It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Say you're at bat in a baseball game. There are 4 pictures lying on the table. First one you strike out, second one you get a base hit, third one you bunt the ball and the fourth on the catcher drops the ball. Light projects each reference frame so there's a wave of probable things that can happen. Say you get a bunt. This is like a snapshot of one of these reference frames.
I think what i was trying to get at is, there is motion. The reference of frame to space is impossible as there is infinity smaller and smaller frames of reference.
why does it hurt when the ball appears to smack you in the face, if it's not really moving? And why does someone bleed when a bullet appears to tear their flesh, if it's not really moving?
Originally posted by listerofsmeg
indeed an interesting concept.
but what about momentum.
what is kinetic energy.
still interesting though
In the paradox of Achilles and the Tortoise, Achilles is in a footrace with the tortoise. Achilles allows the tortoise a head start of 100 metres. If we suppose that each racer starts running at some constant speed (one very fast and one very slow), then after some finite time, Achilles will have run 100 metres, bringing him to the tortoise's starting point. During this time, the tortoise has run a much shorter distance, say, 10 metres. It will then take Achilles some further time to run that distance, by which time the tortoise will have advanced farther; and then more time still to reach this third point, while the tortoise moves ahead. Thus, whenever Achilles reaches somewhere the tortoise has been, he still has farther to go. Therefore, because there are an infinite number of points Achilles must reach where the tortoise has already been, he can never overtake the tortoise.
Thanks and that's an interesting question. You said:
why does it hurt when the ball appears to smack you in the face, if it's not really moving? And why does someone bleed when a bullet appears to tear their flesh, if it's not really moving?
I suspect it's because nothing ever touches. Nobody has ever touched matter, the electrons from a hard table or a soft pillow just repel against the electrons from your hand and you percieve a hard or soft force. So when these reference frames gets close i.e. the reference frame of the ball and your face, you feel a force that could be strong enough to really hurt.
Think about a pitcher throwing a ball. At each point in space the ball is at rest, so there's no motion. Light is moving so fast, it projects a thousand different reference frames for the ball. So the motionless ball appears to be moving but the only things that's changing is the reference frame between you and the ball relative to the speed of light. Out of a thousand different reference frames we may only see 10 and those 10 we call "reality." So from our perspective it's strike 3 but from the perspective of light it's a base hit, a homerun, a fly ball and more.
Originally posted by Winged-Sphinx
reply to post by new_here
"Because if i remember correctly,light is controlled by (in sacred geometry terms) the spirit..a force or intelligence if you will..."
So I thought, what if light is constantly changing the frame of reference of everything and nothing is really moving. So I'm not changing the reference frame between me and the moon, light is changing it. "
Originally posted by visualmiscreant
Very interesting post. I'm wondering however, if our present understanding of mathematics has an answer for this. The reason I say this is that when I was in prison, there was a story going around about some guys who had pulled off a scam using math. They had eventually gotten caught and were serving time. The inmates told the story like this...
There were three salesmen going to a convention, and to save money, they decided to share a room at a motel. The clerk told them the room was 30 dollars, so each salesman gave the clerk 10 dollars. A little later, the clerk realized that it was Tuesday, and rooms were discounted on Tuesdays to 25 dollars. He told his assistant to take 5 one dollar bills to the salesman's room and explain the situation, refunding the 5 dollars. The salesman decided that because they couldn't split the 5 dollars equally, they would keep one dollar each and give the other two dollars to the assistant as a tip.
Each salesman originally spent ten dollars each for a total of thirty dollars. After receiving one dollar each back, they had spent only nine dollars each. 3 times 9 is 27, plus the two dollar tip equals 29 dollars. What happened to the other dollar. It's said these guys made a fortune fooling people with this scam. I don't honestly know that it's true, but it does show how average people can be fooled with mathematics.
I hope there is someone out there who has a greater understanding of the mathematics of motion, but I can assure you that it's not me.
I think light is so fast that it gives us different reference frames of objects in space relative to the speed of light that we see these different reference frames as motion.
Originally posted by Beyond Creation
Nothing moves as everything is everywhere at the same time, but time is just an illusion.
There is nowhere to go because you, it, we are already there. It is full already. Full as an egg.
Energy is the essence of activity but as this world is cursed with dualism and separation, we view this as ''motion'' .
All methods for the definition of time are thus based on comparisons of motions.
In order to make the concept as precise and as useful as possible, a standard reference
motion is chosen, and with it a standard sequence and a standard duration is defined.
The device that performs this task is called a clock. We can thus answer the question of
the section title:
⊳ Time is what we read from a clock.
Note that all definitions of time used in the various branches of physics are equivalent
to this one; no ‘deeper’ or more fundamental definition is possible.** Note that the word
‘moment’ is indeed derived from the word ‘movement’. Language follows physics in this
case. Astonishingly, the definition of time just given is final; it will never be changed,
not even at the top of Motion Mountain. This is surprising at first sight, because many
bookshave beenwrittenonthe nature of time. Instead, they should investigate thenature
of motion! But this is the aim of our walk anyhow. We are thus set to discover all the
secrets of time as a side result of our adventure. Every clock reminds us that in order to
understand time, we need to understand motion.
A clock is thus a moving systemwhose position can be read. Of course, a precise clock
is a system moving as regularly as possible, with as little outside disturbance as possible.
Is there a perfect clock in nature? Do clocks exist at all? We will continue to study these
questions throughout this work and eventually reach a surprising conclusion. At this
point, however, we state a simple intermediate result: since clocks do exist, somehow
Challenge 38 s there is in nature an intrinsic, natural and ideal way to measure time. Can you see it?