True in terms of relative speed, but your position at some point relative to your starting position, will be different as observed from the North or the East. There will have been an elapse between your starting point to the measured next point, which will be expressed in units of time. You will also have moved in terms of a point in 2D space to another one which can be measured in terms of distance. Yes the time and the space are interlinked, of course they are.

It's more than distance = velocity * time. Time and speed are components of the same vector. The vector exists in the domain called spacetime.

The way I see it, you need time to describe the position of an object. You can move the object through a Cartesian plane, and it changes coordinates. The thing is that by changing the coordinates of an object, it is still where it was, at a specified time. Time moves in one direction, but is still required to determine exactly where an object is in space.

An example is that the dinosaurs existed 65 million years ago, and they still exist at that time. If you had a big enough telescope, and could travel 65 million light years away, you could theoretically observe the dinosaurs going about their daily lives.

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

But I still contend that there is no such unit as space-time. That was invented to try to explain Einsteins theories.

The other way around. Einstein described spacetime the same way Newton described inertia.

I think that the best argument against travel backwards in time ever being invented is the lack of time travelers from some unforeseen future turning up now at important events. Perhaps they are just good at hiding. :^)

Of course, there are the paradoxes as well. Once a time machine is invented, at at any time after that someone who didn't like time machines could prevent this from happening by going back in time and murdering the inventor(s).

---

I think that the best argument against travel backwards in time ever being invented is the lack of time travelers from some unforeseen future turning up now at important events. Perhaps they are just good at hiding. :^)

Of course, there are the paradoxes as well. Once a time machine is invented, at at any time after that someone who didn't like time machines could prevent this from happening by going back in time and murdering the inventor(s).

It's really mind boggling if you ask me:) Maybe in the very far future we'll be able to do time travel, although I doubt it, thinking as a scientist:)) We always have to be open to new ideas and theories but it has to stay realistic, as in the 'matter', the real life stuff that surrounds us. On a quantum scale we're talking about atoms and protons, Quarks and even neutrino's.

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

One of the most challenging aspects when it comes to science is that it is dealing with what is thought of as being simple and predictable versus the complex and unpredictable when it comes to particular phenomena being observed.

We are seeing both things in nature, but complex and unpredictable things yet to be explained rather becomes subject to scientific scrutiny and often discrepancies both when it comes to results as well as opinon when it comes to the same such results.

Take the subject of time as an example. The notion of time does not go well with all scientists, particularly because time is very difficult to define the exact meaning of.

Again, referring back to Albert Einstein, the first of his two major laws about relativity, namely Special Relativity, published in 1905, is dealing with this subject. First of all, time is possibly explained by means of mathematical laws
which generally are to complex for ordinary people and even many mathematicians to understand and comprehend.

Rather a more simplistic way of formulating these equations are typically being presented in order to give people a better understanding of the subject of time.

Also, the second part of Einsteins equations, dealing with General Theory of Relativity is a difficult and not too well known subject field of science. I will get back to this tomorrow and also later on, but for know I am almost blank when it comes to these things.

When we are looking into space, we are observing everything from light and dark dust through stars, galaxies and galaxy clusters. Matter from the Big Bang is creating stars, galaxies and galaxy clusters almost everywhere around in a more or less non-uniform way. Matter is both mass and energy and the force of gravity is creating stars and galaxies as well as galaxy clusters from dust and gas being present in space.

We are also seeeking an answer to the question about whether or not we are alone in the Universe because we happen to be intelligent and evolved ourselves as a result of biological and genetical evolution and in this way having intelligence and being able to recognize ourselves as well as our place in the cosmos that we are just a small part of.

So, the question becomes then - is it time to perhaps explain the notion of time by means or through the subject of Quantum Theory? As possibly may be known, Einstein was not found about this theory. Rather he preferred dealing with the subject of time, but in the end, scientists rather prefer to be dealing with the notion of gravity instead.

Then the subject rather becomes black holes as an alternative. Time is supposed to be coming to a standstill as a result of immense gravity over a very small space and the notion of space versus time becomes the main problem for scientists to solve.

The topics that you are mentioning are well understood by all scientists and most Engineers. Laymen will need to educate themselves to broaden their understanding.

Get yourself some good texts on Theoretical Physics and study them as well as watch the many video's that are available on the internet. Berkley has an excellent, free series on physics which is quite enjoyable.

Time is the interval between events by which we order our everyday lives. If you travel a certain distance at a certain velocity then the ratio of distance to velocity is time. The rub comes in when velocity is also defined as distance per unit time. Time is given units that are defined by the interval it takes the Earth to complete one orbit around the Sun.

Einstein, or more accurately Lorentz, showed that Newton was wrong in stating that time flows evenly and without restraint. Time like mass is not a constant. It appears so in our everyday lives but not to careful measurements under motion.

Einstein was a very clever man before his time, I wish he was here now, I really do.

Einstein is said to have had an IQ of 160. That is only 3.75 standard deviations above the norm.

That means: that in a world of 7.125 Billion people, there are hundreds of thousands of people alive now that are just as intelligent. The trick would be to gather a bunch of them together and train them and then see what comes out of their heads.



"There was an old lady from the Isle of Wight, who traveled must faster than light.
She left one day in a relative way, and came back on the previous night."

It was not only his IQ that made Einstein the way he was, a great man. (If there would have been a pun in my sentence, intended it would have been)

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

But he refused quantum theory, because it is based on the idea of chance,God does not play dice, he said (Gott erwulfelt nicht,if I am not wrong). If your read Jacques Monod's "Chance and necessity" you may understand how old was his mentality.
Tullio

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity

It really should be read, but it contains most of what you need to know.

I am doing this right now.

For now I only want to add that mathematics and physics are related to and being used in conjunction with observation of different objects as they are being seen in the sky, whether it is neutron stars, black holes or else.

The orbit of two objects around each other follows one or more specific rule. Such a rule adheres and is tried being explained related to certain laws of physics as provided by several different scientists.

The same goes for objects being thrown up into the air and then falling back to earth again as a result of gravity. Different areas of mathematics and physics are dealing with their respective laws for explaining the same. The same goes for the different subjects themselves.

They are part of a complete picture where Newton's laws are trying to explain things as well as possible. Einstein's special and general laws of gravity does this another way and the laws relating to Quantum Theory (which is all about physics), a third and even more complex way of trying to give an understanding of nature as it is being observed.

This is possibly what is being meant when using the term GUT (or Grand Unified Theory).

But he refused quantum theory, because it is based on the idea of chance,God does not play dice, he said (Gott erwulfelt nicht,if I am not wrong). If your read Jacques Monod's "Chance and necessity" you may understand how old was his mentality.
Tullio

Not entirely accurate.

He did not refuse quantum theory. He, after all, pretty much invented that theory. In his 1905 paper "On a Heuristic Viewpoint Concerning the Production and Transformation of Light", Einstein solved the paradox between the predicted behavior of photoelectrons under the then current theory that the energy of individual emitted electrons should vary based on the intensity of the light shining on the metal surface with the observed behavior that their energy varied based on the frequency of the light.

His explanation was that light existed in discrete 'quanta', not as continuous waves. This paper is what earned Einstein his Nobel Prize in Physics (1921).

What Einstein objected to was quantum mechanics, a later outgrowth of quantum theory as his idea of quanta was applied to other areas. Quantum mechanics brought in all the stuff about probability wave functions and the like. That was what Einstein objected to... the idea that, at the smallest scale, existence was nothing but probability and chance.

OK, but what Einstein objected to is the "Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics", which raised objections also by David Bohm and others.This why he said "God does not play dice".
Tullio

---