Seeing things in their past? You are full of beans!

[Polymath257]

Think about this, a Photon has memory, we can send memory via photons.

P.s memory is continuous , we do perceive those small times.

No, we do not. That's why a videos are possible. We cannot transmit a *continuous* series of pictures. But we *can* transmit a sequence of discrete pictures that are updated fast enough that we don't notice. We literally don't perceive the time between the updates if it is short enough.

 

[james blunt]

I know what I am talking about, well worth an investment gamble.

added- sorry wrong thread.

 

[james blunt]

No, we do not. That's why a videos are possible. We cannot transmit a *continuous* series of pictures. But we *can* transmit a sequence of discrete pictures that are updated fast enough that we don't notice. We literally don't perceive the time between the updates if it is short enough.

Our brain is faster than a transmission.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

No. The speed of light is special. You can use this equation with v as the speed of the boat to compare time on the shore with time on the boat. But you would still use c=speed of light.

Is the observer time always the same no matter where the observer is located? Because that doesn't seem to be taken into account in the equation.

 

[Polymath257]

Is the observer time always the same no matter where the observer is located? Because that doesn't seem to be taken into account in the equation.

Location isn't relevant (we aren't dealing with gravity here). Relative motion is. That is taken into account by the v.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Location isn't relevant (we aren't dealing with gravity here). Relative motion is. That is taken into account by the v.

How in the world can location not be relevant?

 

[Polymath257]

Our brain is faster than a transmission.

Not even close. Typical speeds for neural signals are less than 120 m/s. That's around 250 miles per hour, which is slower than a jet airplane. By the way, that's for very fast neural signals. For pain, the speed is much, much slower.

In contrast, the speed of electrical conduction is above 90% that of light.

 

[Polymath257]

How in the world can location not be relevant?

For measuring time? Why would it be?

 

[james blunt]

Where is the kitchen sink situated?

 

[james blunt]

For measuring time? Why would it be?

No motion needed for time to pass .

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Location isn't relevant (we aren't dealing with gravity here). Relative motion is. That is taken into account by the v.

Ok give me an example where we are measuring time for the observer who is standing still, when it is a ship traveling at 60mph across the lake. If I have another observer standing still in a totally different location( maybe several miles away) measuring the event. Which observer's time are we getting the answer for?

 

[james blunt]

Ok give me an example where we are measuring time for the observer who is standing still, when it is a ship traveling at 60mph across the lake. If I have another observer standing still in a totally different location( maybe several miles away) measuring the event. Which observer's time are we getting the answer for?

The observer is measuring their own time observing.

 

[Polymath257]

Ok give me an example where we are measuring time for the observer who is standing still, when it is a ship traveling at 60mph across the lake. If I have another observer standing still in a totally different location( maybe several miles away) measuring the event. Which observer's time are we getting the answer for?

Remember we are talking about time intervals here...how much time has elapsed. In that case, since both observers are at rest with respect to each other, they will measure the same time interval.

The person in the *boat*, which is moving with respect to the two observers, may well get a different measured time interval. Now, for 60mph, percentage of the speed of light is about .00001%, so the percentage difference in the measured time interval is in the 13th decimal place.

This is why at speeds like 60mph, we don't ever detect relativistic effects: they are *small* at such speeds.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Location isn't relevant (we aren't dealing with gravity here). Relative motion is. That is taken into account by the v.

Are you guys saying that one equation produces a limit for time = 0? If so, is the limit for what you call the proper time or observer time?

Wouldn't it be observer time the way the equation is set up?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The observer is measuring their own time observing.

Right, but their equation says observer time = proper time/ something. He said location of the observer didn't matter. I am trying to show that it has to matter, if different answers are obtained when the observer is in a different location.

 

[james blunt]

Remember we are talking about time intervals here...how much time has elapsed. In that case, since both observers are at rest with respect to each other, they will measure the same time interval.

The person in the *boat*, which is moving with respect to the two observers, may well get a different measured time interval. Now, for 60mph, percentage of the speed of light is about .00001%, so the percentage difference in the measured time interval is in the 13th decimal place.

This is why at speeds like 60mph, we don't ever detect relativistic effects: they are *small* at such speeds.

Objectively the person in the boat, can return to the observer at rest to the realism that their measurement of time was incorrect. They conclude they both experienced the longer measurement of time.

 

[james blunt]

Right, but their equation says observer time = proper time/ something. He said location of the observer didn't matter. I am trying to show that it has to matter, if different answers are obtained when the observer is in a different location.

''They'' don't understand that time does not slow down so will argue all day.

 

[james blunt]

Like I have already demonstrated,

 

[james blunt]

Analogy

Two cars simultaneous start a race travelling parallel to each other

One travels at c and one travels at 0.5c


After one second we pause the race


They both experience 1 second timed by the longer length.

The observer travelling at 0.5 c experiences half the length of travel but equal time, what their clock is measuring is irrelevant.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

There is no distance for a photon, so it is nonsensical to ask about travelling a distance.

Ok I will ask the question differently. Does the photon get from the star to the planet instantly or does it take time?

If instantly, then why does it take 8m and 20s for us to notice it getting from sun to earth?