 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Physics / General Physics / July 2008The clock malfunctioned.
If 2 clocks show different times. At least one clock malfunctioned in it's proper counting rate. Clocks are nothing more that "periodic counting machines". When a clock does not "count" at the same rate as another clock, at least one lost it's proper counting rate. Only relativist fools can not grasp such a simple fact that has been known about clocks for centuries. :)  SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 22, 9:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > If 2 clocks show different times. > At least one clock malfunctioned in it's proper [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman How's that understanding of basic highschool physics going? > On Jul 22, 9:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > How's that understanding of basic highschool physics going? It worked to find out the clock malfunctioned. To bad you can't do the same yet! Still working under that level huh Eric? LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 22, 10:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > If 2 clocks show different times. > At least one clock malfunctioned in it's proper > counting rate. Learn about apostrophe's and they're use's you blithering douche- nozzle. > On Jul 22, 10:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Learn about apostrophe's and they're use's you blithering douche- > nozzle. So, you find nothing wrong other than that. Thank you as usual. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > If 2 clocks show different times. > At least one clock malfunctioned in it's proper > counting rate. And if two odometers that have been driven between San Diego and Sacramento show different mileages, then at least one odometer malfunctioned in its proper mileage rate? > Clocks are nothing more that "periodic counting machines". > When a clock does not "count" at the same > rate as another clock, at least one lost it's proper > counting rate. And if neither clock happens to be on earth and they end up disagreeing, then which one malfunctioned, and how do you know? > Only relativist fools can not grasp such a simple fact > that has been known about clocks for centuries. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Sacramento show different mileages, then at least one odometer > malfunctioned in its proper mileage rate? Why would they speedometers are meant to count distances that vary with path. Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. They are designed to count periodically with no variance at all regardless of path. >> Clocks are nothing more that "periodic counting machines". >> When a clock does not "count" at the same [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And if neither clock happens to be on earth and they end up > disagreeing, then which one malfunctioned, and how do you know? You need to use the "single standards" of science to find that out. Of course we know you don't like "single standards" like science uses because it conflicts with your rubber ruler world.. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 11:39 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Why would they speedometers are meant to count distances > that vary with path. Yes! > Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. > They are designed to count periodically with no variance at all > regardless of path. Sorry, but that's not true. They do vary with path, just like odometers. Doesn't matter at all what YOU think they SHOULD do or what you WANT them to do. Clocks vary according to path. > >> Clocks are nothing more that "periodic counting machines". > >> When a clock does not "count" at the same [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You need to use the "single standards" of science to find that > out. Science doesn't have "single standards". You think they SHOULD. You also think Newtonian physics (which, by the way, includes conservation of energy that you don't believe in) works just fine if a single standard would be used. However, this is just a statement of religious fantasy on your part. > Of course we know you don't like "single standards" like science > uses because it conflicts with your rubber ruler world.. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 11:39 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > odometers. Doesn't matter at all what YOU think they SHOULD do or what > you WANT them to do. Clocks vary according to path. LOL! It is not what I "think" they should do, They are "designed" to not vary and they screw up trying to do such. They vary with path because they are malfunctioning PD! Sheesh you are lost. You still don't know how clocks are supposed to work! You still think "variable" seconds is OK for timing things. LOL > Science doesn't have "single standards". LOL Poor PD, he lost the science of measurement completely He thinks we should have multiple standards for distance and multiple standards for time.! No wonder he is lost in his rubber ruler world. He does not know how clocks work nor what they are "designed" to do! He never learned how to "measure" invariably. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 11:39 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > They are "designed" to not vary and they screw up trying > to do such. I "don't" think so. Have "you" ever designed a clock? Who are "the" manufacturers of clocks you know "that" design clocks so that "they" won't vary with path? Why do you "just" make stuff up "as" you go along? LOL > They vary with path because they are malfunctioning PD! > Sheesh you are lost. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > I "don't" think so. Have "you" ever designed a clock? Yes, I have, in fact I have made all sorts of clocks. >Who are "the" > manufacturers of clocks you know "that" design clocks so that "they" > won't vary with path? Hello? Is there anything in that blank head of yours besides ROM? I said they design them to keep a non variable tick rate, and when the clocks are moved they malfunction in keeping that proper rate they were designed to do. WTF is wrong with you? You truly have no clue how clocks work nor what they are designed to do. That is truly sad. SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman Spaceman <spaceman@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote in message CMedndG5O4nk7RrVnZ2dnUVZ_o7inZ2d@comcast.com >> On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > that proper rate they were designed to do. > WTF is wrong with you? What is probably wrong with PD is that he obviously assumes that there ultimately must be some way to actually 2-way communicate, and thus to have some kind of conversation with a specimen of the ebola community. Dirk Vdm > What is probably wrong with PD is that he obviously assumes that > there ultimately must be some way to actually 2-way communicate, > and thus to have some kind of conversation with a specimen of the > ebola community. I put it to you that James' nickname, Spaceman, is incomplete. It needs a first name, too. I suggest "Takingup" for that first name. Greg Neill <gneillREM@OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message 488778ed$0$7401$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com >> What is probably wrong with PD is that he obviously assumes that >> there ultimately must be some way to actually 2-way communicate, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > incomplete. It needs a first name, too. I suggest > "Takingup" for that first name. what about "Takemeupif U. Dare Spaceman" ? > Greg Neill <gneillREM@OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message > 488778ed$0$7401$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > what about "Takemeupif U. Dare Spaceman" ? I have another suggestion. First name, "Wasteof". Greg Neill <gneillREM@OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message 488799a4$0$7371$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com >> Greg Neill <gneillREM@OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message >> 488778ed$0$7401$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I have another suggestion. First name, "Wasteof". hm... he doesn't take much space in my Folders.dbx though. Dirk Vdm >> Greg Neill <gneillREM@OVEsympatico.ca> wrote in message >> 488778ed$0$7401$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I have another suggestion. First name, "Wasteof". The insultation physics is of course expected. More funny, if they actually prove me wrong by finding that "perfect clock" they will also prove relativity wrong! and of course. They will have to "fix" the malfunctioning clock to make that "perfect clock and prove me wrong.. and yet.. once fixed.. it also proves I was correct and only relativity was wrong after that.! ROFLOL I win either way. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 12:54 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 12:12 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > Yes, I have, in fact I have made all sorts of clocks. And what measures do you take to guarantee that their readings will be path-independent? > >Who are "the" > > manufacturers of clocks you know "that" design clocks so that "they" [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > and when the clocks are moved they malfunction in keeping > that proper rate they were designed to do. Well, there's obviously something wrong with the design of your clocks that keeps them from keeping the same time independent of path! Odometers have a nonvariable tick rate, too. They are designed to count miles per revolutions of the tire, as stable as can be. But somehow this nonvariable tick rate still leads to different answers for mileage between San Diego and Sacramento, depending on path -- even with a nonvariable tick rate. As you can see, ensuring that odometers have a nonvariable tick rate doesn't guarantee path independence. I don't know why you'd make the table-leg-stupid assumption that nonvariable tick rates for clocks would result in path independence, when it obviously doesn't work for odometers. > WTF is wrong with you? > You truly have no clue how clocks work nor what they are [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 12:54 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > And what measures do you take to guarantee that their readings will be > path-independent? You don't use a moving clock to time things. sheesh PD. You truly have no clue how to time things motion scientifically huh? You really love using a multiple standard for time instead of scientifically timing motion. LOL >>> Who are "the" >>> manufacturers of clocks you know "that" design clocks so that "they" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Well, there's obviously something wrong with the design of your clocks > that keeps them from keeping the same time independent of path! No, The design is not the problem, the motion is the problem. Again, you only prove you don't know how to time things. > Odometers have a nonvariable tick rate, too. They are designed to > count miles per revolutions of the tire, as stable as can be. But [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > assumption that nonvariable tick rates for clocks would result in path > independence, when it obviously doesn't work for odometers. Poor PD, again he does not get the difference between what a distance along a path is and a timing of the motion along the path is. Spacetime has "warped" his brain beyond repair. Poor PD can not grasp that the clock is not keeping a "non variable" tick rate when it gets moved. LOL -- James M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:10 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 12:54 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > You don't use a moving clock to time things. > sheesh PD. I don't? What's this thing on my wrist for, then? > You truly have no clue how to time things motion scientifically huh? > You really love using a multiple standard for time instead of [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > No, > The design is not the problem, the motion is the problem. Then why design portable clocks? What good is a clock if I have to leave it behind when I go somewhere? > Again, you only prove you don't know how to time things. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > a distance along a path is and a timing of the motion along the path > is. Then you need to tell me what the difference is. > Spacetime has "warped" his brain beyond repair. > Poor PD can not grasp that the clock is not keeping > a "non variable" tick rate when it gets moved. Maybe so! You've just told me I can't take a clock with me! This is of course a terrible disappointment, and it tells me that the clock in my car was poorly designed, and the clock in the hotel room has been rendered useless because it lost its head when it got moved from the factory to the store to the hotel. It tells me that the little travel alarm in my suitcase is poorly designed, and that the clock on my cell phone that still runs even if I'm not connected to the network is useless on a plane. There is apparently only one clock you think is scientifically designed and it must be chained down somewhere. Damn, Spaceman, I had no idea your idea of perfectly designed time measurement was so gol-darned useless. LOL. > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > I don't? What's this thing on my wrist for, then? It is a "periodic counting device" Do you think it is immune to all physics so it can keep the correct time all the time? Lets use that watch you have to play on a gigantic merry go round. The circumference of the merry go round is 50 light years. So it takes light 50 years to circle around once. We will mark the one spot just outside that merry go round as (12:00). Now we will get you spinning around at 0.5c, according to the clock sitting at the (12:00 mark) Will you and your watch show 25 yrs of time went by after you make 1 revolution of the circumference? What does you watch say PD? Will it agree that you are actually traveling at 0.5c and say it takes 25 yrs just like the clock sitting at the (12:00) mark will say? Or will your watch say somethign different? What will your watch say it took to make that 1 revolution at 0.5c according to the non moving clock? SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >> I don't? What's this thing on my wrist for, then? > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > What will your watch say it took to make that 1 revolution > at 0.5c according to the non moving clock? Why do you bother to ask when you will just deny the (correct) answer? You're trolling again, as you have admitted doing all along. >>> I don't? What's this thing on my wrist for, then? >> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > (correct) answer? You're trolling again, as you have > admitted doing all along. Correct answer? ROFLOL The clock at the (12:00) point already gave the correct answer. I am waiting to see the "wrong answer" so I can laugh at the moron that does not understand his watch failed him. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > I don't? What's this thing on my wrist for, then? > > It is a "periodic counting device" > Do you think it is immune to all physics so it > can keep the correct time all the time? I didn't say it was immune to physics. I just want to know why so many of them are around if it's pointless to design a moving clock as you say. I mean, you were so forceful about saying that it's *stupid* to measure time with a moving clock. So why are there so many of them, James? > On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > measure time with a moving clock. So why are there so many of them, > James? It would not be pointless if the clock did not malfunction you freakin moron brain-dead parrot case. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >> On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It would not be pointless if the clock did not malfunction you > freakin moron brain-dead parrot case. You mean, you'd have nothing to whine about? >>> On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > You mean, you'd have nothing to whine about? You are the one that is whining about "nothing" Your theory has "nothing" for physical causes. You are therefore constantly whining about "nothing". LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 25, 12:10 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > >>> On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > >>> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > You are the one that is whining about "nothing" > Your theory has "nothing" for physical causes. This is no longer about "theories". This has become about your claim that there is only one properly functioning clock in the world, and it is chained to the ground. You say that all portable clocks are stupid things to build because they're obviously malfunctioning. So you're saying that every man, woman, and child that is in the clock-making business is a fool and an idiot because they are building broken devices. I would suppose this would extend to microwave ovens, cars, cell phones, and computers, because they all include clocks that are obviously broken, according to you. So you have a major problem with the makers of a lot of things. > You are therefore constantly whining about "nothing". > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > This is no longer about "theories". This has become about your claim > that there is only one properly functioning clock in the world, and it > is chained to the ground. Again, That is not what I stated and I see all you want to do is pull your little "you said" game. f.ck Off PD. You truly are one sad assed charlitan. SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 25, 9:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > This is no longer about "theories". This has become about your claim > > that there is only one properly functioning clock in the world, and it [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > f.ck Off PD. > You truly are one sad assed charlitan. Then is there more than one scientifically reliable clock in the world, and are any of them not chained to the ground? > On Jul 25, 9:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Then is there more than one scientifically reliable clock in the > world, and are any of them not chained to the ground? There is only one standard for a second PD. But we know, you don't like single standards for a measurement system and would rather worship the scifi version of measurement. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 25, 3:56 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 25, 9:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > There is only one standard for a second PD. That's not what I asked you. I asked you a question about scientifically reliable clocks. > But we know, you don't like single standards for > a measurement system and would rather worship the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 25, 3:56 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > That's not what I asked you. I asked you a question about > scientifically reliable clocks. I gave you the answer. Only one standard second exists. If you are using clocks that do not "match" that second, you are measuring time incorrectly. It is not my fault you are freakin clueless when it comes to timing things and the fact you should be using only one clock to scientifically time "2 objects" for comparison of motion. You truly are a moron beyond help. SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 10:36 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2:40 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > It would not be pointless if the clock did not malfunction you > freakin moron brain-dead parrot case. But you say they all do. And there are so MANY of them out there. And you say they are ALL useless, and the only clock that is reliable at all is one that is chained to the ground. Why aren't you in the clock business, since you are convinced they are ALL useless? > :) > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > But you say they all do. And there are so MANY of them out there. And > you say they are ALL useless, and the only clock that is reliable at > all is one that is chained to the ground. I don't say they are useless PD, I say they are not accurate for scientific timing. What the hell is your problem with twisting words into what is in your head instead of what is actually stated? SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 25, 9:17 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > But you say they all do. And there are so MANY of them out there. And > > you say they are ALL useless, and the only clock that is reliable at > > all is one that is chained to the ground. > > I don't say they are useless PD, > I say they are not accurate for scientific timing. Really? How accurate is accurate enough for scientific timing? > What the hell is your problem with twisting words into > what is in your head instead of what is actually stated? > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 25, 9:17 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Really? How accurate is accurate enough for scientific timing? Well, If you really want to know. You should learn about clocks and how atomic clocks can malfunction when moved. Until you do such, you will never figure out the true accuracy of the clock that is in motion at all. :) SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 25, 3:57 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 25, 9:17 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > You should learn about clocks and how atomic clocks > can malfunction when moved. I didn't ask you what can affect a clock. I asked you how accurate is accurate enough for scientific timing? Please pay attention to the question. > Until you do such, you will never figure out the true > accuracy of the clock that is in motion at all. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman >> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Why would they speedometers are meant to count distances > that vary with path. So are clocks! They measure the proper time duration along a spacetime path. > Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. But they do nonetheless. > They are designed to count periodically with no variance at all > regardless of path. Nope. That's your desire, but not reality. >>> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" >>> <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > So are clocks! They measure the proper time duration > along a spacetime path. No they do not measure "proper" time. If they measured "proper" time they would never show different times. And your "spacetime path" is a freakin joke beyond me calling it anythign but a joke. >> Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. > > But they do nonetheless. They count variably so they have malfunctioned in the proper operation they were designed to do. >> They are designed to count periodically with no variance at all >> regardless of path. > > Nope. That's your desire, but not reality. Nope. that is what scientists and engineers call the science of measurement, They use single standards for each system of measurement. One single standard for distance and one single standard for time. But we know you left science long ago when you accepted a curved path as the shortest physical distance between two points and started playing with your rubber rulers and malfunctioning clocks. ROFLOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >>>> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" >>>> <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > If they measured "proper" time they would never show different > times. James doesn't know what the term "proper time" means. Add it to the vast list... > And your "spacetime path" is a freakin joke beyond me calling > it anythign but a joke. James doesn't like it so it can't be so. >>> Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. >> >> But they do nonetheless. > > They count variably so they have malfunctioned in the proper > operation they were designed to do. Nope. They count perfectly and regularly in their own frames of reference. They measure the proper time of their frame. >>> They are designed to count periodically with no variance at all >>> regardless of path. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > of measurement, They use single standards for each system > of measurement. Strange, then isn't it, that you can't find a single scientist or engineer to agree with you? You seem to like telling everyone else what they're thinking and what they should think, especially if you disagree with what they actually *are* thinking (which it seems is practically all the time). >>>>> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" >>>>> <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > James doesn't know what the term "proper time" means. > Add it to the vast list... Greg "thinks" clocks always use "proper" time even when they malfunction. ROFLOL! >> And your "spacetime path" is a freakin joke beyond me calling >> it anythign but a joke. > > James doesn't like it so it can't be so. Nothing to do with "not liking it". It has to do with knowing what the science of measurement is, and what the standards of such a science are. >>>> Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > frames of reference. They measure the proper time of > their frame. LOL So don't pendulum clocks! An amount of swings = 1 second apparently you think pendulum clocks also measure proper time in thier frames even when they vary in rate also! Greg proves he does not even know what malfunction means! ROFLOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >>>>>> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" >>>>>> <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Greg "thinks" clocks always use "proper" time even when > they malfunction. James has never demonstrated that a clock has malfunctioned in the way he thinks it does. James denies empirical evidence that shows him wrong. >>> And your "spacetime path" is a freakin joke beyond me calling >>> it anythign but a joke. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It has to do with knowing what the science of measurement > is, and what the standards of such a science are. James thinks that the science of measurement must be what he wants it to be, rather than what it is. >>>>> Clocks are nto meant to count "distances" that vary. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > apparently you think pendulum clocks also measure proper time > in thier frames even when they vary in rate also! Sure, if the local acceleration due to gravity is accounted for (they use it drive their mechanism) and if their swing is not perturbed by environmental conditions and accelerations. > James has never demonstrated that a clock has malfunctioned > in the way he thinks it does. James denies empirical > evidence that shows him wrong. Greg denies the emperical evidence that clocks show every single time they do nto have the same time on thier faces. LOL Poor Greg is warped beyond repair also. He is denying the "different" time being shown. LOL > James thinks that the science of measurement must be what > he wants it to be, rather than what it is. Greg thinks it is ok to have multiple standards for a meter or a second. LOL > Sure, if the local acceleration due to gravity is > accounted for (they use it drive their mechanism) > and if their swing is not perturbed by environmental > conditions and accelerations. Again, Greg proves he can not grasp that the "tick rate" did not remain the same if it shows two different times on two different clocks. He denies the emperical evidence that the clocks are even showing how much they malfunctioned! SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman LOL On Jul 23, 12:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > >>> On Jul 23, 12:18 am, "Spaceman" > >>> <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > of measurement, They use single standards for each system > of measurement. Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, just because you think it should be true? > One single standard for distance and one single standard for time. > But we know you left science long ago when you accepted a curved [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" > for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, > just because you think it should be true? Any scientist or engineer that builds real world items will use such "single" standards PD so the thing they build will work correctly. You don't build rela world items by using variable seconds while building and you don't build real world items by using variable distance standards either. Sheesh! You are clueless. You really have no clue about "real world" building huh? SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 12:57 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" > > for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > will use such "single" standards PD so the thing they build > will work correctly. I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" for each system of measurement? If you don't know personal names, then at least name the department in a named agency or company that will back up what you say -- unless you're just making it up as you go along... > You don't build rela world items by using variable seconds > while building and you don't build real world items by using > variable distance standards either. > Sheesh! > You are clueless. > You really have no clue about "real world" building huh? Actually, I do. You're the one who has imaginary friends that do things the way you think they should be done. > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. > WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" > for each system of measurement? If you don't know personal names, then > at least name the department in a named agency or company that will > back up what you say -- unless you're just making it up as you go > along... Poor PD, he now pulls the old, Name the names. PD the name list is too long I will just say "all of them that have brains" use the single standards of each mesurement system used. >> You don't build rela world items by using variable seconds >> while building and you don't build real world items by using [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Actually, I do. You're the one who has imaginary friends that do > things the way you think they should be done. So you use multiple meter "sizes" to make things in reality? You admit you are using a rubber ruler? Better not tell that to the design team that is building a building or any other real world item. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. > > WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Name the names. > PD the name list is too long I'm not asking for the complete list. I'm asking for TWO names out of that list. But please, Jimmy, don't include your imaginary friends. I need names or agencies I can call up on the phone and ask about this. Unless you're just making it up... > I will just say "all of them that have brains" use the > single standards of each mesurement system used. [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > So you use multiple meter "sizes" to make things in reality? > You admit you are using a rubber ruler? Yup. Nothing's crashed so far, and it all works. I realize that this is magic to you. > Better not tell that to the design team that is building a building > or any other real world item. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 2:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > or agencies I can call up on the phone and ask about this. Unless > you're just making it up... Call up any engineer or scientist that built anything PD and ask them if they use rubber rulers or "moving clocks" to make the device itself. You clueless Einstein dingleberry Are you selling flux capacitors for use with your MR Fusion in your time traveling car? LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman > Call up any engineer or scientist that built anything > PD and ask them if they use rubber rulers or "moving clocks" > to make the device itself. > You clueless Einstein dingleberry > Are you selling flux capacitors for use with your MR Fusion in your > time traveling car? Continued weaseling noted. >> Call up any engineer or scientist that built anything >> PD and ask them if they use rubber rulers or "moving clocks" [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Continued weaseling noted. So you are also selling the flux capacitors? Have you called the engineers that built the particle accelerator and asked them if they used multiple standards for a meter to "build" the accelerator? Affraid to do that huh? LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Call up any engineer or scientist that built anything So you don't have any names, any agencies, any companies. These are just your imaginary friends, I take it. Let's play poker sometime. You must have thought a "poker face" meant getting hit in the face with a poker. > PD and ask them if they use rubber rulers or "moving clocks" > to make the device itself. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 2:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > So you don't have any names, any agencies, any companies. These are > just your imaginary friends, I take it. Nothing more imaginary than the engineers,agencies and companies that you say built the particle accelerators using rubber rulers and malfunctioning clocks! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 4:41 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > that you say built the particle accelerators using rubber rulers and > malfunctioning clocks! Except unlike you, I can name names of people who used rubber rulers in designing the accelerators, to great success. For example, at Fermilab: You can look up Ernie Malamud Helen Edwards Steve Holmes Bill Foster Sunanda Banerjee Robert Wilson Norman Ramsey John Peoples All you can do is mutter about "anyone" this or "anyone" that. > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 4:41 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > Except unlike you, I can name names of people who used rubber rulers > in designing the accelerators, to great success. For example, at > Fermilab: > You can look up [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Norman Ramsey > John Peoples LOL PD, you only fool yourself if you think rubber rulers were used to actually "BUILD" the accelerator itself. So those are the engineers and they used blueprints that were based on rubber rulers and all huh? I do feel sorry for you I also think it is real funny you have such a loss of a clue! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 8:58 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 4:41 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > So those are the engineers and they used blueprints > that were based on rubber rulers and all huh? Yup. They had to do calculations of what the ring would look like to the particles in it, then they had to stretch the rubber rules to see what it would look like to those folks with the front loaders, and then they drew the plans accordingly. > I do feel sorry for you > I also think it is real funny you have such a loss of a clue! > LOL > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 24, 8:58 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > what it would look like to those folks with the front loaders, and > then they drew the plans accordingly. Ya .. OK sure! LOL You truly are dillusional PD! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 2:02 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 24, 8:58 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > > Ya .. OK sure! I'm glad that's settled then. > LOL > You truly are dillusional PD! You do realize, Spaceman, that the point is not to get you to believe anything. I don't give a damn what you believe. In fact, the more stuff you don't believe, the funnier you are. You're a regular Gomer Pyle. I'm inclined to tell you some more true stuff you won't believe, because it just makes you foam at the mouth in that cute little way you have. > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > You do realize, Spaceman, that the point is not to get you to believe > anything. I don't give a damn what you believe. In fact, the more > stuff you don't believe, the funnier you are. You're a regular Gomer > Pyle. I'm inclined to tell you some more true stuff you won't believe, > because it just makes you foam at the mouth in that cute little way > you have. PD, You really don't know how funny you are then huh? You are just like the guy that said the world was flat! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:49 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2:16 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Call up any engineer or scientist that built anything Can't do it, can you? Just TWO NAMES of people I can talk to. What's the matter? You don't know any engineers or scientists? Just how far out in the country IS your single-wide? > PD and ask them if they use rubber rulers or "moving clocks" > to make the device itself. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman >> I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. >> WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I will just say "all of them that have brains" use the > single standards of each mesurement system used. James weasles around again. No depth of character. >>> I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. >>> WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > James weasles around again. No depth of character. Greg proves he still can not grasp that when two clocks show different times that it is emperical evidence that at least one clock did not keep the same rate as the other did. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >>>> I asked you for specifics and you keep waffling with generalities. >>>> WHICH scientists and engineers in PARTICULAR use "single standards" [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > show different times that it is emperical evidence that > at least one clock did not keep the same rate as the other did. ...and again. >> Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" >> for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > while building and you don't build real world items by using > variable distance standards either. James denies that particle accelerators exist; obviously no one could have built one! >>> Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" >>> for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > James denies that particle accelerators exist; obviously > no one could have built one! Hang On, You are saying they used rubber rulers to "build" a particle accelerator? ROFLOL! That would be one funny looking circle if everyone used a different meter length to build it with! LOL >>>> Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" >>>> for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > You are saying they used rubber rulers to "build" a particle > accelerator? James doesn't even know the sorts of calculations that need to be done in order to design a particle accelerator so that it can function to spec. > James doesn't even know the sorts of calculations that need > to be done in order to design a particle accelerator so > that it can function to spec. Greg, Not once in the "building of a particle accelerator" is a multiple standard of time or distance used. If you truly think such. You will never build one of your own even if you had billions upon billions of dollars! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >> James doesn't even know the sorts of calculations that need >> to be done in order to design a particle accelerator so [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > You will never build one of your own even if you > had billions upon billions of dollars! We are anxious to see your plans for the various accelerators around the world, and the construction manuals. >>> James doesn't even know the sorts of calculations that need >>> to be done in order to design a particle accelerator so [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > accelerators around the world, and the construction > manuals. Funny thing about such plans I would create is that they match the "single standards used for a meter" in the plans they actually used. But of course you don't get that building stuff with an elastic band tape measure is really stupid. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 2:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > >>> Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" > >>> for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > You are saying they used rubber rulers to "build" a particle > accelerator? Yup. And it works. > ROFLOL! > That would be one funny looking circle if everyone used a different > meter length to build it with! Oh, the rulers aren't just ANY old length. There are rules. They're called Lorentz transforms. And the circle looks just fine, and it works really, really well. You ought to hop in your pick-up and drive out there sometime. http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/images07/aerial092407.jpg http://www.fnal.gov/pub/today/images04/SLAC_aerial.jpg http://www.aip.org/png/images/rhic.jpg http://britlog.slaughter.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/lhc-aerial-view.jpg http://www.lns.cornell.edu/Research/AP/CESR/rsrc/LEPP/Research/AP/CESR/WebHome/c esr_aerial.jpg http://xfelinfo.desy.de/_medien/desy-luftbild.jpg http://qd.typepad.com/33/images/jlab2.jpg http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/kullander/ Whoops. Almost forgot. ... LOL! PD > On Jul 23, 2:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > Yup. And it works. You just proved you are completey clueless how to build an accelearator that will work at all! LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman >> On Jul 23, 2:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > You just proved you are completey clueless how to build > an accelearator that will work at all! Really? Please back up your statement with evidence. On Jul 23, 2:53 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2:18 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > You just proved you are completey clueless how to build > an accelearator that will work at all! Well, let's see. Which one of us has worked for decades at several accelerator labs? Hey, I know! > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > Well, let's see. Which one of us has worked for decades at several > accelerator labs? Hey, I know! Working at Mcdonalds does not prove the McDonalds building you work in was built using rubber rulers and malfunctioning clocks LOL hmmm? So when you say a particle is traveling at 0.9c around that circle it is not really traveling at 0.9c because it's clock should be running slower? What speed is it "really" doing if it's clock is runing slower PD? LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 23, 4:39 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > Well, let's see. Which one of us has worked for decades at several > > accelerator labs? Hey, I know! [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > that circle it is not really traveling at 0.9c because it's clock > should be running slower? The way I measure speed at the Tevatron is by using exactly the same prescription that YOU suggested. I mark off a distance -- in this case the distance around the ring -- and then time how long it takes for the particles to go around the ring. Got any problem with using YOUR method for measuring speed? Oh, and the answer is a lot closer to 1c than it is to 0.9c. > What speed is it "really" doing if it's clock is runing slower PD? > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 23, 4:39 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > method for measuring speed? Oh, and the answer is a lot closer to 1c > than it is to 0.9c. But PD, I just asked you, why are you not using the "particles speed" It has the clock that slowed down. Why would you measure the speed from the accelerator point of view? Do you actually realize that the particles point of view with a "wrong" time would be stupid? Or are you just ignorant to the first degree? SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 9:01 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 4:39 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > But PD, I just asked you, why are you not using the "particles speed" > It has the clock that slowed down. Because I don't have to use that clock. I can use either. The Lorentz transform tells me how to go from one to the other. So I choose one I want to make measurements with. > Why would you measure the speed from the accelerator point of view? Why not? It's the easier one to use. > Do you actually realize that the particles point of view with a "wrong" time > would be stupid? No, it would't be wrong. I could use it if desired. Just don't need to in this case. > Or are you just ignorant to the first degree? > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > Because I don't have to use that clock. I can use either. > The Lorentz transform tells me how to go from one to the other. So I > choose one I want to make measurements with. When you use the "particles clock" you have lost speed and the accelerator clock proves your particle clock is wrong. You are a fool PD. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 2:04 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > Because I don't have to use that clock. I can use either. > > The Lorentz transform tells me how to go from one to the other. So I > > choose one I want to make measurements with. > > When you use the "particles clock" you have lost > speed I don't know why you'd think that. You know the distance changes too, don't you? > and the accelerator clock proves your particle > clock is wrong. > You are a fool PD. In your eyes, yes. Of course, what you think doesn't matter, does it? You can think any damn fool thing you want. It's part of what makes you the gem you are. > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > On Jul 24, 2:04 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > You can think any damn fool thing you want. It's part of what makes > you the gem you are. PD, if the dang particles clock was right, it would not be moving as fast and all your calculations for impact speeds would be totally useless. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman On Jul 24, 10:38 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > On Jul 24, 2:04 pm, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > moving as fast and all your calculations for impact > speeds would be totally useless. Sorry, no. Now you're just making stuff up. > LOL > > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman On Jul 23, 9:57 am, "Spaceman" <space...@yourclockmalfunctioned.duh> wrote: > > Which scientists and engineers in particular use "single standards" > > for each system of measurement? Why do you make all this stuff up, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > will use such "single" standards PD so the thing they build > will work correctly. You are neither a scientist or an engineer, so what do you know about either? > You don't build rela world items by using variable seconds Tell that to the people who operate GPS, or the people who actually use high precision clocks. > while building and you don't build real world items by using > variable distance standards either. Tell that to the engineers who build bridges who have to account for thermal expansion and contraction. > Sheesh! > You are clueless. > You really have no clue about "real world" building huh? You have no clue about "real world" anything, spaceshit. That's why you are here wasting everyone's time. > -- > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman > You are neither a scientist or an engineer, so what do you know about > either? You also don't know how clock work huh Eric? You truly never learned what the proper function of a clock is for huh? Poor Eric. Clock illiterate to the first degree. :) > Tell that to the engineers who build bridges who have to account for > thermal expansion and contraction. Hello? Those engineers use a single meter standard for the entire thing. and they also do not use anythign other than a single standard for a second. Poor Eric, Good thing he is not building those bridges with his rubber rulers! > You have no clue about "real world" anything, spaceshit. That's why > you are here wasting everyone's time. I am not wasting time, You are by supporting a multiple standards based bullshit theory that can not even find out "how" the clock malfunctioned. LOL SignatureJames M Driscoll Jr Spaceman > If 2 clocks show different times. > At least one clock malfunctioned in it's proper > counting rate. [snip crap] > James M Driscoll Jr > Spaceman 1) GPS. Each satellite has on board four cesium or three rubidium atomic clocks. Geee... they all "mafunction" identically versus more than a dozen ground atomic clocks! 2) Idiot. 3) Hafele-Keating Experiment, <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele-Keating_experiment> <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html> <http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/pdf/flying_clock_math.pdf> http://metrologyforum.tm.agilent.com/cesium.shtml http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0008012 4) f.cking imbecile 5) Hey stooopid Spaceshit - how does radioactive decay "malfunction"? <http://www.eurisol.org/site01/radioactive_beam_facilities_in_europe_status_and_p lans-754.html> <http://www.nupecc.org/report97/report97_final/node14.html> <http://ps-div.web.cern.ch/ps-div/Workshops/Seminars/20010613.ppt> Does it burn, stooopid Spaceshit, does it burn? http://groups.google.com/groups?q=spaceshit&ie=ISO-8859-1&hl=en http://www.hyperdeath.co.uk/spaceman/message.html 1) Where is the clock in the Mossbauer effect, Spaceshit? http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/mossb.html 2) Fill in the following (the first one is mercy humped): (+1)(+1) = +1 (-1)(+1) = ? (+1)(-1) = ? (-1)(-1) = ? <http://unusedcycles.wordpress.com/2008/05/30/physics-of-gps-relativistic-time-delay/> clocks in orbit - by an undergrad <http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/relativ/airtim.html> Hafele-Keating Experiment for Spaceshit http://www.yugop.com/ver3/stuff/03/fla.html Clock for Spaceshit <http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/ptti/ptti2002/paper20.pdf> Clocks for Spaceshit http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9504017 Clocks for Spaceshit. http://bkocay.cs.umanitoba.ca/Students/Theory.html The distorted cube http://www.hyperdeath.co.uk/spaceman/ Spaceshit emulator http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/toe_frames.html Chew on it http://www.iancgbell.clara.net/maths/spctime.htm http://insti.physics.sunysb.edu/~siegel/Fields2.pdf SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message