Proper clocks and scientific method

[maluw...@gmail.com]

My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.

Will you falsify this hypothesis, poor halfbrains?

[Python]

Demented Polish Drunkard, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
> the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.
>
> Will you falsify this hypothesis

If you use that clock at a reference for time coordinate and
perform experiments in a GPS satellite frame, like checking
the cooking time of an egg or the motion of an object you
won't get result consistent with basic classical principles
(and an unsual cooking time for the egg).

Another question, idiotic Mr Wozniak?

[Richard Hertz]

That you have to measure your velocity, location and gravitational potential to define which is the value of LOCAL time at any object in outer space, and that you have to keep 1 million "clocks" to register "local" time of 1 million objects is SCHIZOFRENIC, ok?

Now, going back to reason, t = t' EVERYWHERE. If needed, a Resolution of the UN can solve this fucking problem that five generations of retarded physicists carried up to present time.

Politics WIN over science, anytime. So, shove deeply into your throath every trace of relativity, which poissoned rational thought in science.

[kenseto]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 8:08:35 AM UTC-4, Python wrote:
> Demented Polish Drunkard, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
> > the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.
> >
> > Will you falsify this hypothesis
>
> If you use that clock at a reference for time coordinate and
> perform experiments in a GPS satellite frame, like checking
> the cooking time of an egg or the motion of an object you
> won't get result consistent with basic classical principles

> (and an unusual cooking time for the egg).

If you cook your eggs on earth for three minutes and you get soft boiled egg. If you cook your eggs of three minute up at the GPS you get runny boiled eggs. This proved that three minute on earth has longer duration than three minutes up at the GPS.

[maluw...@gmail.com]

In other words - you can't falsify it, but you can
wave arms and scream "they are not!! It's agaist
the basic principles of my theory!!".

[Pálek Slovù]

maluwozniak wrote:

> My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones, the proper ones are
> those applied on GPS satellites.

You are starting to understand relativity, I suspect.

[Pálek Slovù]

kenseto wrote:

> If you cook your eggs on earth for three minutes and you get soft boiled
> egg. If you cook your eggs of three minute up at the GPS you get runny
> boiled eggs. This proved that three minute on earth has longer duration
> than three minutes up at the GPS.

No, and no. Think at it, harder. You can't enter this world as neutral.
You have to take a references, a standpoint. We don't need spectators.
You either are in the _game_, or out of the _arena_.

[kenseto]

You think about it. You based your bogus assertions on the assumption that a clock second is a universal interval of time....it is not. A clock second in your frame is worth 1/gamma seconds for a clock moving wrt you.

[Pálek Slovù]

Again, no. I must insist. Please interrupt everything and start looking
at it, harder.

[Michael Moroney]

"Proved", Stupid Ken? You proved it? You went up to a GPS satellite and cooked an
egg?

No, Stupid Ken, that is an assertion. Assertions are not proof of anything.

Relativity does not predict that, it predicts the three minute egg is cooked
properly. And no, nobody cares what your failed Muddle Mechanics asserts.

[Dono,]

On Friday, September 13, 2019 at 7:17:12 AM UTC-7, Richard Hertz wrote:

> Now, going back to reason, t = t' EVERYWHERE.

Err, FAIL. Again

[kenseto]

Sorry, you look harder. The LT says that one second on a moving clock is worth gamma seconds on the observer’s clock.
Delta(t’)=gamma*delta(t)

[kenseto]

Nobody cares what a Moron_y says

[Paul B. Andersen]

Den 13.09.2019 16.17, skrev Richard Hertz:
>
> That you have to measure your velocity, location and gravitational potential to define which is the value of LOCAL time at any object in outer space, and that you have to keep 1 million "clocks" to register "local" time of 1 million objects is SCHIZOFRENIC, ok?
>
> Now, going back to reason, t = t' EVERYWHERE. If needed, a Resolution of the UN can solve this fucking problem that five generations of retarded physicists carried up to present time.
>
> Politics WIN over science, anytime. So, shove deeply into your throath every trace of relativity, which poissoned rational thought in science.
>

If you hadn't told us otherwise, I might possibly have believed
that the above was what you believed.

But now I know that you are just playing with us and
the fucking physics. It's easy, because dogmatic and
indoctrinated people like us are easy preys for trolling.

I can't understand your motivation for trying to convince
us that you are an idiot, though.
Do you get some kind of satisfaction by succeeding?

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

[maluw...@gmail.com]

Paul, of course you don't understand.
You're such a pathetic idiot.

[Dirk Van de moortel]

Op 14-sep.-2019 om 09:46 schreef Paul B. Andersen:

> Den 13.09.2019 16.17, skrev Richard Hertz:
>>
>> That you have to measure your velocity, location and gravitational
>> potential to define which is the value of LOCAL time at any object in
>> outer space, and that you have to keep 1 million "clocks" to register
>> "local" time of 1 million objects is SCHIZOFRENIC, ok?
>>
>> Now, going back to reason, t = t' EVERYWHERE. If needed, a Resolution
>> of the UN can solve this fucking problem that five generations of
>> retarded physicists carried up to present time.
>>
>> Politics WIN over science, anytime. So, shove deeply into your throath
>> every trace of relativity, which poissoned rational thought in science.
>>
>
> If you hadn't told us otherwise, I might possibly have believed
> that the above was what you believed.
>
> But now I know that you are just playing with us and
> the fucking physics. It's easy, because dogmatic and
> indoctrinated people like us are easy preys for trolling.

This is THE place for trolls and their preys on the one
hand, and for downright imbeciles on the other hand.

>
> I can't understand your motivation for trying to convince
> us that you are an idiot, though.
> Do you get some kind of satisfaction by succeeding?

For *all* of them the satisfaction is getting somehow --ANYhow--
being talked to. This place was created for people for whom
that is sufficient.

Dirk Vdm

[Richard Hertz]

On Saturday, 14 September 2019 17:30:23 UTC-3, Dirk Van de moortel wrote:

< snip >

> For *all* of them the satisfaction is getting somehow --ANYhow--
> being talked to. This place was created for people for whom
> that is sufficient.
>
> Dirk Vdm

Dirk, that a person like you have had a 18 years fixation with Ken Seto at this forum, is not a good sign of your mental health. You really didn't find anything else to do since years 2000?

And, still, do you have the face to criticize others? You have no shame!

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Stuff/SetoPapers.html

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/index.html

http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/ImmortalFumbles.html#OhYes

[maluw...@gmail.com]

My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.

[Pálek Slovù]

maluwozniak wrote:

> My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones, the proper ones are
> those applied on GPS satellites.

That word, "proper" should once for all be removed from science and
physics. It cause so much unnecessary unspeakable pain and confusion.

[kenseto]

In SR, proper time is the time interval shown on a clock beside the observer. The LT predicts one-second of proper time on the observer’s clock is worth 1/gamma seconds on a clock moving wrt him.
Delta(t’)=Gamma*Delta(t)

[maluw...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 15 September 2019 17:07:38 UTC+2, Pálek Slovù wrote:
> maluwozniak wrote:
>
> > My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones, the proper ones are
> > those applied on GPS satellites.
>
> That word, "proper" should once for all be removed from science and
> physics.

Sorry, but the remaining stuff would collapse without it
(unless, of course, you mean replacing it by "correct"
or alike).
So, it's rather that you should change your should-be.

[Python]

Not quite. Actually the opposite: it can be falsified.
You do not know how to read? You have issues with basic
cognitive comprehension? You are a dishonest idiot? All
of this?

[maluw...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 12:40:07 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Idiotic Polish Retard maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Friday, 13 September 2019 14:08:35 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Demented Polish Drunkard, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
> >>> the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.
> >>>
> >>> Will you falsify this hypothesis
> >>
> >> If you use that clock at a reference for time coordinate and
> >> perform experiments in a GPS satellite frame, like checking
> >> the cooking time of an egg or the motion of an object you
> >> won't get result consistent with basic classical principles
> >> (and an unsual cooking time for the egg).
> >
> > In other words - you can't falsify it, but you can
> > wave arms and scream "they are not!! It's agaist
> > the basic principles of my theory!!".
>
> Not quite. Actually the opposite: it can be falsified.
> You do not know how to read?

Not quite. Actually the opposite. You can't write,
so you've written differently than you believe
you should.

So, now we're getting it: it can be falsified.
Fine. Describe the experiment and expected results,
then.

[Pálek Slovù]

I wouldn't, because I feel I'm right, consistent in my approach. Watch
this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8MCjdwd-bs

[Python]

Are you on drugs Mr Wozniak?

> So, now we're getting it: it can be falsified.
> Fine. Describe the experiment and expected results,
> then.

I gave enough hints to do that, if you had any kind of integrity
AND a minimal background in physics, as you have neither of course
you won't.

If you really want a detailled description, my daily faire is
$1000, paypal is ok.

[maluw...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:51:43 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Demented Polish Drunkard maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, 16 September 2019 12:40:07 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Idiotic Polish Retard maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Friday, 13 September 2019 14:08:35 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >>>> Demented Polish Drunkard, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>>>> My hypothesis is: your clocks are not proper ones,
> >>>>> the proper ones are those applied on GPS satellites.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Will you falsify this hypothesis
> >>>>
> >>>> If you use that clock at a reference for time coordinate and
> >>>> perform experiments in a GPS satellite frame, like checking
> >>>> the cooking time of an egg or the motion of an object you
> >>>> won't get result consistent with basic classical principles
> >>>> (and an unsual cooking time for the egg).
> >>>
> >>> In other words - you can't falsify it, but you can
> >>> wave arms and scream "they are not!! It's agaist
> >>> the basic principles of my theory!!".
> >>
> >> Not quite. Actually the opposite: it can be falsified.
> >> You do not know how to read?
> >
> > Not quite. Actually the opposite. You can't write,
> > so you've written differently than you believe
> > you should.
>
> Are you on drugs Mr Wozniak?

You wrote exactly what I said -
"It can't be true! It's inconsistent with
the Holy Principles I believe deeply!!!"
You've not proposed any experiment and
you have not proposed any falsifiable
consequences of my hypothesis.

> I gave enough hints to do that

Fine, you'll have no problem with doing it.

> If you really want a detailled description, my daily faire is
> $1000, paypal is ok.

As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor
trash, it's a try of an extortion. But I'm too lazy
to call the police.

BTW. It's unfalsifiable. Quite obviously. And you're
a poor idiot, poor idiot.

[Python]

Shame of Poland, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:51:43 UTC+2, Python wrote:

...
>> If you really want a detailed description, my daily fare is

>> $1000, paypal is ok.
>
> As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor
> trash, it's a try of an extortion. But I'm too lazy
> to call the police.

It is not a extortion, Mr Wozniak, it is a commercial offer. If
the price look too high for you you are free to look for another
offer. As a failed engineer and uneducated moron you are unable
to do it yourself, millions of people on Earth are, nevertheless,
able to do it. It's not that a big deal you know?

> BTW. It's unfalsifiable. Quite obviously.

We know that "obviously" in your mind qualifies a lot of utter
absurd claims, so...

[maluw...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 16 September 2019 16:38:25 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Shame of Poland, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:51:43 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> ...
> >> If you really want a detailed description, my daily fare is
> >> $1000, paypal is ok.
> >
> > As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor
> > trash, it's a try of an extortion. But I'm too lazy
> > to call the police.
>
> It is not a extortion, Mr Wozniak, it is a commercial offer.

As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor

trash, it's a try of an extortion. Sorry.
And the hypothesis is unfalsifiable. Your moronic raving
and spitting won't help it. But, well, what else can you
do.

[Python]

Paranoid demented idiot maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, 16 September 2019 16:38:25 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> Shame of Poland, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:51:43 UTC+2, Python wrote:
>> ...
>>>> If you really want a detailed description, my daily fare is
>>>> $1000, paypal is ok.
>>>
>>> As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor
>>> trash, it's a try of an extortion. But I'm too lazy
>>> to call the police.
>>
>> It is not a extortion, Mr Wozniak, it is a commercial offer.
>
> As you're not able

I am. Pay and you'll see.

> and not intending to do it, poor
> trash, it's a try of an extortion. Sorry.
> And the hypothesis is unfalsifiable.

It is not.

> Your moronic raving
> and spitting won't help it. But, well, what else can you
> do.

A lot, including making fun of your deluded stupidity.

[maluw...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, 17 September 2019 15:25:25 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> Paranoid demented idiot maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday, 16 September 2019 16:38:25 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> Shame of Poland, maluw...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Monday, 16 September 2019 14:51:43 UTC+2, Python wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>> If you really want a detailed description, my daily fare is
> >>>> $1000, paypal is ok.
> >>>
> >>> As you're not able and not intending to do it, poor
> >>> trash, it's a try of an extortion. But I'm too lazy
> >>> to call the police.
> >>
> >> It is not a extortion, Mr Wozniak, it is a commercial offer.
> >
> > As you're not able
>
> I am. Pay and you'll see.

More usual insults, more usual raving, more usual spitting and
more usual armwaving would be the only thing I would see.
As usual.

>
> > and not intending to do it, poor
> > trash, it's a try of an extortion. Sorry.
> > And the hypothesis is unfalsifiable.
>
> It is not.

Yes it is.

> > Your moronic raving
> > and spitting won't help it. But, well, what else can you
> > do.
>
> A lot, including making fun of your deluded stupidity.

A lot more for sure. A lot more spitting and a lot more
raving. That's all.