Light bends matter, surprising scientists

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Trying but not succeeding as it can't be done. We have the theory, but not the means to execute the idea behind it because time itself doesn't exist and not once have we ever pointed at a unit of time itself. You can't measure cycles and call it time my friend.

It was written best by H.G. Wells.

"Can an instantaneous cube exist?(Something the other guy said) Exactly. So an object must have 4 dimensions length, breadth, height and duration."

I like how Einstein said it though with space and time being a fabric. None of that Einstein is wrong hogwash please.

Let's Stay on Topic, Please.

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Trying but not succeeding as it can't be done. We have the theory, but not the means to execute the idea behind it because time itself doesn't exist and not once have we ever pointed at a unit of time itself. You can't measure cycles and call it time my friend.

It was written best by H.G. Wells.

"Can an instantaneous cube exist?(Something the other guy said) Exactly. So an object must have 4 dimensions length, breadth, height and duration."

I like how Einstein said it though with space and time being a fabric. None of that Einstein is wrong hogwash please.

If you truly believe Einstein is spot on, then please by all means show me a unit of time that requires no other unit of measure and please show me a fabric of space.

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Trying but not succeeding as it can't be done. We have the theory, but not the means to execute the idea behind it because time itself doesn't exist and not once have we ever pointed at a unit of time itself. You can't measure cycles and call it time my friend.

It was written best by H.G. Wells.

"Can an instantaneous cube exist?(Something the other guy said) Exactly. So an object must have 4 dimensions length, breadth, height and duration."

I like how Einstein said it though with space and time being a fabric. None of that Einstein is wrong hogwash please.

If you truly believe Einstein is spot on, then please by all means show me a unit of time that requires no other unit of measure and please show me a fabric of space.

You wanna see space?

Space is a dimension. Space is a dimension that is interlinked with time. Space and time are what make up the universe. Inside space there is time which governs how long or how short space can be. Trying to observe a unit of space is like an object passing the event horizon of a black hole trying to come back.

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Trying but not succeeding as it can't be done. We have the theory, but not the means to execute the idea behind it because time itself doesn't exist and not once have we ever pointed at a unit of time itself. You can't measure cycles and call it time my friend.

It was written best by H.G. Wells.

"Can an instantaneous cube exist?(Something the other guy said) Exactly. So an object must have 4 dimensions length, breadth, height and duration."

I like how Einstein said it though with space and time being a fabric. None of that Einstein is wrong hogwash please.

If you truly believe Einstein is spot on, then please by all means show me a unit of time that requires no other unit of measure and please show me a fabric of space.

You wanna see space?

Space is a dimension. Space is a dimension that is interlinked with time. Space and time are what make up the universe. Inside space there is time which governs how long or how short space can be. Trying to observe a unit of space is like an object passing the event horizon of a black hole trying to come back.

Really now? OK, show me.

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex

Originally posted by Gentill Abdulla

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Trying but not succeeding as it can't be done. We have the theory, but not the means to execute the idea behind it because time itself doesn't exist and not once have we ever pointed at a unit of time itself. You can't measure cycles and call it time my friend.

It was written best by H.G. Wells.

"Can an instantaneous cube exist?(Something the other guy said) Exactly. So an object must have 4 dimensions length, breadth, height and duration."

I like how Einstein said it though with space and time being a fabric. None of that Einstein is wrong hogwash please.

If you truly believe Einstein is spot on, then please by all means show me a unit of time that requires no other unit of measure and please show me a fabric of space.

You wanna see space?

Space is a dimension. Space is a dimension that is interlinked with time. Space and time are what make up the universe. Inside space there is time which governs how long or how short space can be. Trying to observe a unit of space is like an object passing the event horizon of a black hole trying to come back.

Really now? OK, show me.

First you are going to have to cut a strip of the universe. Then your going to have to somehow roll up the strip into an actual object such as a sphere. Then you are going to have to observe the changes in the sphere and see how it reacts with other substances. You might already know but this is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT!

reply to post by Gentill Abdulla


So it's never been proven and is all pure speculation, that is what your saying right?

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

So it's never been proven and is all pure speculation, that is what your saying right?

Time dilation is fact right now. So if time is interlinked with space then I guess it means it has been proven.


As to regarding an observable unit of time, it could be that time and space are each one very huge substance that is made up of nothing.That is just one object. Like when a fluid is super cooled. All molecules loose their identities and become one molecule. Whose to say that doesn't happen on a much larger scale?

reply to post by Gentill Abdulla


Time dilation is far from a fact if one applies a smidgen of critical thought. Do you honestly think time will dilate for a moving clock going in and out from strong to weak gravitational tugs speeding and slowing down as it constantly orbits the Earth? It's not time, it's called being out of sync with the stationary clock that is under a constant gravitational tug.

Clearly you are unable to provide me for what I ask and for the very reason I've told you. It doesn't exist.

Originally posted by sirnex
reply to post by Gentill Abdulla

 

Time dilation is far from a fact if one applies a smidgen of critical thought. Do you honestly think time will dilate for a moving clock going in and out from strong to weak gravitational tugs speeding and slowing down as it constantly orbits the Earth? It's not time, it's called being out of sync with the stationary clock that is under a constant gravitational tug.

Clearly you are unable to provide me for what I ask and for the very reason I've told you. It doesn't exist.

Why yes, yes I do. Obviously we will never convince the other about who is right so I guess we should stop because we are cluttering this thread and I am getting kind of sleepy seeing as it's 10:14 over here.

But, as I said, if time exists as Einstein puts it it is possible to manipulate time using light. No not the way Mallet does. If you want to further talk to me on that, Sirnex, then feel free to u2u me as I would love to explain.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by Gentill Abdulla]

reply to post by Gentill Abdulla


When you get the chance, explain the time dilation experiment without the effects of variable gravitational influences upon a moving satellite in orbit when checked against a stationary clock on Earth. It simply can't be done and I would eat my words if you can explain it.

There is not enough information in this article to draw any conclusions, much less slight inferences...it doesn't pass the "common sense" test...

The resultant spiral structure could likely be stress relaxation due to it's preparation/processing/fabrication. This is the first issue to address.

Regardless of the nature of light (it's duality and what not), there is no mention of heat. A physicist may think of this in terms of the electromagnetic radiation of the photons themselves as "wave packets." The ambient heat and effect of the photons on the samples must be measured and analyzed. This is not easily done even with the most sophisticated data acquisition sensors and monitoring. If measured and shown to be present, it would lend credence to the notion of stress relaxation of the samples.

[edit on 21-4-2010 by ibiubu]

Hasn't light ALWAYS effected matter?