0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Apart from a bizarre and unrealistic view of how atomic clocks work, this seems to be entirely consistent with everyone else's observations. Now the rest of us describe gravitational frequency shift and relative motion shift as "time dilation" phenomena, and mysteriously we get the right answer by solving conventional relativistic equations for them.So the question is what do you mean by inverse time dilation?
So just to be absolutely clear you are saying that as gravitational potential increases time slows down. So that's why my GPS never gets me to the right place! And why all satellite phones run slow mo.
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 13/08/2016 12:24:59Quote from: alancalverd on 13/08/2016 09:48:16Alas, I can't do italics on this site any longer, so things get confused by the two different conventional uses of h, but yes, one is height above the surface of a large planet, and one is Planck's constant - as is obvious from dimensional analysis of the equations. Quote... Just to clarify your last words. For a clock above the Earth spinning around with velocity V, the clock will slower relative to the Earth. As the clock moves faster it will slow even more. If put a clock on a tower atop a high mountain, is it correct that the clock will move slower than a clock at the base of the mountain. If we build a tower atop the mountain is it correct that the higher up the clock moves, the clock will move even slower. Jerry - I think you need to read this:http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/aluminum-atomic-clock_092310.cfm Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?
Quote from: alancalverd on 13/08/2016 09:48:16Alas, I can't do italics on this site any longer, so things get confused by the two different conventional uses of h, but yes, one is height above the surface of a large planet, and one is Planck's constant - as is obvious from dimensional analysis of the equations. Quote... Just to clarify your last words. For a clock above the Earth spinning around with velocity V, the clock will slower relative to the Earth. As the clock moves faster it will slow even more. If put a clock on a tower atop a high mountain, is it correct that the clock will move slower than a clock at the base of the mountain. If we build a tower atop the mountain is it correct that the higher up the clock moves, the clock will move even slower. Jerry - I think you need to read this:http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/aluminum-atomic-clock_092310.cfm
Alas, I can't do italics on this site any longer, so things get confused by the two different conventional uses of h, but yes, one is height above the surface of a large planet, and one is Planck's constant - as is obvious from dimensional analysis of the equations. Quote... Just to clarify your last words. For a clock above the Earth spinning around with velocity V, the clock will slower relative to the Earth. As the clock moves faster it will slow even more. If put a clock on a tower atop a high mountain, is it correct that the clock will move slower than a clock at the base of the mountain. If we build a tower atop the mountain is it correct that the higher up the clock moves, the clock will move even slower.
...
Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yesy!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!
Quote from: timey on 15/08/2016 11:41:00Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yesy!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!If you carry an object in your hand to the top of a tower and let it go gravity will accelerate it toward the ground. This increases the kinetic energy of the object via the acceleration. A photon heading from space toward the ground cannot be accelerated since that would increase its speed above c. That is prohibited. So the only way a photon can gain kinetic energy is via a blue shift in its wavelength. Why is this so difficult to grasp?
Quote from: jeffreyH on 15/08/2016 14:09:53Quote from: timey on 15/08/2016 11:41:00Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yesy!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!If you carry an object in your hand to the top of a tower and let it go gravity will accelerate it toward the ground. This increases the kinetic energy of the object via the acceleration. A photon heading from space toward the ground cannot be accelerated since that would increase its speed above c. That is prohibited. So the only way a photon can gain kinetic energy is via a blue shift in its wavelength. Why is this so difficult to grasp?Actually it's really easy to grasp, and was indeed grasped by myself yonks ago!I am making an alteration to current theory...Light blue shifting towards a gravity field cannot exceed the speed of light, we observe that its wavelength contracts...I am simply altering the concept and saying: forget about relativistic mass concept, and that it is the time periods that the light is travelling through that are contracting, not the wavelength itself. ie: 299 792 458 metres per ***variable seconds***.Can 'you' grasp that?
Quote from: timey on 15/08/2016 14:39:25Quote from: jeffreyH on 15/08/2016 14:09:53Quote from: timey on 15/08/2016 11:41:00Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yesy!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!If you carry an object in your hand to the top of a tower and let it go gravity will accelerate it toward the ground. This increases the kinetic energy of the object via the acceleration. A photon heading from space toward the ground cannot be accelerated since that would increase its speed above c. That is prohibited. So the only way a photon can gain kinetic energy is via a blue shift in its wavelength. Why is this so difficult to grasp?Actually it's really easy to grasp, and was indeed grasped by myself yonks ago!I am making an alteration to current theory...Light blue shifting towards a gravity field cannot exceed the speed of light, we observe that its wavelength contracts...I am simply altering the concept and saying: forget about relativistic mass concept, and that it is the time periods that the light is travelling through that are contracting, not the wavelength itself. ie: 299 792 458 metres per ***variable seconds***.Can 'you' grasp that?Therefore you are accelerating the photon but YOU don't grasp THAT!
Au contraire. I understand exactly the nature of your misconception.
Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yes!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!
Quote from: timey on 15/08/2016 11:41:00Quote from: jerrygg38 on 15/08/2016 11:21:27 Thanks for the info. I read it and copied it to my computer. It is easy to understand the slowing of the clock with motion. Now the data specifies that the higher up we go, the faster the clock. I always need a picture in my mind to understand things. So the higher up we go, the less gravitational pressure on the clock and it will run faster. Then the other problem is that it appears that the lower down we are and the higher the gravitational field, the gravitational pressure will produce higher energy photons. These would be opposite effects. slower clock and higher energy photons. What do you think?Aha, Jerry... Yes, yes, yes!!!You have now arrived at 'the' observation that I've been attempting to illuminate.Good on ya!The only problem being that nobody has ever observed it.
You can have a situation where a photon with a long wavelength is moving into a lower gravitational potential and a short wavelength photon is moving into a higher gravitational potential. We can find two points in the potential where each wavelength will have the value that the other started with. This shows just how silly your hypothesis is. Wavelength is simply a function of position and potential. The photons wavelength can start with just about any value at any magnitude of the potential. We can have a gamma ray and a radio wave generated at exactly the same position in the potential.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 16/08/2016 08:44:06You can have a situation where a photon with a long wavelength is moving into a lower gravitational potential and a short wavelength photon is moving into a higher gravitational potential. We can find two points in the potential where each wavelength will have the value that the other started with. This shows just how silly your hypothesis is. Wavelength is simply a function of position and potential. The photons wavelength can start with just about any value at any magnitude of the potential. We can have a gamma ray and a radio wave generated at exactly the same position in the potential.And why do you say that this shows how silly my idea is?Light waves can be emitted at a spectrum of energies and associated frequencies, but these energies and frequencies can only be shifted in energy and frequency in the gravity potential by degrees, and these degrees of shifting energy and frequency occur in a ladder format, where E=fh.To be clear, I am not suggesting that the energy and frequency of a light waves wavelength is indicative of the value of the proposed inverted time dilation...I am suggesting that it is the degrees of change that are indicative of this value.
...and, please be aware that your observation and complaint of silliness also applies in practice to Hubble's red shift velocities. Hubble has used the means of a standard candle to standardise wavelength for these velocity measurements.
EQuote from: timey on 16/08/2016 12:40:03Quote from: jeffreyH on 16/08/2016 08:44:06You can have a situation where a photon with a long wavelength is moving into a lower gravitational potential and a short wavelength photon is moving into a higher gravitational potential. We can find two points in the potential where each wavelength will have the value that the other started with. This shows just how silly your hypothesis is. Wavelength is simply a function of position and potential. The photons wavelength can start with just about any value at any magnitude of the potential. We can have a gamma ray and a radio wave generated at exactly the same position in the potential.And why do you say that this shows how silly my idea is?Light waves can be emitted at a spectrum of energies and associated frequencies, but these energies and frequencies can only be shifted in energy and frequency in the gravity potential by degrees, and these degrees of shifting energy and frequency occur in a ladder format, where E=fh.To be clear, I am not suggesting that the energy and frequency of a light waves wavelength is indicative of the value of the proposed inverted time dilation...I am suggesting that it is the degrees of change that are indicative of this value.So then we agree that it is only the gravitational potential gradient that matters. Which obeys postulates of the general theory of relativity. You have discredited your own hypothesis. Although you will likely fail entirely to understand how.Quote...and, please be aware that your observation and complaint of silliness also applies in practice to Hubble's red shift velocities. Hubble has used the means of a standard candle to standardise wavelength for these velocity measurements.
The explanation is that your hypothesis runs counter to both theory and observation. Which you yourself have just made clear.