Drunken Monkey Posted October 18, 2003 Posted October 18, 2003 the sound might be different but that isn;t how cesium clocks work. they don't monitor the waves. they monitor the cesium atoms. and all the guys have to do, is take a "count" of the clocks. how can they get this wrong? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Warp Spider Posted October 19, 2003 Author Posted October 19, 2003 Holy smokes. I realize how a cesium clock works. I'm trying to make an analogy because you meet a direct answer with "please explain." Sorry if I can't break down the notion of a reading being incorrect into something simpler. I'll try putting it in less technical terms: The fact that the clock's reading was off is no indication that time has somehow been altered for that clock, but rather an indication that the clock is broken. External interference, the result of moving the clocks around, has caused them to fail to read correctly. Although they still provide an accurate indication of chronology, they no longer provide an accurate indication of time, which is completely different. Like I said earlier in this thread, you can change the time on a clock and it doesn't mean you've gone back in time: the fact that the researchers managed to generate an erroneous reading on the clock only means that they've generated an erroneous reading, it's no indication that time dilation has occurred. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Drunken Monkey Posted October 20, 2003 Posted October 20, 2003 you didn't give a direct answer. you just said that the guys MIGHT have read it wrong or that the results of the experiment MIGHT not be a true indication of the reality. so can you actually tell me how the clocks have been broken instead of just saying that they have? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Warp Spider Posted October 20, 2003 Author Posted October 20, 2003 Well, I would classify a clock as broken when it ceases to keep accurate time, and since the clocks not only gave an inaccurate reading, but one that didn't even agree with relativity, I'd say it's a fair bet that the thing is busted. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Drunken Monkey Posted October 20, 2003 Posted October 20, 2003 but you still haven't said anything about how it is caused to be broken. all you have said is what broken means. i asked HOW the clocks have been broken. you say that the readings were inaccurate but you don't say why they are inaccurate. the fact remains that they might not inaccurate. so once again i ask my question that remains unanswered. how have the clocks been broken? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Warp Spider Posted October 21, 2003 Author Posted October 21, 2003 As for exactly what part of the clock caused the malfunction, it's impossible to say based on published reports about that experiment. One would likely need to repeat the experiment while using a considerable amount of equipment to monitor the clock in order to see exactly where the inaccuracy crept in. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Valithor Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 How about instead of clocks - you use something else in your argument. Like carbon decay... or an animal aging... Keep Smiling!
Drunken Monkey Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 that is still assuming that an inaccuracy has developed. and so the short answer to my question of whether you could inform us what has broken, would be "no". post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Warp Spider Posted October 21, 2003 Author Posted October 21, 2003 Well, no, I couldn't say what exactly individual component of the clock was rendered ineffective.that is still assuming that an inaccuracy has developed. A fairly safe assumption considering that the clock's reading disagrees with another clock's reading. Obviously at least one of them has to be incorrect. Paladin - A holy beat down in the name of God!
Drunken Monkey Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 so why can't it be that time has indeed warped? because you say so? post count is directly related to how much free time you have, not how intelligent you are."When you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite."
Recommended Posts