That the clocks moved at different rates also doesn't prove that time moved at different rates. It only proves that matter is affected by velocity. Calling that effect "time" is an operational definition at best.
Supposedly clocks moving at fast speeds relative to one another that started at the same time before they started moving relative to one another will give different results although I have never tested that
But that does not prove Einstein's theory because other theories also give that result
Self contrafictions disprove Einstein's theory
Those who point out Einstein's contradictions are called not smart or antisemitic
@shortstories@gav@hidden@Leaflord@dicey@Hyolobrika you will need to observing an going at least .5c to observe a noticeable length contraction. And you will need a video camera of at least 1/(.5c) fps to observe it.
In physics, an object, like your pants, can shrink when you put them in the dryer. But the dryer can NEVER shrink the “length” of your pants. Length is a static qualitative property that can neither shrink nor expand.....no way in Hell.
@shortstories@dicey@gav@hidden@Leaflord@Hyolobrika Yes and No. Lorentz did indeed derived the Lorentz transformation, but in the context of the Aether Luminipherous theory, so it maintained that it existed a privileged reference frame for light, Einstein throw away all that stating that the laws of nature must be the same for all reference frames. That's why Einstein had to state that light had a constant value ( i.e. light particles are massless ) which was the same for all reference frames.
In his History of the theories of ether and electricity from 1953, E. T. Whittaker claimed that relativity is the creation of Poincaré and Lorentz and attributed to Einstein's papers only little importance
"Albert Einstein presented the theories of special relativity and general relativity in publications that either contained no formal references to previous literature, or referred only to a small number of his predecessors"
"Subsequently, claims have been put forward about both theories, asserting that they were formulated, either wholly or in part, by others before Einstein"
You really make being on here worthwhile. Just by your presence. You add a certain sensibility to the experience of being here everyday. I'm sure @Leaflord agrees
By the way, not to be creepy, but can you tell a difference when I don't take my benzodiazepines medication in how I express myself from the usual benzo sedated conversations I have. I just feel completely different without that medication.
@gav@hidden@Humpleupagus@Leaflord@shortstories@dicey@Hyolobrika Relativism would be stating that the laws of physics are different for different observer i.e. that there is a privileged frame of reference in which, for example, the velocity of light in vaccum has a different value.
@TheMadPirate@hidden@Humpleupagus@Leaflord@shortstories@dicey@Hyolobrika frames of refrence dont exist, they do not have privilegedness, real objects do real things to eachother and are identical wherever you are, e.g. they are objective not subjective at no pont does """time""" slow down for anything from any frame of refrence
@shortstories@gav@hidden@Humpleupagus@Leaflord@dicey@Hyolobrika Gav is spouting nihilist and postmodernist blabblering bullshit about "there is no such thing as truth", "there is no such thing as objective reality", or "everything is relative", etc. The kinda of stupid things the Continental Philosophers charlatans ( I am being redundant there ) say all the time.
@TheMadPirate@hidden@Humpleupagus@Leaflord@shortstories@dicey@Hyolobrika time is a thing, it has no frame it as no traits, things do not and can not experience different times, nor do either of these examples exist, nor is their anything to indicate that c is an actual impedance to acceleration, its entirely presumptive, things for some reason happen to never reach that speed
@Humpleupagus@gav@hidden@Leaflord@shortstories@dicey@Hyolobrika The main problem with Relativity is that it is a non-local theory whereas Quatum Mechanics is a local theory, therefore there is a fundamental clash between the two theories that makes it really hard to unify them into a cohesive theory.
Something something.... India doesn't have a theory of history. If you as a curry nigger about what happened in the past, they just make shit up and believe it true. — Hagel
@gav@hidden@Humpleupagus@Leaflord@shortstories@dicey@Hyolobrika Hegel says black and white can be synthesized into grey , what kind of grey ? people asks, Hegel says another grey can be synthesized from grey and either white or black, and so on and so forth til you reach either white or black, which again can be synthesized into a gray and the whole cycle starts again.