• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Science and religion

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Se
Nope. It has been observed.

Since even simple addition is too difficult for you how will you refute Einstein?

Ok, I'm not going to get into petty argument with you over this where your replies will just be repetition of wiki .
I will demonstrate it to you and take you through it step by step being critical and objective !

If you actually think for yourself , you might learn something !
 

Audie

Veteran Member
He knows I have plenty of documentary evidence.

He provided sufficient evidence with his refusal to
answer. But really, who cares.

It is unsuitable for me or anyone to make sport
of what may be a rather unfortunate individual.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Se


Ok, I'm not going to get into petty argument with you over this where your replies will just be repetition of wiki .
I will demonstrate it to you and take you through it step by step being critical and objective !

If you actually think for yourself , you might learn something !
Wiki is more than enough to refute you. But this could be entertaining.

Go ahead.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Perhaps you could clarify as to whether the specifics
mentioned are true?

Multiple sock puppet identities, and gender changes?
@exchemist is familiar with "james" work on other forums. Ones where he got banned multiple times so he created different sock puppets and even changed his gender for at least one of them.
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
Wiki is more than enough to refute you. But this could be entertaining.

Go ahead.

Simply understand in the light clock thought experiment , the distance creates the subjective parlor trick . If you collapse the y-axis 1 second reference frame to a time planck (tP) reference frame , there is no dilation .

c.jpg
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
It is nonsense since you parroted terms that you do not understand and cannot do the math.

I really think you really struggle to see objective from subjective .

Anyway ! demonstrating Einsteins errors is rather boring , would you like to discuss the miracle instead ?

Some thing from nothingness

0 energy

0 time

0 pressure

0 force


It's a spatial miracle right ?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I really think you really struggle to see objective from subjective .

Anyway ! demonstrating Einsteins errors is rather boring , would you like to discuss the miracle instead ?

Some thing from nothingness

0 energy

0 time

0 pressure

0 force


It's a spatial miracle right ?
But you have not demonstrated Einstein's errors. And you forgot that we have observed time dilation. We can go on once you own up to your errors.
 

james blunt

Well-Known Member
I'll add more for you .

If you are traveling away from me at 0.5c and I remain stationary . When I measure 1.s on my clock you will measure less time . However you have experienced my longer second the same as me .

Consider two parallel lines moving left to right but one is moving slower , the slower line experiences the same time as the faster line .

.............................
...............
 
Last edited:
Top