I need time dilation help please?

There is no difference,

Answer this , if you was on lets say Pluto and I on Earth and we both want to measure time, how do we get past the very very big issue , that no matter how small of a measurement we try to measure, we will only ever be recoding history and marking a place mark of history, we can't get past the issue of that anything past zero , is automatic by default a past event.

indeed

Now how would that be explained? @Peroxidation @Implication

I'm not quite sure what the question is. Does this help? http://www.askamathematician.com/2011/01/q-why-does-relativistic-length-contraction-lorentz-contraction-happen/

I think we're going in circles!




Why is that a problem?

yes thx

That reminded me of the Jim Al-Khalili book

All observers see the lightning at the same time because they can see through space,

Because imagine we have no clocks, no sundials, no caesium, how on Earth or anywhere in the Universe could we ever agree on a rate of time according to the present model and that time dilates and there is simultaneity?

We all could agree we need an increment of one, but also we must all agree that the increment of one is the same for all observers because of the very fact that anything after 0 is past tense.

We have to all agree that 0 moves forward and remains 0 because measuring it is past tense, 0 is never overtook in measurement.

time is relative

Relative to what?

Well, one could argue that simultaneity is an illusion based on SR because whether or not an observer sees two events occur at the same time depends on what velocity the observer has with respect to those events.




We don't all need to agree on it; we just need to have that we can all measure it. I may be in a different reference frame to you and so be measuring different time intervals, but I can still compute the time intervals in your frame.

Proper time is often used in this regard because all frames agree on it.




Well that's kind of arbitrary. Physics only ever depends on time intervals, not on absolute time. If we wanted we could label the current time as 5,977,468,202. Then everything before 5,977,468,202 would be the past, and everything after 5,977,468,202 the future. But we wouldn't repeatedly relabel the present as 5,977,468,202 (or 0). That wouldn't be very helpful, because then we wouldn't be able to measure any intervals. If we define $t=0$ to correspond to the present now, the present in 1 second's time would be $t=1 \mathrm{s}$. It wouldn't be very helpful to consider that $t=0$ as well, because we know full well there is a second's difference!

relative to your speed and/or location (gravity and the like)

So what is time?

I have no idea, but we seem to be able to measure it quite accurately

So you measure something but have no idea what it is your are measuring?


You time a runner running around a track, do you think you are timing the runner?


or is the truth you are recording an amount of history of how long you stood observing for?

no idea

An honest answer , well I have an idea that I am recording my own history , if the runner is recording there own history, then I am pretty sure we record at an equal rate and I am quite positive that the video cameras around the stadium will confirm this with play back.

But that's the thing. If you and the runner both had a clock, they would be ticking at different rates.

But when you are making absolute space t=0 and relativistic space t=1 an interwoven space, it shows the true nature of the universe

before the big bang there was absolute n-dimensional space and the Universe is not expanding, it is simply objects moving away into more space.

Minkowski space time is not independent of matter, it is dependent to matter

, the value of space time

and an independent time is 0

light propagating through space has 0 dimension, the singularity thing I mentioned is 0.

I assure you it all fits and my universal model is very accurate and true.

And that has nothing to do with time.