This is fun
1) So a metaphor is not ridiculous even if far from exact? Then all the crazy posts I've been reading here lately about evolution and creationism are not "crocks of Language Removed" -- they're metaphors!
2) Also at the Google discussion you excerpted were the following two statements. I would like your comment on a question following each. (Can you really trump Dr. Dick or were you premature.)
Aside from whether he's clueless or not,
can you forgive someone for trying to patronize Dr. Einstein? Others question the Deities of various religion. Humans are arrogant...that's why I'm ...that's another story.
Patrick Reany wrote:
"Clock time is ALL that modern physics cares about. This is not a mistake on Einstein's part. It was a free choice he made to get away from metaphysical time. Most physicists today accept this paradigm shift toward Einstein's view and a way from the older mechanical view with its undetectable absolute time concept. It is still perfectly fine to adopt some notion of absolute, unmeasurable time in one's program of research, but probably few physicists will adopt this program. But you're free to pursue it. "
So, Bruce, this quote was interesting...a little remote maybe. Isn't this what Dr. Dick is talking about, so could the forum reply to what he was talking about now that he has managed to express it with some additional help from you and the others?
"Since every single electromagnetic scattering cross-section or decay rate has a rate fixed by the same coupling electromagnetic constant, any device that measures those things, constitutes a clock."
So, Bruce, since, as Yanniru points out at http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/4984.shtml
"We are going at and beyond the speed of light relative to some distant parts of the universe."
then, Bruce, would frames of reference times be slightly inconvenient under those conditions?
Clearly, Dr. Dick's trying to approach a big question which maybe you will be able to advance.