Creation vs. Evolution

[Soggy]

- nope, that must be someone else. Now ... what's your excuse?

You're not the space cowboy, the gangster of love?

I love Steve Miller Band.

 

[Midnight Star]

Brian Greene does a good job explaining this in The Elegant Universe, using Jack and Jill, both with jet packs and clocks on them. He goes through a bunch of different scenarios that makes the concept of relativity fairly understandable.

Hmmmm... let me see, Brian Greene does an good job (implying I missed the boat maybe, or should be ignored?) - same ol' Soggy I see. I thought we were discussing the possibilities of the universe openly, in which, we all have a part or say.

Here's the real question maybe we should ask first, before continuing:

Does ANYONE outside the scientific references you post, possess ANY kind of intelligence? Or is IQ and intelligence only found within the refernces of scientific community - all else is trivial trash?

Inquiring minds want to know ...

-----

Mike.

 

[Midnight Star]

I love Steve Miller Band.

Me too! My favorite was "Jungle Love"

-----

Mike.

 

[Soggy]

Does ANYONE outside the scientific references you post, possess ANY kind of intelligence? Or is IQ and intelligence only found within the refernces of scientific community - all else is trivial trash?

Inquiring minds want to know ...

There are lots of intelligent people, but most of them are not qualified to speak about the nature of the universe, since they have not studied it. I am intelligent, yet I am not qualified to coach football, since I have never played.

You are allowed to make stuff up about the universe and come up with all sorts of crazy scenarios, but that doesn't make it reality. It has to fit within a framework of the real.

 

[Hank49]

i

remember Einsteins "twins" experiment: one leaves Earth on a light-speed ship and returns two hours later.

to his horror, his twin and everybody in Earth has aged 50 years.

to put it another way:

the closer you can get to the speed of light, the less effect time has on you

-or-

the closer you can get to pure energy (photons), the less effect time has on you

So if you could travel at the speed of light...someday....time affects you less. How? If you were in a ship traveling that fast, would the "time" between you blinking your eyes (say, 4 seconds as we know it), or waking up and going back to sleep (13 hours) somehow be different?

 

[Soggy]

So if you could travel at the speed of light...someday....time affects you less. How? If you were in a ship traveling that fast, would the "time" between you blinking your eyes (say, 4 seconds as we know it), or waking up and going back to sleep (13 hours) somehow be different?

If you were traveling near the speed of light, 50 years of your time might only be the blink of an eye to the observer. Everything would seem normal to you, however, except the world around you would seem to move VEEERRRYYY slowly.

This is not theoretical, by the way, it is purely fact. It can be demonstrated with the use of atomic clocks. A clock put on a fast moving airplane will be off from a clock on the ground.

 

[Hank49]

Not to you, but you might blink your eyes, which to you takes a second, but the world around you (not moving close to the speed of light) would have aged 50 years.

This is not theoretical, by the way, it is purely fact. It can be demonstrated with the use of atomic clocks. A clock put on a fast moving airplane will be off from a clock on the ground.

So you're saying that traveling at the speed of light, perhaps orbiting the earth and landing again, would enable you to "time travel" into the future?
An edit to your edit....into the past, relative to yourself?

 

[Soggy]

So you're saying that traveling at the speed of light, perhaps orbiting the earth and landing again, would enable you to "time travel" into the future?
An edit to your edit....into the past?

If it were possible to exceed the speed of light (which it isn't), you would theoretical go back in time.

But, in practical terms, as you approach the speed of light, you would observe the world around you slowing down and those observing you would see you speeding up. There are also spatial distortions that go along with this...you would appear to elongate (I can't remember if you elongate or compress...I think it's elongate)

 

[Midnight Star]

There are lots of intelligent people, but most of them are not qualified to speak about the nature of the universe, since they have not studied it. I am intelligent, yet I am not qualified to coach football, since I have never played.

So your saying that they can't understand, or rationalize something like theoretical physics when it's explained to them? I wonder who explained it to them? Or, that because they don't immediately understand scientific terminology they can't grasp it's meaning, and apply it in new and creative ways? Does education really equal intelligence? It seems that in many of the postlings in this thread, intelligence is deliberately measured by understanding terminology: do I really need to use that term, when I can simply explain what I mean? That seems to protective to me for some reason ... i'm not sure why.

What's your favorite Steve Miller song?

-----

Mike.

 

[Hank49]

If it were possible to exceed the speed of light (which it isn't), you would theoretical go back in time.

I can understand this concept if we were to travel to a far away galaxy because instead of looking at it now, which is its past, we would get there in its past, relative to us, which would be its present or closer to it. But if you were to orbit Earth at that speed, how would it be anything more than a really fast ride?