usenet weirdness

They don't, they only have their proper time. We do know that it runs at the same rate, because we see the spectra coming from there.

They agre to such an extent that we can put strong limits on the possible rate of change of physical constants, such as \alpha.

Jan

Nothing new there, it goes back all the way to Huygens. (and Newton)

Yes, you misunderstood completely. Huygens faced the problem that there are many kinds of time, for example sundials and pendulum clocks. (and they don't all agree)

In addition there is theoretical time, as it occurs in the laws of physics, like F = ma. In order to determine a, by differentiating wrt time, you must know what time is.

Huygens short-circuited that with: Time is what the clock says it is, AND a clock is any entity that moves in occordance with the laws of physics. So his pendulum clock was right, and sundials needed to be corrected. Newton just took it over.

This is nicely circular, as it should be. The laws of physics define what a clock is, and clocks determine how the laws of physics must be interpreted.

Einstein followed in their footsteps, but he his fundamental insight was that Newton's equations must be replaced by Maxwell's equations to obtain a clock that moves in accordance with the laws of physics, (a photon clock for example)

Jan

The other day I saw a butterfly. There used to be tons of butterflies everywhere, something like the Monarch needs milkweed and is not very tolerant of otherwise habitat destruction, overpredation, and waves of invasive species, or neglect, if we were stewards of the environment.

It's February in the Rocky Mountains, so it being spring-like is also not conducive to usual accounts of ecological development.

Here "Four Seasons" is considered ideal.

Anybody check the Earth's average distance to the Sun or the "definition" of "1 Astronomical Unit" lately?

We've seen a few Monarchs this year in our backyard in San Francisco. We and some other people are planting milkweed for them.

We get lots of butterflies here, expecially some flimsy little white ones. The birds like them.

We have two seasons. Summer is cool and dry. Winter is cool and wet.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

c_0 = 299 792 458 m/s

(now: c) in the SI:

F'up2 sci.physics.relativity

"cool" is gilding the lily a bit; "cold" might be more accurate for much of the summer. I was married for the first time in mid-June 1968 in San Francisco (more exactly on Treasure Island). In those days British people didn't fly half-way round the world to attend weddings, and the only member of my family who came was an aunt who lived in Toronto. I warned her that she would need warm clothes for a San Francisco summer, but she didn't believe me (everyone in Toronto knows that California is warm and sunny throughout the year). She was OK for the wedding itself, when it was indeed warm and sunny. However, then she went for a week to Carmel, where she had to buy herself a new warm coat

I grew up in New Orleans, where the temperature and humidity can both be 98, and the mosquitoes are as big as chickens.

I like it here. Nobody I know has air conditioning.

I was just sitting outside on the deck in my undies, reading a Hornblower book, manufacturing vitamin C and thinking about cryogenic level sensors.

We went to a surprise wedding on East Brother Island. That was fun.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

For the kiddies: Loddie has completely lost any connection with the reality; but that was obvious earlier.

Global Warming doomsaying is *so* last millenium. Sub-zero temps and six feet of snow didn't help the cause.

The real money now is is in predicting the death of humanity from microplastics.

Do try to keep up.

John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics

It may not be fashionable to mention it, but anthropogenic global warming is still in full swing. The planet is still warming up, and a little faster than it was when first became big enough to stick out of La Nina/El Nino type noise, around 1990. China does seem to be on the verge of burning less fossil carbon than it did last year, and the rest of the world will eventually catch up - China is exporting a lot of cheap solar cells. They are also exporting a lot of wind turbines. Donald Trump isn't interested in those markets.

One of the symptoms of global warming is more water vapour evaporating off the ocean surfaces, feeding more energy into extreme weather, but unsophisticated observers don't understand the implication of that.

The real money is still in digging up fossil carbon and selling it as fuel - the people who do it know that they are going to run out of market soon, so they spend a lot of money on lying propaganda to keep the money flowing as long as possible. "Microplastics" is just the latest modish fad. It seems unlikely to kill off all that many people or make a lot of money for the people boosting the fad,

With a gullible twit like you?

Sure, but clocks are necessarily local!

Any clock and any observer needs to be somewhere.

And most observers we know about live on planet Earth.

So, let's assume that the surface of planet Earth is actually a 'time bubble' (actually I used the term 'time domain').

This realm is the space, in which we as human beings usually live.

What is happenign outside of this realm is more or less unknown.

But we have hints already, that time behaves in strange ways, if the universe is observed from very remote locations (like e.g. by the Pioneer probe).

(This btw was my personal explanation for the so called 'Pioneer anomaly'.)

TH

Sure, it's convenient.

But is it actually true???

Big bang theory suffers from a 'little' problem:

how would you actually create a universe from nothing?

Far better is actually my own approach, which goes like this:

I take the 'big bang' as case of a 'white hole'.

(That is 'the other side' of a 'black hole'.)

This 'white hole' spreads out and creates, what we call 'universe' in which we as human beings live on planet Earth.

But 'universe' isn't universal at all and the timeline from big bang to us isn't the only timeline possible.

Our past is just one of an infinite number of possible timelines, which all connect a big bang with something much later.

This is more like a HUGE clock with one hnad only, that circles once every ten billion years or so. This 'hand' moves slowly forewards and creates new universes every time it moves.

Now new universes need new stars and those new planet.

This causes what also regard as true: Growing Earth.

(plus, of course, growing moons, stars and galaxies)

The overall picture of my approach assumes a 'real universe' which is mainly invisible, which folds back into itself, where time is local and where matter is actually 'relative'.

The latter 'relative matter' is actually, what disturbs the most, because it would violate one of our most important assumptions which is called 'the great materialistic meta-paradigme'.

...

TH

(have a look at my book, if you like

Why on earth would we want to do that?

We don't seem to need a different explanation at this point. If eventually make some observations that are inconsistent with the theory, we'll start looking for a better one, but the big gbang theory seems to be true enough for all current practical purposes

Nobody said anything about creating it from nothing. The point about the theory is that it starts off with a large lump of undifferentiated mass-energy that doesn't have any structure that links it back to a preceding structure. The early stages of its development seem to have been pretty well randomised, and if the mechanism that created initial the lump of mass energy was merely the collapse of a previously existing universe we'd end up with essential;ly the same theory.

But since we can't observe any of these other universes it is a complete waste of time to speculate about their possible existence.

But you need to find a mechanism that lets you explore these other timelines before anybody is going to take you seriously.

If you want to imagine something like that, feel free, but don't expect anybody else to be interested. You won't get any research grants to support any work you might want to put in to make the idea sound less half-witted.

They might, if they existed.

The earth doesn't seem to be growing.

What we can see is mass-energy redistributing itself. There's no evidence that more is being created.

Not that you've got a single piece of evidence that supports this bizarre conceit.

So it's the central silly idea, which doesn't make it any less silly. If you've written a book about it, and self-published it, you are extravagantly silly.

There are many outfits these days claiming to economically make sustainable aviation fuel and other fuels like gasoline from carbon from carbon dioxide in the air and hydrogen from dihydrogen monoxide the water via electricity from usual sorts of renewable means in a sort of carbon-neutral liquid fuel setup.

It's not even particularly high-tech.

But that's not what Thomas Heger is being silly about. Making hydrocarbons from water, sunlight and the CO2 in the air is what plants do, albeit not all that efficiently. There are other ways of doing it, which don't involve plants and DNA, but none of them seem to be cheap enough to be all that attractive.

...and none of them self-replicate like plants do.

Oh, $7/gallon claimed by outfits like "Aircela" isn't much more than $3/liter.

Even $15/gallon given reliable production of gasoline from air, water, and electricity over time in remote locations doesn't seem too cheap.

"Cheap, fast, or right: pick no."

Am Dienstag000003, 03.03.2026 um 13:14 schrieb Bill Sloman: ...

Please have a look at my 'book':

The idea behind it, that I wanted to find a connection between GR and QM, but wanted to start at the side of GR.

My aim was therefore to create particles out of spacetime.

This concept is called 'structured spacetime'.

In this concept we have not just one single time, but multiple local times.

The set of points, which use the same ti´me are called a 'time domain'.

And because we live upon the surface of planet Earth and use UTC, we live in the same 'time domain'.

Sure, but 'unexpected acceleration' looks pretty much like 'time behaving in a strange way'.