I have disproven Time Dilation and Theory of Relativity

[johnnyfalcon]

If you are moving in a train awaay from the clock and bouncing light beams????
Then yes the time between bounces will appear slower than if you were standing still next to the clocks and bouncing light beam..

"appear" is the key word .

Actual time between light bouncing events can be accuratley calculated at any point on the train ride. And you would always get the same amount of time between light bouncing events....the further and faster you go on the train away from lthe light bouncing events the more time delay will appear

What are you trying to say this not time dilation, this is an illusion of time dilation

You could o

Yes.
Now consider just one such clock.
At one moment the light reflects on the lower mirror. This moment I label "moment A".
There is only one "moment A", so it is a unique event. Everyone can witness this once in a lifetime "moment A".
From this moment, the light goes up, reflects on the upper mirror and comes back at the lower mirror. This return to the lower mirror I label "moment B".
Thus we have defined two unique events "moment A" and "moment B".
There can be no discussion on when these moments occur, because they are uniquely defined. Agreed?
Now the question is how much time passes between these two events?
It is a simple question, but the answer is not as straightforward.
I think you will have no problem with this:
Solution 1: the light goes up over a distance of h, then travels down over a distance of h so light travels a distance of 2h. This we divide by c (the speed of light) to get our answer: 2h/c.
Am I correct?
Then comes the hard part. Remember we are still talking about the same clock!
Solution 1 only applies if the clock does not move with respect to me, now suppose it does because, for example, I am in a (very fast) train passing by. Now I see the clock and its light pulse moving in the opposite direction that the train is moving.
So the light does not only go up and down, it now moves in a triangular path which is longer then 2h, maybe 2.2h. That gives us solution 2:
The light goes up over a distance of 1.1h, then travels down over a distance of 1.1h so light travels a distance of 2.2h. This we divide by c (the speed of light) to get our answer: 2.2h/c.

So the time between these uniquely defined moments depends on my state of motion relative to the clock.

What does your toolbox say about that?


Ernst.

[Ernst]

You are almost there, Johnny.
Tell me which one is moving and which one is standing still.
Then tell me which answer is the right answer; solution 1 or solution 2?


Ernst.

[johnnyfalcon]

You are almost there, Johnny.
Tell me which one is moving and which one is standing still.
Then tell me which answer is the right answer; solution 1 or solution 2?


Ernst.

both will have the same answer

The one in the train will have to calculate the distance that he is getting further and further away, and his speed

There is more math involved with the person in the train, this is essential in order to measure the light bouncinng intervals flawlessly riding on a train

[Ernst]

In the calculation I showed you will get different answers.
Can you show me how to get the same answers in both cases?
(I am not afraid of a little more math, don't worry)


Ernst.

[ldrancer]

truth doesnt need to be proven only you need to answer questions. since you can't prove it you said you showed, not proved. so,....

[johnnyfalcon]

In the calculation I showed you will get different answers.
Can you show me how to get the same answers in both cases?
(I am not afraid of a little more math, don't worry)


Ernst.

The further away you are there will be a time discrepency between what you see and what really happend

For every 6 mile there might be a 6 second discrepancy that you simply subtract

So at 30 miles out there will be a 30 second difference in time measured on the train compared to where the bouncing lights are at. So at 30 miles out you know that from your point of view you are seeing 30 seconds behined the actual event because of distance

You have to do less calculations to get a measuremeant of an event the closer you are


The further you are you must know the ratio of time delay per distance...

60 miles out =60 second time delay of event being measured

[Ernst]

The further away you are there will be a time discrepency between what you see and what really happend

For every 6 mile there might be a 6 second discrepancy that you simply subtract

So at 30 miles out there will be a 30 second difference in time measured on the train compared to where the bouncing lights are at. So at 30 miles out you know that from your point of view you are seeing 30 seconds behined the actual event because of distance

You have to do less calculations to get a measuremeant of an event the closer you are


The further you are you must know the ratio of time delay per distance...

60 miles out =60 second time delay of event being measured

REALLY??? Where did you learn that?
Then all murders should be solved pretty easy. Suppose I arrive at a place where a murder has been committed 1 hour ago. Then to see who did it I would have to wait 288 seconds, because in that time our solar system has travelled 3600 miles through the galaxy. And 3600 miles = 3600 seconds = 1 hour according to your theory.
But an even stranger thing happens, because if I arrive 2 hours after the time of the murder I would have to wait 576 seconds to see the event. Come to think of it, no one would ever see the same events at the same time.

I'm afraid you lost me here.

Ernst.

[Ernst]

Or.... do you mean that the light of the event has to travel towards me, which takes time.

If that is the case, let's put two people on the train passing the clock. The first person passes the clock at moment A and the second person passes at moment B. They have both seen the triangular path...
Let's put some numbers on this example. Suppose the train is driving at half the light speed. Then the diagonal (both in the upward direction as in the downward direction) is equal to the base of the triangle. (the light goes diagonally up 2 meters, and we drive 1 meter, then it goes diagonally down 2 meters and we drive again 1 meter. So all sides of the triangle are 2 meter). The person sitting next to the clock sees the light going up √3 meter, and going down √3 meter (ask Pythagoras), that is about 3.46 meters, while the train people see the light move 4 meters.
Where and how does your correction apply?


Ernst.

[johnnyfalcon]

6 second delay for every 6 miles was made up for discussion but here is truth

The light we see from jupiter is 32 to 52 minites old depending on wich side of the sun we're on ill give you the luxury of calculating that per mile

Ernst no offense but you sound like a paid poster trying to defend the status quo, derail thread or distract, if not then i apoligize buddy

Light is older when far and newer up close theres proof

[Ernst]

6 second delay for every 6 miles was made up for discussion but here is truth

The light we see from jupiter is 32 to 52 minites old depending on wich side of the sun we're on ill give you the luxury of calculating that per mile

Ernst no offense but you sound like a paid poster trying to defend the status quo, derail thread or distract, if not then i apoligize buddy

Light is older when far and newer up close theres proof

I wish I was paid for this. About 30 years ago I was, I was helping high school students with math and physics. Not any more. But I still enjoy it if I can show someone how things work.
I am defending the status quo with regards to time dilation, because I am convinced that it is true. I must add here that I believe that an ether (such as akasha in the Vedas) exists so there I differ from the currently accepted theories. I have also worked out Tesla's theory on electricity which will obliviate large parts of quantum mechs and make a drastic change in Maxwell's theories. So.... I am not all status quo.
If you feel I am derailing the thread, then I will quit immediately hoping that you will show me what this thread is about. I thought it was about time dilation and I have only been talking about that, so how does that derail your thread?
I am convinced that time dilation happens for two reasons:
1 - it is logically and mathematically correct
2 - it has been proven in experiments
Given these two reasons there is very little hope for you that you will convince me otherwise. This hope diminishes even further seeing that you really do not know the first thing about relativity (no offence, just an observed fact).
You are not stupid, just ignorant. So let me explain time dilation to you and once you understand it, then you can explain me how you will disprove it.
And again, if you want me to quit, I'm gone. Promise.
So let me go back to my last post to which you have not yet responded:

Let's put two people on the train passing the clock. The first person passes the clock at moment A and the second person passes at moment B. They have both seen the triangular path...
Let's put some numbers on this example. Suppose the train is driving at half the light speed. Then the diagonal (both in the upward direction as in the downward direction) is equal to the base of the triangle. (the light goes diagonally up 2 meters, and we drive 1 meter, then it goes diagonally down 2 meters and we drive again 1 meter. So all sides of the triangle are 2 meter). The person sitting next to the clock sees the light going up √3 meter, and going down √3 meter (ask Pythagoras), that is about 3.46 meters, while the train people see the light move 4 meters.
Where and how does your correction apply?

Putting two persons on the train will remove the mathematical complications you were referring to, and it does not change anything about the triangular path.
Right?


Ernst.

[johnnyfalcon]

You keep changing your proof and have ignored all of mine but ill keep biting and read this one later because frankly im bored repeating myself to explain what you arent getting

I wish I was paid for this. About 30 years ago I was, I was helping high school students with math and physics. Not any more. But I still enjoy it if I can show someone how things work.
I am defending the status quo with regards to time dilation, because I am convinced that it is true. I must add here that I believe that an ether (such as akasha in the Vedas) exists so there I differ from the currently accepted theories. I have also worked out Tesla's theory on electricity which will obliviate large parts of quantum mechs and make a drastic change in Maxwell's theories. So.... I am not all status quo.
If you feel I am derailing the thread, then I will quit immediately hoping that you will show me what this thread is about. I thought it was about time dilation and I have only been talking about that, so how does that derail your thread?
I am convinced that time dilation happens for two reasons:
1 - it is logically and mathematically correct
2 - it has been proven in experiments
Given these two reasons there is very little hope for you that you will convince me otherwise. This hope diminishes even further seeing that you really do not know the first thing about relativity (no offence, just an observed fact).
You are not stupid, just ignorant. So let me explain time dilation to you and once you understand it, then you can explain me how you will disprove it.
And again, if you want me to quit, I'm gone. Promise.
So let me go back to my last post to which you have not yet responded:

Putting two persons on the train will remove the mathematical complications you were referring to, and it does not change anything about the triangular path.
Right?


Ernst.

[Ernst]

You keep changing your proof and have ignored all of mine but ill keep biting and read this one later because frankly im bored repeating myself to explain what you arent getting

I am not changing any proof: the triangular path remains the same, whether you are moving towards the clock or away from it, whether you are far or near.
I have put in some numbers to make it easier to talk about and I have put in another observer to take away your objections. The point is the people on the train see the light travelling further than those not moving relative to the clock.
I am not ignoring your proof at all, I have read it and see its flaws. But I can not explain these flaws to someone who is clueless about relativity. Therefore I explain (special) relativity to you. Once you understand that, you too will see the flaws in your theory.
Quite frankly... I think that your feeling of being bored is coming from a tinge of understanding that your proof will fall apart.


Ernst.

[johnnyfalcon]

To clarify you are saying to people on a train in a straight path away from the bouncing lights??

If so they will see more time delay or old light like in the jupiter example the further away they are

Or.... do you mean that the light of the event has to travel towards me, which takes time.

If that is the case, let's put two people on the train passing the clock. The first person passes the clock at moment A and the second person passes at moment B. They have both seen the triangular path...
Let's put some numbers on this example. Suppose the train is driving at half the light speed. Then the diagonal (both in the upward direction as in the downward direction) is equal to the base of the triangle. (the light goes diagonally up 2 meters, and we drive 1 meter, then it goes diagonally down 2 meters and we drive again 1 meter. So all sides of the triangle are 2 meter). The person sitting next to the clock sees the light going up √3 meter, and going down √3 meter (ask Pythagoras), that is about 3.46 meters, while the train people see the light move 4 meters.
Where and how does your correction apply?


Ernst.

[johnnyfalcon]

You are trying to make this more confusing then it has to be ernst i made a perfect disproof of time dilation that bromikey quoted it was no more than two sentences

Paid posters add distracting unnecesary details to make a thread boring

[johnnyfalcon]

If your twin travel 10 times the speed of light for and came back to earth after 20 years , you could see his flight trail/hologram or impression in the sky for years to come but he would return 20 years older no time dilation...only his blur in the sky would be present for a few years

Look at this post ernst

No unecessary math