Time in physics

A search for “gps general relativity” reveals all kinds of content claiming that without general relativistic corrections your GPS will not give correct results. The entire myth about this GPS and General Relativity has been started by a physicist called Neil Ashby who at the time worked for the government. There is no evidence, except Neil Ashby’s own word which cannot be verified independently that there are general relativistic corrections in the operational code used by GPS satellites. Neil Ashby writes about theoretical General Relativity and like all physicists his papers are yet one more iteration of boilerplate General Relativity fare.

Remember that physics is an unregulated professional industry practiced by individuals who lie and cheat regularly in their work to advance their career. Their lying and cheating is exactly analogous to the lying and cheating of lawyers; because physics too is a legal system. These professionals lie and cheat by selecting favorable legal statements from the official legal body. In the case of physics every statement comes in contradictory triplicates and the physicist can chose the one that works and dismiss the others.

So it is business as usual in physics to enforce an unverified legal speculation about GPS and General Relativity as a natural law discovered by physicists. But here I am concerned more about how physicists abuse the concept of time in the name of physics.

In this case we are against a scholastic army of Doctors of Philosophy aka physicists who spent a lifetime to rationalize that a clock has anything to do with Time, the time with capital T — a clock is an oscillator; nothing more; nothing less.

In other words, physicists are fools (or professional crooks, depending on your point of view) who confuse intentionally the measurement of time with the concept of time.

Such speculations about nature of philosophical Time are the oldest of scholastic speculations.

Why are speculations about Time are scholastic speculations?

Because operational equations used in astronomy do not contain a term for philosophical Time; time t, associated with clocks are for period; and period is essentially a length or an angle.

Physicists load a geometric angle with scholastic philosophy about Time and dilate it, contract it, and mess with it in every mystical and scholastic way possible.

So, a scholastic doctor of philosophy who plied his trade in the time of Galileo, made his career by loading the a geometric line with peripatetic philosophy; Galileo removed peripatetic philosophy and called a line a line. This started the scientific revolution.

Removing the branding of modern scholastic physics from geometry, once again, will lead to a scientific revolution.

Like their professional ancestors, modern scholastic doctors of philosophy aka physicists too use the language of mathematics to practice their trade in the speculative scholastic philosophy (and call what they do “science”. . . obviously).

About these ads

One thought on “Time in physics

  1. Dear Sirs
    What is time?
    Is it uniform in the Universe, Is it kinematical. geodesic or all of this three, what mathematical device can obtain to explain time?
    We it is my conviction that we can’t explain time philosophically, can we explain through differential equations, vector, tensor calculus or other forms of mathematical devices?
    Yet to be discovered?
    Do we in fact need to create a new rational approach and then equalize it in a new mathematical device in order to explain time?
    Time according to Einstein is geodesic in gravitation, kinematical in motion, but not very metaphysical, but isn’t it uniform in orbit as the speed of light is uniform in the gravitational field?
    Time is doubtless uniform, kinematical and perhaps geodesical, the great challenge for astrophysics is as i propose to create a formal new mathematical device that formalizes al of this three fundamental devices of times in one single fundamental device to explain time.-Professor Doctor Paulo Crawford works-available in his page at the Lisbon faculty of sciences-www.fc.ul.pt, are strongly recommended, available in http://www.google.pt-“pesquisar” or “search”-translated-“Paulo Crawford”
    This are the questions i formalize.
    P. Rose / M. Lapa

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s