, doesn't it?
dalehileman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 04:18 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
describes our life
A culmination of dust, water, and gases coalesce to form the head of a river then flowing downstream 'til it meets its fate emptying into the vast ocean to repeat its experience
0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 05:01 pm
@Leadfoot,
Quote:
Just curious. How do you account for the easily tested equation E = 1/2MV^2 ?

It takes much more energy to go from 20 to 40 MPH than from 0 to 20 in my car. Same delta V in both cases. This has been observed innumerable times.



(What an idiot. No doubt that this guy don't know anything about gears in car transmission, lol)

(lets play with him)

Hell with your formulas.

Show the increasing of mass.

Evidence, nothing but evidence.
0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 05:09 pm
@dalehileman,
Quote:
Incidentally, while clock slowing is apparently still somewhat controversial owing to its mutuality, 'mem' that near c, the slowing of a clock is more nearly absolute. If it were traveling 'at' c, its hands would be literally stopped




All your babbling full of "apparently"."somewhat controversial" "near c" (Even when atomic clocks traveling at 5 miles per second are not close to c by any means) has no value at all in science. You are talking trash, you are trying to sell tires in here...

Lets go straight to the point:

Clocks in outer space do not slow. Clocks in outer space malfunction.


Period.
cameronleon
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 05:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
You don't understand how science works. Theories are developed with the best information that is observed, confirmed and repeated. The theory we understand today about our knowledge on our environment may change with new discoveries.


The theory of relativity has been a fraud from its very beginning. Einstein was a retarded dude not a genius.

He has been exposed as a plagiarist, stealing others discoveries while working as a clerk in a patent office. The members of the Academy who give the Nobel Prize of Physics rejected and made mockery of relativity saying that such was not a theory of science but poor philosophy.

In 1919 the prediction of Newton was the winner over the prediction of Einstein.

Today, by pride, the people who belong to Einstein family or his ethnic group are paying millions to cover up that their assumed genius was a stupid dude in real life.

By asking you for the evidence of a physically real time and the mechanism of such a dilatation, and you never answer these two simple questions, you are demonstrating that you yourself don't want to admit that in physics you are just a poor ignorant.

Prove yourself that you are not an ignorant, and answer with evidence the existence of time as a physical entity that flows.

0 Replies
 
cameronleon
 
  0  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 05:21 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
No. You must prove that time doesn't flow.


See? I told you that in physics you are a complete ignorant.

For your knowledge, in science you don't have to prove a negative.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 05:59 pm
@cameronleon,
Quote:
in science you don't have to prove a negative.
Maybe in "Christian Science" but in my field, you still must present evidence and draw a conclusion and present it. We need to know why the negative may be fact. Its like non-fiction writing, forensics cuts both ways.

TomTomBinks
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 06:10 pm
@cameronleon,
Quote:
Clocks in outer space do not slow. Clocks in outer space malfunction.


How likely is it that they ALL malfunction in exactly the same way and by an amount predicted by Relativity? Think about it for a minute.
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Reply Sun 27 Aug, 2017 06:16 pm
@MontereyJack,
Louis Essen was earthbound. Satellite clocks are not. They are moving fast enough with respect to the earth for relativistic effects to show up and need to be taken iknto accountto keep earth and space clocks in synbch. They've been making the needed relativistic corrections for several decades now, and it works. Sorry Cameronloon, FAIL.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/18/2024 at 12:20:10