Minkowski SpaceTime diagrams re assigned

[marcospolo]

1 minute ago, VictorMedvil said:

 

 

but you really are either a Zionist Ashkinazi Jew (a jew by conversion, not by race) or you are an ignorant german/englishman, who has believed that Israel means Jew. (because you are a christian) and God said he chose Israel.

(he did not say he chose jew.)

So what is it, a crypto Jew (fake Jew, a zionist) or a confused christian?

[Vmedvil2]

4 minutes ago, marcospolo said:

but you really are either a Zionist Ashkinazi Jew (a jew by conversion, not by race) or you are an ignorant german/englishman, who has believed that Israel means Jew. (because you are a christian) and God said he chose Israel.

(he did not say he chose jew.)

So what is it, a crypto Jew (fake Jew, a zionist) or a confused christian?

I am a atheist that believes that Israel is the right choice to protect the Middle East from Tyranny and promote the interests of the US Government. There is no religious reason only that I think tactically it is the right decision.

Edited March 23, 2021 by VictorMedvil

[marcospolo]

9 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

I think you have this wrong too, Israel in no way controls the US, they are our allies and we support our allies. They are our guard dog in the Middle East.

That is just either spoken by someone who is blind and ignorant, or by an Israeli / Zionist who is lying.

Now I know you are not ignorant, so you must be a Zionist, loyal to only one master, Israel.

Anyone who denies that Israel totally controls every aspect of the USA is either stupid or a liar. Which are you?

The USA has absolutely no business in waging endless wars on Israels neighbors.

The USA is on the opposite side of this planet!  Stay at home for gods sake!. Drop your bombs on Ohio.

 

 

[Vmedvil2]

5 minutes ago, marcospolo said:

That is just either spoken by someone who is blind and ignorant, or by an Israeli / Zionist who is lying.

Now I know you are not ignorant, so you must be a Zionist, loyal to only one master, Israel.

Anyone who denies that Israel totally controls every aspect of the USA is either stupid or a liar. Which are you?

The USA has absolutely no business in waging endless wars on Israels neighbors.

The USA is on the opposite side of this planet!  Stay at home for gods sake!. Drop your bombs on Ohio.

 

 

We do it for the promise of one thing.

The American Global Order, in which we control all things, then the entire world can bathe in freedom and democracy.

Edited March 23, 2021 by VictorMedvil

[marcospolo]

9 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

I am a atheist that believes that Israel is the right choice to protect the Middle East from Tyranny and promote the interests of the US Government. There is no religious reason only that I think tactically it is the right decision.

Well you are choosing the wrong side here my friend. You ought to figure out that Israel is NOT anyone's friend or ally.

They are a truly evil bunch of religious nutters that seem to have all been "blessed" with being all Psychopaths.

They have totally controlled USA politics, and use USA solders and money to fight their neighbors, They want to own all that region, its all planned to become greater Israel.

But I dont believe that you are not an ashkinazi zionist jew. You cant possibly not see how the jews run everything, so you are lying, and you are one yourself.

 

 

[marcospolo]

7 minutes ago, VictorMedvil said:

We do it for the promise of one thing.

The American Global Order, in which we control all things, then the entire world can bathe in freedom and democracy.

Yep, I knew it. You are a crazed member of the Master Race, and its not the American new world order, is the Israeli Zionist new world order.  Why dont you are your bum buddy Bill Gates go play on each others poo?

Bathe in democracy?  You mean bath in a shower of Bombs and vaccines, because Democracy is just another side of Communism. which is a tool invented by the jew cult.

This is NWO, Great Reset, EU, Agenda 21 and 30 **** that wants to rid the world of 90 % of the population.

The "honest men" only refers to Jews, as all non jews are not fit to be called men...correct?

We don't need to hear anything more for you victor comrade.

 

 

 

[Vmedvil2]

3 hours ago, marcospolo said:

Yep, I knew it. You are a crazed member of the Master Race, and its not the American new world order, is the Israeli Zionist new world order.  Why dont you are your bum buddy Bill Gates go play on each others poo?

Bathe in democracy?  You mean bath in a shower of Bombs and vaccines, because Democracy is just another side of Communism. which is a tool invented by the jew cult.

This is NWO, Great Reset, EU, Agenda 21 and 30 **** that wants to rid the world of 90 % of the population.

The "honest men" only refers to Jews, as all non jews are not fit to be called men...correct?

We don't need to hear anything more for you victor comrade.

 

 

 

You know you are a odd duck Macropolo, I told you the truth because I have nothing to hide and you come up with wild accusations of things that people like myself seek to do and believe, what you believe about them is false, those things you said were written by criminals  because the police one day busted them with 100 pounds of heroin which made them go to jail and the very religious people you dislike. 

Edited March 23, 2021 by VictorMedvil

[Vmedvil2]

3 hours ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

What's your vector, Victor?

"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."

- Commisioner Pravin Lal, Alpha Centauri (game from Firaxis)

 

[sluggo]

Marcos;

 

The brain is an image oriented organism, which is why pictures work so well in story telling. Pictures also show detail and relations that would require much text and be less effective.

 

In the Newton era, light speed was assumed to move through space instantaneously.

Fig.1 is a traditional time and space graph. Time um are seconds, distance um are meters. If Newton could have sent a light signal (blue) to the moon and back, elapsed time would be 2.5 seconds. He would not be able to explain the 2.5 sec delay. The problem is the disparity of 1 sec to 3(10)^8 m, the reason the signals don't terminate at the right. Without some form of scaling, the graphs are useless for near light speed phenomena.

In fig.2, Minkowski revised the t axis to the ct axis via scaling by c. Light speed was defined as the standard speed equal to 1. Time um are seconds, distance um are k meters (distance=kx). The horizontal x axis is the distance vt an object moves, with v<c.

The graph compares object motion to light motion, vt/ct or v/c, a speed profile.

A photon's profile is the diagonal blue line. It is a history of the photon's positions on the x axis, for the duration shown.

 

[sluggo]

Marcos;

In fig.3 U is in the ref. frame, and A is moving relative to U at .6c or .6.

The observation time is Ut=0 to Ut=1. The red line transfers the A time to the U time scale, showing the A clock ran at 80% of the U clock rate.

The graphic also shows A thinks/perceives she is at the small circle.

The light line is just for perspective.

The coordinate transformations for event (A arrives at .6 marker).

U(x, t) = U(.6, 1)

x' = ( (x-vt) = 1.25(.6-.6*1) = 0

t' = ( (t-vx) = 1.25(1-.6*.6) = .8

A(0, .8) in agreement with the graphic.

A's current position is at the .6 marker in the U frame.

If A thinks the U frame is moving past her in the opposite direction, then the marker has arrived early, and the U frame is contracted by 80%. That is the reciprocal observation.

 

[sluggo]

Marcos questioned details of the Msd and asked for examples of lc and td.

x' = g(x-vt) = 1.25(.6-.6*1) = 0

t' = g(t-vx) = 1.25(1-.6*.6) = .8

g (gamma) is missing, if only there was a standard format for forums!

all fonts don't translate!

[marcospolo]

9 hours ago, sluggo said:

Marcos;

 

The brain is an image oriented organism, which is why pictures work so well in story telling. Pictures also show detail and relations that would require much text and be less effective.

 

In the Newton era, light speed was assumed to move through space instantaneously.

Fig.1 is a traditional time and space graph. Time um are seconds, distance um are meters. If Newton could have sent a light signal (blue) to the moon and back, elapsed time would be 2.5 seconds. He would not be able to explain the 2.5 sec delay. The problem is the disparity of 1 sec to 3(10)^8 m, the reason the signals don't terminate at the right. Without some form of scaling, the graphs are useless for near light speed phenomena.

In fig.2, Minkowski revised the t axis to the ct axis via scaling by c. Light speed was defined as the standard speed equal to 1. Time um are seconds, distance um are k meters (distance=kx). The horizontal x axis is the distance vt an object moves, with v<c.

The graph compares object motion to light motion, vt/ct or v/c, a speed profile.

A photon's profile is the diagonal blue line. It is a history of the photon's positions on the x axis, for the duration shown.

 

Fig 1 does NOT show classical plot for light. In this figure, it shows that a  1 second, NO MOTION occurred.

I'm not interested in the ancient belief that light was considered as instant. This Figure 1 does not even show that!

Figure 2 shows the classical Physics VELOCITY plot for Light outwards and then back to origin.

"The horizontal x axis is the distance vt an object moves,"  No, it does not mean this. it is just a distance axis, and so can be any distance whatsoever. It has zero to do with velocity. It can show how far light went, or how far a spaceship or a snail went. So you can actually plot a distance and a time that exceeds the speed of light. The diagram does not prevent that.  Postulates claim to prevent it, not actual facts.

However, Fig2 is at the moment, accurate and correct for light. But it's what you want to do to this graph later where it turns to mush.

[marcospolo]

9 hours ago, sluggo said:

Marcos;

In fig.3 U is in the ref. frame, and A is moving relative to U at .6c or .6.

The observation time is Ut=0 to Ut=1. The red line transfers the A time to the U time scale, showing the A clock ran at 80% of the U clock rate.

The red line is unjustified. Why are you doing this? Its not rational.  In the diagram "t " is the same for everyone. Also both observers will get the same distance traveled for the same time period. because the line OA is a velocity vector.

The graphic also shows A thinks/perceives she is at the small circle.

The light line is just for perspective.

The coordinate transformations for event (A arrives at .6 marker).

U(x, t) = U(.6, 1)

x' = ( (x-vt) = 1.25(.6-.6*1) = 0

t' = ( (t-vx) = 1.25(1-.6*.6) = .8

A(0, .8) in agreement with the graphic.

A's current position is at the .6 marker in the U frame.

If A thinks the U frame is moving past her in the opposite direction, then the marker has arrived early, and the U frame is contracted by 80%. That is the reciprocal observation.

 

 

[marcospolo]

21 hours ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

Anyway I cracked the Minkowski st diagram. 

ct=x

So whatever t is in seconds, x is going to be that number divided by c in meters.

Should have led with that 😃

 

But with my second observer idea of ct=x+n, you can use it show how much more redshifted light gets when it has to travel to observer one and how that redshift decreases or increases depending on whether observer 2 is moving toward or away from observer 1. While all the while keeping the light cone a 45 degree angle (ct=x; 0=0 after subtraction from both sides) for your observer 1 reference frame no matter how far away he is from (x,0)

You see Marcko, intelligence is not knowing everything beforehand, it's just being able to make something like the Minkowski diagram work for you. Which you showed an inability to do whereas I did it in short order using the few pieces of info you tried to use to show how it's useless.

 

 

X = ct, this is 100% correct, BUT ONLY FOR LIGHT.  or only when x and ct are both zero.

So you cant just plug x = ct into equations replacing x if that x is not referring to light. X distance is where light got to in 1 second (for instance, so in this case x =ct.  but x' is NOT also equal to ct', because the x' origin is now no longer at zero x,t.  In other words, is t' taken from the start of the experiment when obs2 is at x,t =zero? or is the t' taken from where obs2 end up (at x=vt) ? 

If t is from the beginning, and obs2 also starts his clock from then, well then t can only still equal t' at the end of the experiment.

But if t' is taken from where obs2 is measuring his distance to where light got to, then Obs's t' is not equal to t.

its x't' = ct' + vt  = ct      (x't' and ct are where light got to at the conclusion of the experiment. )

and so there is no contradiction, nothing needs to shrink or warp, the math works out fine.

[sluggo]

Marcos;

I checked out the Khan site and it's not very good. Cluttered with too much stuff, a pointer and narration that's too fast to follow. No surprise it's confusing.

Here is summation of results from the HK experiment. Notice, there are both types of time dilation. Included a reprint of the original article.

 

 

Around-the-World Atomic Clocks In October 1971, Hafele and Keating flew cesium beam atomic clocks around the world twice on regularly scheduled commercial airline flights, once to the East and once to the West. In this experiment, both gravitational time dilation and kinematic time dilation are significant - and are in fact of comparable magnitude. Their predicted and measured time dilation effects were as follows: Predicted: Time difference in ns     Eastward Westward Gravitational   144 +/- 14 179 +/- 18  Kinematic -184 +/- 18 96 +/- 10 Net effect -40 +/- 23 275 +/- 21  Observed: -59 +/- 10 273 +/- 21    Gravitational calculation Kinematic calculation

Index

HyperPhysics***** Relativity R Nave

 

hafele-keating.pdf

[marcospolo]

7 hours ago, sluggo said:

Marcos;

I checked out the Khan site and it's not very good. Cluttered with too much stuff, a pointer and narration that's too fast to follow. No surprise it's confusing.

Here is summation of results from the HK experiment. Notice, there are both types of time dilation. Included a reprint of the original article.

 

 

Around-the-World Atomic Clocks In October 1971, Hafele and Keating flew cesium beam atomic clocks around the world twice on regularly scheduled commercial airline flights, once to the East and once to the West. In this experiment, both gravitational time dilation and kinematic time dilation are significant - and are in fact of comparable magnitude. Their predicted and measured time dilation effects were as follows: Predicted: Time difference in ns     Eastward Westward Gravitational   144 +/- 14 179 +/- 18  Kinematic -184 +/- 18 96 +/- 10 Net effect -40 +/- 23 275 +/- 21  Observed: -59 +/- 10 273 +/- 21    Gravitational calculation Kinematic calculation

Index

HyperPhysics***** Relativity R Nave

 

See: https://journals.dbuniversity.ac.in/ojs/index.php/JFAS/article/download/529/493

http://www.conspiracyoflight.com/Hafele/HafeleKeating.html

http://thescientificworldview.blogspot.com/2011/02/time-dilation-and-hafele-and-keating.html

https://debunkingrelativity.com/twin-flight-experiment/

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292970880_A_comparison_between_Newtonian_gravitational_time_effect_and_Einstein's_gravitational_time_dilation

https://sci.physics.narkive.com/Lh1EKypd/debunked-by-proof-the-hafele-keating-rt-time-dilation-experiment-of-1971

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-03/ngpi-tst030116.php

https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pe/pe/2016/00000029/00000001/art00019;jsessionid=41ak6tptj2g8p.x-ic-live-03

http://euclideanreality.com/pdf/Critical_Reflections_on_the_Hafele_and_Keating_Experiment.pdf

 

At the very least, its clear that SR's Time dilation hypothesis is not all plain sailing for the Relativists.

You cant just ignore all these documents on the grounds they are not authorized by Einsteins fan club officials.

No, you need to explain where each one is wrong.

[marcospolo]

2 hours ago, TheProdigalProdigy said:

 

 

So you are stumped now, right?  Lost for words, so you now think its a great idea to discuss movies?

Being an idiot, is never a good option to debunk an argument in Science. You actually have to think and react intelligently.  This move response is being an idiot who is clearly out of his depth.