(June 19, 2017 at 3:00 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(June 19, 2017 at 12:32 pm)Cyberman Wrote: It depends on how you're using it. I don't disagree with the scientific understanding of the concept, but I may disagree with yours. That's why I've been asking you to explain what you mean by relative time. I'm just trying to nail your trousers to the mast.
I've said nothing that contradicts science in any way, it would seem that you're attempting to argue semantics.
I've stated that time is relative; that is a fact, what you seem to want is an explanation of the mechanics, which is irrelevant.
Now, if you believe that time is not relative, then come out and say so.
(June 19, 2017 at 1:12 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: I don't think "time is a direction in four dimensional spacetime, so I am not late in my relativity" would cut any ice with my boss. Time is used as a standard measure all the time. a year is a year the world over.
So is it your argument that a year is not a year? Or are you just a fan of star trek.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.