Talk:WikiJournal of Science/Submissions/Demostration of the No Relativity of Time

Chronometer movement

In reality, the one who moves may be undergoing acceleration. Further, if this acceleration affects the chronometer mechanism, then the recorded times for the one who moves may be ahead, behind, or have greater error of reproducibility, compared to those for the one on Earth not undergoing the acceleration.

This situation for the one who moves suggests that time may be relative to acceleration or the force producing the acceleration. If the one who moves undergoes the same effect as the chronometer mechanism, then the time for the one who moves is different than for the one who does not. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

First postulate

1. Time is absolute; i.e., time is always independent of movement, including acceleration.

"Premise: Lets suppose time is different for the one who moves."

Then either no chronometer mechanism undergoing acceleration can accurately measure time at one extreme, or time may be a dependent variable and is not absolute at the other.

The first contradicts your no relativity of time because we can never know the time, and the second contradicts the absolution of time. --Marshallsumter (discuss • contribs) 19:27, 12 March 2017 (UTC)