View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:07 pm




Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
 TIME DILATION 
Author Message
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
To OZLOFT,

Thank you so much for your agreement :!: .

Yours faithfully
nakayama


Sat Aug 23, 2014 10:58 pm
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: Light Clock
A light clock is working in a moving train. Light path of light clock is illustrated vertically (in books). But this light clock leans somewhat to the right (or to the left). So, to an observer who stands on the ground, zigzag of the light path (saw-tooth like) warps. Common view says that the diagonal (slant) of the light path shows delay of time (time dilation). Two kinds of dilation ? And if two clocks work, and if these lean differs ?


Wed Dec 10, 2014 1:00 am
Profile
Consumed by Physics

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:21 am
Posts: 3695
Reply with quote
Post Re: Light Clock
Greetings again nakayama.
nakayama wrote:
A light clock is working in a moving train. Light path of light clock is illustrated vertically (in books). But this light clock leans somewhat to the right (or to the left). So, to an observer who stands on the ground, zigzag of the light path (saw-tooth like) warps. Common view says that the diagonal (slant) of the light path shows delay of time (time dilation). Two kinds of dilation ? And if two clocks work, and if these lean differs ?
The whole light-clock story is nonsense since the motion of the light is not altered by the light being reflected back & forth while traveling on a moving train or other (relatively) moving device.

It is merely a delusional setup based upon treating the earth or stationary surface as an absolutely stationary system or "absolute reference frame" (ARF).

Yours faithfully
OZLOFT


Wed Dec 10, 2014 2:20 am
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
Time adjustment on atomic clocks on the ground (latitude and altitude differs) seems not to be done (except a leap second). Then, who (what organization) adjust clocks loaded on gps satellites ?


Sun Aug 02, 2015 6:32 pm
Profile
Consumed by Physics

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:21 am
Posts: 3695
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
Dear nakayama,

latitude and altitude changes to clocks...
nakayama wrote:
Time adjustment on atomic clocks on the ground (latitude and altitude differs) seems not to be done (except a leap second). Then, who (what organization) adjust clocks loaded on gps satellites ?
...including atomic clocks, are due to the differing gravitational pull at such latitudes and altitudes.

This is an effect on the clock mechanism. It is anything but the effect of general relativity (GR). GR, like SR, is but spurious drivel created by Einstein to mislead science across the world.

Yours faithfully
OZLOFT


Mon Aug 03, 2015 2:48 am
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
There are three passenger cars A,B and C. A is standing. B is moving to the right , C is to the left. Speed of B,C is the same. So, value of time dilation is the same (if it’s true). Then, how about time dilation seen from B or C ? In books, motion shown seems to be between the two only.


Fri Jan 08, 2016 10:03 pm
Profile
Consumed by Physics

Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2008 8:21 am
Posts: 3695
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
Very true nakayama!
nakayama wrote:
There are three passenger cars A,B and C. A is standing. B is moving to the right , C is to the left. Speed of B,C is the same. So, value of time dilation is the same (if it’s true). Then, how about time dilation seen from B or C ? In books, motion shown seems to be between the two only.
If Einsteinian time dilation were true than B and C should find that "the other one" undergoes more time dilation than either of them find with A.

What we would then have is three parallel/daughter universes, one for A, one for B and one for C. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You can see we need a better theory than Einstein's - or Lorentz's or Poincare's for that matter! :D

Yours faithfully
OZLOFT


Mon Jan 18, 2016 7:39 am
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:00 pm
Posts: 633
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
OZLOFT wrote:
Very true nakayama!
nakayama wrote:
There are three passenger cars A,B and C. A is standing. B is moving to the right , C is to the left. Speed of B,C is the same. So, value of time dilation is the same (if it’s true). Then, how about time dilation seen from B or C ? In books, motion shown seems to be between the two only.
If Einsteinian time dilation were true than B and C should find that "the other one" undergoes more time dilation than either of them find with A.

What we would then have is three parallel/daughter universes, one for A, one for B and one for C. :lol: :lol: :lol:

You can see we need a better theory than Einstein's - or Lorentz's or Poincare's for that matter! :D

Yours faithfully
OZLOFT


You believe in an infinite, steady state universe. You believe in all the laws of thermodynamics over long time spans. You believe that all physical processes are irreversible.

You have to believe in multiple universes because all the entropy that is created has to go somewhere.

1) If all processes are irreversible, than every process creates entropy.
2) If you believe in thermodynamics, then entropy can't be destroyed by the second law.
3) If there is only one universe, and it is infinite, there is no place in the universe where entropy can go.
4) If you believe in a steady state universe, then the total entropy over large periods of time and space can't change.
5) If you believe in statements 1-4, then the entropy created by every physical process has to go into another universe.


Thus, you have to believe in multiple universes because you believe in thermodynamics.

You also believe in quantum mechanics. Since Everett's theory applies specifically to quantum measurements, then you must believe in Everett's theory of multiple universes.

You also can't accept relativity because its basic equations are time reversible. However, Maxwell's equations are time reversible. Newtons's equation of motion are time reversible.
Therefore, you can't believe in either Newtonian mechanics or Maxwell's equations.

So I deduce that you are a person who believes in Everett's multiworld theory, quantum mechanics and thermodynamics. However, you don't believe in Newton's mechanics, Maxwell's equation s relativity.


With deep regards,

Darwin123


Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:48 pm
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
A disk is rotating. To an observer situated on the direction of the axis of rotation, how about time dilation of each point on the surface of the disk ? And how about the number of rotations ? How about when the observer is receding from the direction of the axis ?


Fri Oct 07, 2016 6:10 pm
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2014 4:00 pm
Posts: 633
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
nakayama wrote:
A disk is rotating. To an observer situated on the direction of the axis of rotation, how about time dilation of each point on the surface of the disk ? And how about the number of rotations ? How about when the observer is receding from the direction of the axis ?


There are two observers of importance in this problem. The observer that you mentioned is the observer stationary at a point on the axis of the disk. However, you most likely want to know what happens to an observer at a point on the disk that is moving with the disk material. These are not symmetric observers because of the centripetal force. The centripetal force is only acting on the observer on the edge of the disk. The observer at the center of the disk is not being acted on by centripetal force.

The observer at a point on the axis of rotation is not under the influence of a mechanical force. Therefore, the proper acceleration of this observer is a zero vector. Therefore, the observer ion the axis of rotation sees time DILATION in all bodies that are moving relative to that point.

The points on the edge of the disk are moving with a velocity relative to the point equal to the angular velocity (radians/second) times the radius of the disk. Therefore, clocks on the edge will be ticking slower than the clock on the axis by a factor equal to the Lorentz factor.

This time dilation is NOT reciprocal because a mechanical force is acting on observers moving with the edge of the disk. The clocks moving on the edge of the disk are being acted on by a centripetal force. Therefore, the observer at the edge of the disk sees a clock on the axis of the disk ticking faster. So the observer at the edge of the disk sees a time CONTRACTION for clocks on the axis of the disk.

The observer at the edge of the disk has a nonzero proper acceleration while the on axis observer has a proper acceleration that is a zero vector. Since the observer in the center of the disk has no tangential component of velocity, he has no radial component of proper acceleration.

What the observer that moves away from the center of the disk varies with the mechanical force being applied to it. The centripetal force, which is mechanical, is determined by the tangential component of velocity. You did not tell us what the tangential component of velocity is for the observer moving away from the axis. There is no way to tell what that observer sees unless you tell us what the tangential component of velocity is for this observer.

If the observer moving away from the disk has NO tangential component of velocity, then he sees only time DILATION. The situation is just like the case of the observer on the axis.

If the observer moving away from the center is loosely ATTACHED to the disk material, so that he keeps up with the spinning disk, then there is a tangential velocity equal to the angular velocity times he distance from the axis. The proper acceleration of this observer is proportional to the distance from the disk. This observer has a nonzero proper acceleration. So what he sees is a combination of time DILATION and time CONTRACTION. What the observer sees is not either one or the other, exclusive.

The lesson here is that the mechanical force, whatever it may be, is important in the problem. The mechanical force is what breaks the reciprocity of the time dilation. So if your analysis does not include mechanical force in any way, then your analysis is meaningless. You have to give us information necessary to calculate the mechanical force on the observer, or your statement becomes meaningless.


Wed Dec 28, 2016 9:56 am
Profile
Board Warrior

Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 4:00 pm
Posts: 224
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
I reckon that time dilation has been proven by experiments, thusly it is now not ad hoc, it is now empirical.
And i reckon that if dilation is proven then length contraction must be true.
It used to be the other way around i think, contraction was fairly certain, but dilation was ad hoc.

Dilation at altitude has been proven by 2 experiments at least -- using Caesium clocks on a hill (14000ft) near Seattle -- & using a Al+ clocks (raised 12") by the NIST. Both in the northern hemisphere. Aetherists & Einsteinians (very nearly) agree here for different reasons.
Dilation due to V (velocity) or |V| (speed) has been proven by 2 experiments at least -- using a Al+ clocks by the NIST -- & by Ives & Stilwell.
I am suspicious about these types of faux-velocity dilation tests, ie using accelerated ions or vibrating ions. It aint pure STR -- whatever pure STR is ???.
Also, STR seems to have been edited-revised at least 10 times over the years, & even Einstein ended up doubting some of it (STR).
The Ives & Stilwell tests support aetherists not Einsteinians (Reg Cahill).
The NIST tests seem to support Einsteinians, but i haven't seen a proper review yet (ie by an aetherist).

But aetheric dilation is beautifully simple.
1. Dilation is zero in the aether-wind frame, ie V=0 -- clocks tick slowest here -- it is the absolute frame (F0) -- & we have a universal time.
2. True ticking is faster when V>0, using the standard equation for V & c. Actually (aetheric) ticking depends on |V| (speed) not V (velocity)(Einsteinian i think).
3. Apparent ticking feels the same in any frame, ie when clock & observer have the same V -- because an observer's tickerthalamus & the clock are affected equally.
4. Apparent ticking feels the same in every frame, if clock & observer have the same true speed (ie true |V|)(ie absolute |V|).
5. Observed ticking depends on definition -- it might involve an analysis of c+V or c-V for photons reaching the eye.
6. Acceleration & Jerk & gravitation & gravitational potential & rotation & orbit & spin & force have no direct effect on true ticking, nor on apparent ticking, nor on observed ticking (not sure) -- only true |V| has effect -- however they will have an effect if they affect true |V| (ie we need only know true |V| at that instant, all else is irrelevent).
7. If needed, there are 2 types of distance -- true distance (ie in the absolute frame, ie F0) -- & apparent distance (ie the observer's eye is contracted-distorted by true V)(thusly apparent distances are magnified in the V direction, but are not affected at 90dg to V). I might think about observed distances when sober -- but observed distances & observed times etc are probably redundant, ie they are a silly Einsteinian concept with little application in the real world (not sure).

8. Unfortunately aetherists fall into several camps -- some believe in a stagnant battery-hen aether (Sun centred, or perhaps Earth centred), some (me) a free-range aether -- some believe in drag (or partial drag), some do not (me) -- some believe in a contractile aether (me), some haven't heard of a contractile aether (etc etc). Some believe in aether inflow into matter (me), some do not. Some believe in Ranzan's DSSU (me), some do not.
I reckon that Newton & Fresnel & Fizeau & FitzGerald & Larmor & Lorentz & Poincare' & Michelson & Sagnac & Miller & Ives & Cahill & Ranzan & all of the others (& Einstein) probably had different ideas re the exact nature of their aether (ether).


Last edited by McMac on Fri Apr 21, 2017 4:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:17 am
Profile
Lurker

Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 3:45 am
Posts: 3
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
Right perfect entry. As his colleague wrote above. I agree in 100% !

_________________
more info


Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:23 am
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
In outer space, plane waves of light are coming from the right and from the above. Ahead of an observer, a space ship is moving to the right. Is there contradiction in time dilation ?

In outer space, plane waves of light are coming from the right. Ahead of an observer, one space ship is moving to the right and the other space ship is moving to the left at the same speed. Is there contradiction in time dilation ?


Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:09 pm
Profile
Obsessed With the Question

Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:20 am
Posts: 520
Reply with quote
Post Re: TIME DILATION
Space ship A, B, C form an equilateral triangle. By the motion of space ships, this triangle is enlarging. Time dilation (if it is true) of B, C seen from A is the same. Then, how about time dilation seen from B or C ? In books, motion shown seems to be between the two only.


Sun Oct 01, 2017 11:04 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 29 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.