# Time can never change.

Author: Somebody ,

## Topic's posts

Posts in total: 75
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
Time is just a concept and it can't become an object, nor can it be accelerated or slowed. Time is a measurement of spin and rotation and can't be used as a linear vector of any description.
• Debates: 42
Forum posts: 1,725
6
8
10
--> @Somebody
Time can be slowed down, depending on both speed and force of gravity.

This has been experimentally conformed multiple times:

Two of the most famous examples:

• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Ramshutu
In order to prove relativity wrong all you need to do is add extra speed to the experimental or thought experimental craft. Now, an astronaut in a space craft which travels at 10 times the speed of light for 10 years and returns to Earth to find that he hasn't been born yet. Thus, this shows that time travel or time change is an illogical concept.

The clocks on an aircraft will change according to aether flow hinderance. The aether flows strongest near ground level and gets weaker as you go higher. Thus, The altitude and direction of the plane in relation to the earth's spin will affect the clock's time and is nothing to do with time itself. This is a purely mechanical action and reaction. The universe is 100% pure mechanical. No magic thus far.
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 3,053
2
3
3
--> @Ramshutu
If there is an absolute invariant time then it should be possible to synchronise a 'master clock' so it displays it.  Moving clocks or clocks in a gravitational field could then be be shown to be wrong because they would display a time different from the master clock.

The problem is - where do you put the master clock?   It would not only have to be away from any gravitational field but it would so have to be stationary.  But 'stationary' is always relative to something.  Something 'stationary' on earth is moving at thousands of miles an hour from a different pov.

A bit of thought reveals a 'master clock' is impossible, hence absolute time does not exist.

• Debates: 42
Forum posts: 1,725
6
8
10
--> @Somebody
I’ve provided two of the most famous experiments that prove time dilation occurs. These were predictions based on the application of a scientific theory - a theory which allows you to mathematically calculate the exact amount that time would tick slower.

You said time doesnt change: as your nonsense “aether” assertions are now claiming that time does change: you just refuted yourself, and there’s little more I have to do.

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 511
2
1
4
--> @Somebody
In order to prove relativity wrong all you need to do is add extra speed to the experimental or thought experimental craft. Now, an astronaut in a space craft which travels at 10 times the speed of light for 10 years and returns to Earth to find that he hasn't been born yet. Thus, this shows that time travel or time change is an illogical concept.
According to relativity, nothing can accelerate beyond the speed of light, so it is meaningless to talk about what happens at 10 times the speed of light.

• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Stronn
If Einstein is allowed to do thought experiments then Its OK for others as well. Have you tested it? How do you know that light speed can't be increased? Is it because somebody told you so and you believed them? lol
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Ramshutu
I’ve provided two of the most famous experiments that prove time dilation occurs. These were predictions based on the application of a scientific theory - a theory which allows you to mathematically calculate the exact amount that time would tick slower.

You said time doesnt change: as your nonsense “aether” assertions are now claiming that time does change: you just refuted yourself, and there’s little more I have to do.

As Einstein once said " a world without an ether is unimaginable"
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 511
2
1
4
--> @Somebody
The problem with your "thought experiment" is that it assumes relativity says something ti does not say. Relativity does not say that moving faster than light means moving backward in time. In most of the equations of relativity, velocities faster than light yield nonsensical results. For instance, in the equation that relates velocity to time, using a value larger than the speed of light does not yield a negative number, which would imply backward time travel. Rather, it yields the square root of a negative number--an imaginary number. Imaginary numbers have no way to be interpreted in the real world.
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Stronn
Relativity implies that travelling faster than light would create a backwards time movement. Any movement of time is impossible. I am only trying to highlight the absurdity of time changing by exaggerating Einstein's theory to the nth degree.
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 511
2
1
4
--> @Somebody
Do you actually understand the math in my previous post? If so, then how can you say that an imaginary number implies backward time travel?

Even if backward time travel is impossible (which you have not established, only asserted), that in no way implies that time must move at the same relative rate in all frames of reference.

• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Stronn
You don't even know what time is, so therefore, you don't qualify in stating what its parameters are or are not. Hint - Time is a concept and a measurement and doesn't MOVE. You have fallen into the same English language trap as both Einstein and Hawking did.
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 511
2
1
4
--> @Somebody
Neither do you, or anyone, which is why you have no basis for making assertions about it.
• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 1,713
2
1
2
--> @Somebody
As Einstein once said " a world without an ether is unimaginable"

Nope, Einstein never said that, here's what he actually said...

"According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable"

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 1,713
2
1
2
--> @Somebody
If Einstein is allowed to do thought experiments then Its OK for others as well.
The difference is that Einstein knew what he was talking about, you don't.
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Goldtop
If I wanted your uninformed opinion, I would have asked for it.
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Goldtop
Nope, Einstein never said that, here's what he actually said...

"According to the general theory of relativity space without aether is unthinkable"

Just pedantic nit-picking.

• Debates: 42
Forum posts: 1,725
6
8
10
--> @Somebody
You do realize that Einstein spend the entirety of his 30 minutes of speach taking a massive german sh*t on everything you’ve said and believe about aether? Right? He literally tears the concept of ether completely apart for the entirety of the speech, did you even read it?

The entire speach is literally “believing that aether is a physical thing, an object with mass, or particles, or a frame is just utter refuted horseshit - but space still has some measurable properties - so let’s call whatever it is that gives space it’s properties “aether.”

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 1,713
2
1
2
--> @Somebody
Just pedantic nit-picking.
Not at all, completely different. Einstein already knew there was no such thing as an aether when he developed the Special Theory of Relativity.

• Debates: 0
Forum posts: 1,713
2
1
2
--> @Somebody
If I wanted your uninformed opinion, I would have asked for it.
If I needed your approval  to opine about whatever I want to on these forums, I would have just ignored you.

• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Goldtop
This is a debate and discussion site. Its not a name dropping, insult and then run away and hide site. lol
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Ramshutu
Einstein was just a lazy con-artist who managed to get away with the most audacious nonsense ever imagined by a dim wit. Like the medical world, the science world in general, likes to complicate the universe and make it incomprehensible so that outsiders are confused and disorientated. Its just a gigantic scam.

Reference - How Einstein Ruined Physics by Roger Schlafly
• Debates: 42
Forum posts: 1,725
6
8
10
--> @Somebody
Yeah Einstein is just a stupid conman, who’s theories have been repeatedly validated by independent scientists. Good job we have you:  the insanity spewing internet nut job who randomly asserts nonsensical, incoherent and at times contradictory claims without any evidence. You’re really showing us the way with your petulant denials of any evidence you disagree without cause or reason.
• Debates: 6
Forum posts: 123
0
1
2
--> @Ramshutu
Have you read any books and been outside of your home town? I doubt it. You are just a brainwashed computer nerd who sucks up establishment nonsense faster than an empty vacuum cleaner.
• Debates: 42
Forum posts: 1,725
6
8
10
--> @Somebody
What a compelling argument. I’m a nerd, and everything I’m told is a lie!

Of course, you have no evidence of any of that, so we have to take your word for it that your opinion is more reliable that the million scientists in various fields.

That is really the most compelling argument, which is more believable:

A.) That the entire scientific community - every last one of relevant fields - numbering in the million have all been systematically lying repeatedly for hundreds of years, and have managed to successfully recruit new scientists and new people to continue the perpetuate the conspiracy and are hired with a 100% success rate such that not a single one of the million scientists had ever left the conspiracy and taken with them an documentary evidence to expose it. Not only that, they don’t appear to be doing it for any justifiable or practical reason, given that the truth is likely to generate as much money, and be as practical as the lies. And, the only reason we know of this massive conspiracy, is because some nobber on the internet - who doesn’t seem to have any objective evidence, is frequently incoherent, and often contradicts his own claims in the space of a few posts - has managed to unveil the conspiracy and is confident in his claims despite having no actual evidence or practical backing for anything he says, and doesn’t even seem to understand what evidence is.

B.) Scientists are not engaged in some massive conspiracy, you’re just a cretin.