
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. 
Today, 03:10 AM  #201 
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,657


Today, 03:49 AM  #202 
Master Poster
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,776


Today, 01:52 PM  #203 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,943

Irrelevant nonsense about runners who are not photons
16 April 2021: Irrelevant nonsense about runners who are not photons travelling at c emphasizes his ignorance.
Photons are travelling at c have undefined times on a clock which is the first reason why your "dynamic time" idea into a ignorant fantasy. The second reason is that if w ignore textbook physics what you have is a made up equation that has no derived connection to cosmological redshift (other than your imagination) and so cannot match the data. If your runner ran at c, their clock has undefined time because there is a division by zero. Try actually reading my posts !. The first link is on the post is your ignorant for over three week fantasy. The relevant point is in the link text and inow highlighted. If you do not know about calendars , March has 31 days, so that 15 April 2021 is 15 + 7 days from 23 March 2021 which is 22 says. A week is 7 days. 22/7 is 1 day more than 3 weeks. 23 March 2021: Ignorance of relativity from Mike Helland (photons have undefined proper time). 29 March 2021: Mike Helland starts a new "expanding time hypothesis" fantasy. 14 April 2021: Mike Helland repeats his ignorance yet again with his idiotic dynamic time fantasy 15 April 2021: An ignorant "redshifts naturally fall out" fantasy from Mike Helland. 15 April 2021: Abysmal ignorance about relativity where space and time are dynamic from Mike Helland 15 April 2021: Repeats "So what's so idiotic about dynamic time?" spamming when the question has been answered. 
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! 

Today, 01:58 PM  #204 
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,657


Today, 02:55 PM  #205 
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 27,943

Edits my post to emphasize his persistent irrelevancy, ignorance, and fantasies
16 April 2021: Edits my post to emphasize his persistent irrelevancy, ignorance, and fantasies and the idiocy of ignoring attempts to educate him.
I do stick with recording Mike Helland's persistent irrelevancy, ignorance, and fantasies in the probably futile hope that he will learn something. Repeating textbook physics for maybe the 4th time! Plug c into the Lorentz factor and you get a division by zero. This is undefined. A photon travels at c in vacuum for any inertial observer  including one travelling at c. Photons have undefined time. Another source: How Do Photons Experience Time?
Quote:
16 April 2021: Irrelevant nonsense about runners who are not photons travelling at c emphasizes his ignorance. is obviously irrelevant because he does not have them running at c like photons. Over three weeks of ignorance of textbook relativity continues even after I highlighted the relevant physics! 23 March 2021: Ignorance of relativity from Mike Helland (photons have undefined proper time). 
__________________
NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter (another observation) (and Abell 520) Electric comets still do not exist! 

Today, 03:04 PM  #206 
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,657

When I said the universe was indefinite, you conflated that with being infinite and also unknown.
I also made a mistake in remembering your error, conflating unknown with being undefined. But did I mention a million other times? No. Because that's annoying. And is worthless noise. Is that what you aspire to? Because you're nailing it. Reality Check. Ha. Talk about an idiotic fantasy. You speaking for reality. 
Today, 05:36 PM  #207 
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Nov 2020
Posts: 1,657

Ok, thank you.
So here are the three runners. The first can't run at top speed the full race, it's speed is v' = v  aD, where v is the runner's top speed, D is the distance ran, and a is exactly Hubble's constant. The first runner sabotages the other runners. For the second runner the race track is literally pulled like a rubber sheet at one end. Everything moves away from the starting line at velocity v=H_{0}D, where H_{0} is of course Hubble's constant and D is the distance ran. For the third runner, the clock is sabotaged to run faster. The clock runs at 1 / (1  jD) the speed of the others. j here is in units of inverse distance, but interestingly enough, you can use the exact same value for j as Hubble's constant. Due to the sabotages, all runners finish in a tie. The length between steps for runner 2 is stretched, which allows us to calculate a z: Code:
step.z = ((this.x  lastStep.x)  wavelength) / wavelength Code:
var f = 1 / (this.t  lastStep.t) step.z = (frequency  f) / f Since I'm using the an actual value of Hubble's constant, these runner's actually produce predictions that are accurate with measurements of redshifts up until dark energy kicks in. For that, the model behind runners 1 and 3 can be changed rather easily to fit the most distant data we have. Runner 2's model doesn't change so easily. Not only, but think about this, one of those situations describes reality. The most commonly accepted one is easily the most outlandish one. If you were going to sabotage a race, stretching the race track would not be the easiest way. And it leads to the conclusion that all race tracks in the known universe once fit into the palm of your hand. 
Bookmarks 
Thread Tools  

