Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 6/15/2021 10:23 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 15:43:15 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 6/15/2021 6:20 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> When Einstein lived and mumbled, "second" or
>>>>> "unit of time" weren't defined as Cs related, like
>>>>> today. When he was saying "unit of time" - he
>>>>> meant 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>>>> Wrong. It was then defined as 1/24*60*60 of a *particular* day, namely
>>>> Jan 1, 1900.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong, stupid Mike.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
>>> "The second was thus defined as "the fraction 1/31,556,925.9747 of the
>>> tropical year [not day - MW] for 1900 January 0 at 12 hours ephemeris time"".
>>> But such definition was established in 1960. Not in 1905, stupid Mike.
>>>
>>> The only second known in the time of your idiot guru was
>>> 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>> No, scientists already knew by then that 1/86164 of a sidereal day was a
>> more accurate way of measuring time. I don't know if they had more
>> accurate time measurements than that, but they must have, since they
>> already suspected earth's rotation wasn't consistent (wobbly or slowing
>> down). Time, however, was then defined by the railroads, or UK Greenwich
>> Observatory, or Washington DC solar time, or local solar time, depending.
>
> No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133
> atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.

It was never considered a universal interval of time as you understand that
phrase.

> It is not. That’s why they have this shit of time dilation. The only time
> that is universal is absolute time. That’s why they use absolute time to
> synch the GPS with the ground clock. They do that by inlcresing the GPS
> second to have 4.4647 more periods of Cs 133 radiation than the ground
> clock second. This makes the passage of 9,192,631,774.4647 periods of Cs
> 133 radiation on the GPS clock corresponds to the passage of
> 9,192,631,770 periods of CS 133 radiation of the ground clock.
>>
>> Don’t confuse the clock (earth) with they have this shit of time
>> dilation. time itself. Like the decay of
>> radioactive elements certainly does not depend on the rotation of some
>> big rock, but at the time that rock may have been the best clock
>> available to measure it.
>>
>> Einstein's 1905 paper mentions "second" (as unit of time) 4 times, in
>> two pairs, both times showing how a moving clock is seen as running slow
>> by a certain amount of "seconds per second". Meaning, of course, if the
>> same definition of second was used each time, the definition cancels and
>> the amount is a ratio, a pure number. Thus the actual definition is
>> pretty much irrelevant. So...do you even have a point (not the one on
>> top of your head) ?
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On 7/5/2021 10:44 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>> On 6/15/2021 10:23 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 15:43:15 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 6/15/2021 6:20 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> When Einstein lived and mumbled, "second" or
>>>>> "unit of time" weren't defined as Cs related, like
>>>>> today. When he was saying "unit of time" - he
>>>>> meant 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>>>> Wrong. It was then defined as 1/24*60*60 of a *particular* day, namely
>>>> Jan 1, 1900.
>>>
>>>
>>> Wrong, stupid Mike.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
>>> "The second was thus defined as "the fraction 1/31,556,925.9747 of the
>>> tropical year [not day - MW] for 1900 January 0 at 12 hours ephemeris time"".
>>> But such definition was established in 1960. Not in 1905, stupid Mike.
>>>
>>> The only second known in the time of your idiot guru was
>>> 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>> No, scientists already knew by then that 1/86164 of a sidereal day was a
>> more accurate way of measuring time. I don't know if they had more
>> accurate time measurements than that, but they must have, since they
>> already suspected earth's rotation wasn't consistent (wobbly or slowing
>> down). Time, however, was then defined by the railroads, or UK Greenwich
>> Observatory, or Washington DC solar time, or local solar time, depending.
>
> No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133 atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.

Not in 1905 they didn't. Do try to keep up, Stupid Ken.

> It is not. That’s why they have this shit of time dilation.

Stupid Ken, time dilation (and length contraction) comes out of the math
of the 1905 paper. Of course that is above your abilities so all you
can do is call it shit.

> The only time that is universal is absolute time.

Assertions are not valid arguments in science.

> That’s why they use absolute time to synch the GPS with the ground clock.

Assertions are not valid arguments. Especially when they conflict with
the GPS design specs.

> They do that by inlcresing the GPS second

How does one inlcresing a second?

> This makes the passage of 9,192,631,774.4647 periods of Cs 133 radiation on the GPS clock corresponds to the passage of 9,192,631,770 periods of CS 133 radiation of the ground clock.

You don't even understand enough math to know whether those two numbers
are equal or which one is larger. Like Wozniak I guess.

On Tuesday, 6 July 2021 at 05:59:35 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> On 7/5/2021 10:44 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 6/15/2021 10:23 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 15:43:15 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 6/15/2021 6:20 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> When Einstein lived and mumbled, "second" or
> >>>>> "unit of time" weren't defined as Cs related, like
> >>>>> today. When he was saying "unit of time" - he
> >>>>> meant 1/24*60*60 of a day.
> >>>> Wrong. It was then defined as 1/24*60*60 of a *particular* day, namely
> >>>> Jan 1, 1900.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Wrong, stupid Mike.
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
> >>> "The second was thus defined as "the fraction 1/31,556,925.9747 of the
> >>> tropical year [not day - MW] for 1900 January 0 at 12 hours ephemeris time"".
> >>> But such definition was established in 1960. Not in 1905, stupid Mike..
> >>>
> >>> The only second known in the time of your idiot guru was
> >>> 1/24*60*60 of a day.
> >> No, scientists already knew by then that 1/86164 of a sidereal day was a
> >> more accurate way of measuring time. I don't know if they had more
> >> accurate time measurements than that, but they must have, since they
> >> already suspected earth's rotation wasn't consistent (wobbly or slowing
> >> down). Time, however, was then defined by the railroads, or UK Greenwich
> >> Observatory, or Washington DC solar time, or local solar time, depending.
> >
> > No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133 atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.
> Not in 1905 they didn't. Do try to keep up, Stupid Ken.
> > It is not. That’s why they have this shit of time dilation.
> Stupid Ken, time dilation (and length contraction) comes out of the math
> of the 1905 paper. Of course

Of course this moronic mumble is inconsistent with
basic definitions valid for your idiot guru in 1905.

that is above your abilities so all you
> can do is call it shit.
> > The only time that is universal is absolute time.
> Assertions are not valid arguments in science.
> > That’s why they use absolute time to synch the GPS with the ground clock.
> Assertions are not valid arguments. Especially when they conflict with
> the GPS design specs.
> > They do that by inlcresing the GPS second
> How does one inlcresing a second?
> > This makes the passage of 9,192,631,774.4647 periods of Cs 133 radiation on the GPS clock corresponds to the passage of 9,192,631,770 periods of CS 133 radiation of the ground clock.
> You don't even understand enough math

Speaking of math, it's always good to remind that
your idiot guru had to deny its oldest, very important
part, as it didn't want to fit his madness.

On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 3:30:07 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >> On 6/15/2021 10:23 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 15:43:15 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
> >>>> On 6/15/2021 6:20 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> >>>>> When Einstein lived and mumbled, "second" or
> >>>>> "unit of time" weren't defined as Cs related, like
> >>>>> today. When he was saying "unit of time" - he
> >>>>> meant 1/24*60*60 of a day.
> >>>> Wrong. It was then defined as 1/24*60*60 of a *particular* day, namely
> >>>> Jan 1, 1900.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Wrong, stupid Mike.
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
> >>> "The second was thus defined as "the fraction 1/31,556,925.9747 of the
> >>> tropical year [not day - MW] for 1900 January 0 at 12 hours ephemeris time"".
> >>> But such definition was established in 1960. Not in 1905, stupid Mike..
> >>>
> >>> The only second known in the time of your idiot guru warm is not s
> >>> 1/24*60*60 of a day.
> >> No, scientists already knew by then that 1/86164 of a sidereal day was a
> >> more accurate way of measuring time. I don't know if they had more
> >> accurate time measurements than that, but they must have, since they
> >> already suspected earth's rotation wasn't consistent (wobbly or slowing
> >> down). Time, however, was then defined by the railroads, or UK Greenwich
> >> Observatory, or Washington DC solar time, or local solar time, depending.
> >
> > No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133
> > atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.
> It was never considered a universal interval of time as you understand that
> phrase.

Ah, so a transition of the Cs 133 atom is not a universal interval of time......that’s why clocks in relative motion are accumulating clock second at different rates. But then you guys claim that clocks doesn’t run at different rates. So are you trying to have it both way?
> > It is not. That’s why they have this shit of time dilation. The only time
> > that is universal is absolute time. That’s why they use absolute time to
> > synch the GPS with the ground clock. They do that by inlcresing the GPS
> > second to have 4.4647 more periods of Cs 133 radiation than the ground
> > clock second. This makes the passage of 9,192,631,774.4647 periods of Cs
> > 133 radiation on the GPS clock corresponds to the passage of
> > 9,192,631,770 periods of CS 133 radiation of the ground clock.
> >>
> >> Don’t confuse the clock (earth) with they have this shit of time
> >> dilation. time itself. Like the decay of
> >> radioactive elements certainly does not depend on the rotation of some
> >> big rock, but at the time that rock may have been the best clock
> >> available to measure it.
> >>
> >> Einstein's 1905 paper mentions "second" (as unit of time) 4 times, in
> >> two pairs, both times showing how a moving clock is seen as running slow
> >> by a certain amount of "seconds per second". Meaning, of course, if the
> >> same definition of second was used each time, the definition cancels and
> >> the amount is a ratio, a pure number. Thus the actual definition is
> >> pretty much irrelevant. So...do you even have a point (not the one on
> >> top of your head) ?
> >
> --
> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 3:30:07 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>> On 6/15/2021 10:23 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 15:43:15 UTC+2, Michael Moroney wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/15/2021 6:20 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
>>>>>>> When Einstein lived and mumbled, "second" or
>>>>>>> "unit of time" weren't defined as Cs related, like
>>>>>>> today. When he was saying "unit of time" - he
>>>>>>> meant 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>>>>>> Wrong. It was then defined as 1/24*60*60 of a *particular* day, namely
>>>>>> Jan 1, 1900.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wrong, stupid Mike.
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second
>>>>> "The second was thus defined as "the fraction 1/31,556,925.9747 of the
>>>>> tropical year [not day - MW] for 1900 January 0 at 12 hours ephemeris time"".
>>>>> But such definition was established in 1960. Not in 1905, stupid Mike.
>>>>>
>>>>> The only second known in the time of your idiot guru warm is not s
>>>>> 1/24*60*60 of a day.
>>>> No, scientists already knew by then that 1/86164 of a sidereal day was a
>>>> more accurate way of measuring time. I don't know if they had more
>>>> accurate time measurements than that, but they must have, since they
>>>> already suspected earth's rotation wasn't consistent (wobbly or slowing
>>>> down). Time, however, was then defined by the railroads, or UK Greenwich
>>>> Observatory, or Washington DC solar time, or local solar time, depending.
>>>
>>> No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133
>>> atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.
>> It was never considered a universal interval of time as you understand that
>> phrase.
>
> Ah, so a transition of the Cs 133 atom is not a universal interval of time.....

Not as you mean “universal interval of time”.

> that’s why clocks in relative motion are accumulating clock second at different rates.

Alright.

> But then you guys claim that clocks doesn’t run at different rates.

That’s true locally. Locally, they are based on the same standard. That
doesn’t make the interval of time the same as measured in different frames.

> So are you trying to have it both way?

No. It shows you don’t know what the words mean.
That may be why you don’t read. You can’t understand four sentences in a
row and understand them.

>>> It is not. That’s why they have this shit of time dilation. The only time
>>> that is universal is absolute time. That’s why they use absolute time to
>>> synch the GPS with the ground clock. They do that by inlcresing the GPS
>>> second to have 4.4647 more periods of Cs 133 radiation than the ground
>>> clock second. This makes the passage of 9,192,631,774.4647 periods of Cs
>>> 133 radiation on the GPS clock corresponds to the passage of
>>> 9,192,631,770 periods of CS 133 radiation of the ground clock.
>>>>
>>>> Don’t confuse the clock (earth) with they have this shit of time
>>>> dilation. time itself. Like the decay of
>>>> radioactive elements certainly does not depend on the rotation of some
>>>> big rock, but at the time that rock may have been the best clock
>>>> available to measure it.
>>>>
>>>> Einstein's 1905 paper mentions "second" (as unit of time) 4 times, in
>>>> two pairs, both times showing how a moving clock is seen as running slow
>>>> by a certain amount of "seconds per second". Meaning, of course, if the
>>>> same definition of second was used each time, the definition cancels and
>>>> the amount is a ratio, a pure number. Thus the actual definition is
>>>> pretty much irrelevant. So...do you even have a point (not the one on
>>>> top of your head) ?
>>>
>> --
>> Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
>

--
Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

On 7/6/2021 9:31 AM, Ken Seto wrote:
> On Monday, July 5, 2021 at 3:30:07 PM UTC-4, bodk...@gmail.com wrote:
>> Ken Seto <seto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, June 15, 2021 at 12:41:35 PM UTC-4, Michael Moroney wrote:

>>> No stupid Mike, they considered (wrongly) that a transition of the Cs 133
>>> atom at the hyperfine level represents a universal interval of time.
>> It was never considered a universal interval of time as you understand that
>> phrase.
>
> Ah, so a transition of the Cs 133 atom is not a universal interval of time.....

No, he said it was not a universal interval as you (mis)interpret that
phrase. Scientists understand differently.

According to SR, all (local) clocks tick at their usual rates. They only
appear different when SIGNALS from one clock are sent to non-local
observers, and the SIGNALS are affected by SR/GR effects and show time
dilation. For example, with the GPS, the SIGNAL to earth is affected.

> that’s why clocks in relative motion are accumulating clock second at different rates.

That's the traveling twin issue, not time dilation. Time dilation
involves different measured tick rates. The traveling twin involves
acceleration (turnaround) and reuniting and comparing proper times.

> But then you guys claim that clocks doesn’t run at different rates. So are you trying to have it both way?

Nope. Local clocks always tick at their own rates. That would mean that
if you had 1000 clocks with you, each involving different technologies
(Cs, rubidium, aluminum, quartz, wound spring etc.) ALL of them would
tick at their usual rate, and ALL would agree with each other, within
limits of their precisions. Other clocks such as radioactive decay
would also do so. It is only when these clocks are observed REMOTELY
involving SIGNALS they may differ in tick rates. That is because the
signals may be affected by SR/GR effects. For example, the GPS carrier
signal, transmitted at 10.22999whatever MHz, but received on earth at
10.23 MHz. The SIGNAL is affected.

Ken Seto wrote:

>> It was never considered a universal interval of time as you understand
>> that phrase.
>
> Ah, so a transition of the Cs 133 atom is not a universal interval of
> time.....that’s why clocks in relative motion are accumulating clock
> second at different rates. But then you guys claim that clocks doesn’t
> run at different rates. So are you trying to have it both way?

Absolutely, you actually truly can read. The later is local, the former
remote. Kiss my ass.

Michael Moroney wrote:

>> that’s why clocks in relative motion are accumulating clock second at
>> different rates.
>
> That's the traveling twin issue, not time dilation. Time dilation
> involves different measured tick rates. The traveling twin involves
> acceleration (turnaround) and reuniting and comparing proper times.

bullshit. It not involves acceleration of any kind. Dr. Kenseto almost
understand more physics than you, madmoiselle. Also, I read that America
(north, central and south) is nothing but a bunch of refugees and
immigrants, the government was infiltrated by enemies of the state years
ago, the old guard is gone, now its just grifters and idiots.