0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: alancalverd on 27/03/2017 14:53:56There's no "electron cycle" involved in an atomic clock. We are looking for microwave absorption at an energy determined by the spin-spin interactions between electrons and nuclei.And yet you do not understand the absorption process. Your model determines your understanding. What causes your vibration?
There's no "electron cycle" involved in an atomic clock. We are looking for microwave absorption at an energy determined by the spin-spin interactions between electrons and nuclei.
Here's where the "electron path " model breaks down. A simple clock consists of a quartz tuning fork. Quartz is anisotropic, which is why we can use its piezoelectric properties to excite and measure its vibrations.
I never mentioned vibration or motion of any sort. Quantum "spin" isn't (indeed can't be) the same as rotation, it just happens to have similar consequences.
Quote from: GoC on 27/03/2017 15:26:34Quote from: alancalverd on 27/03/2017 14:53:56There's no "electron cycle" involved in an atomic clock. We are looking for microwave absorption at an energy determined by the spin-spin interactions between electrons and nuclei.And yet you do not understand the absorption process. Your model determines your understanding. What causes your vibration?I never mentioned vibration or motion of any sort. Quantum "spin" isn't (indeed can't be) the same as rotation, it just happens to have similar consequences. Models are generally useless and often dangerously misleading. You have to describe what actually happens.
Quote from: alancalverd on 27/03/2017 09:19:15Here's where the "electron path " model breaks down. A simple clock consists of a quartz tuning fork. Quartz is anisotropic, which is why we can use its piezoelectric properties to excite and measure its vibrations. Vibration is a motion its just not clear what is causing motion.QuoteI never mentioned vibration or motion of any sort. Quantum "spin" isn't (indeed can't be) the same as rotation, it just happens to have similar consequences. Rotation and spin is definitely possible and the cause of vibration. A spin and rotation is what I believe to be the motion of the electron moving forward.Your understanding is only limited by your model.
Quote from: alancalverd on 27/03/2017 01:11:17Take an elastic band and make 10 marks on it, 1 cm apart. Now stretch the band. There are still 10 marks between your fingers.If two biological events are separated by 10 clock ticks on earth, they will be separated by 10 clock ticks at any other gravitational potential, as measured by the local clock. But an observer on earth might count 9 or 11 ticks of his own clock between observations of the events.No contradiction, as long as you accept that time can be dilated or compressed by gravitational potential. If the observation were due to a gravitational effect on the clock rather than time, we would expect to see different results for different types of clock, but we don't. If a clock only 'appears' to tick faster or slower and all clock's tick at the same rate, because 'how can a clock tick both faster and slower', as you said, and as I quoted you, then the concept of sequential time being stretched or compressed is null and void.It is only by stating that the clock's are 'actually' ticking faster or slower, whereby the observation of the clock above running faster is measured as being faster because the lower clock is running slower and that slower time is what the observer with the lower clock is using to measure the higher clock. And if one goes higher still, that when measuring the middle clock, one is measuring both the middle clock, and the lower clock by the faster rate of time of the higher still clock, where the higher still clock will observe that the middle clock is running slower, and the lower clock is running slower still, because the higher clock is measuring both of these lower clock's by the rate of the higher still clock's time.Then we are looking at the dilation and contraction of time dilation and your elastic analogy has physical meaning.To state the clock's as only 'appearing' to run at differing rates one implies that all clock's run at same rate, in which case your elastic analogy has no physical meaning.My model views the situation as being that the clock's 'actually' run at differing rates in the gravity potential and seeks to attach the potential energy increases at elevation to the increase in frequency between electron transitions.This would require a pe=mgh calculation where value of pe/m insures a 'blanket addition' of pe for any value m at any h from M. (It is appreciated that to describe the time dilation due to additional pe at each h from M would require further calculation)In this manner all electron transitions of any atom should remain in proportion to each other as to energy increases at each h from M, and therefore different clocks types will all give the same result.Taking this alternative view of electron transitions being excited by increase in energy back to the blackbody, Planck measured his increase in energy as joules per second, where the second is an invariant. If one calculates the increase in energy held relative to the increase in frequency, as if an increase in frequency shortened the length of a second, then the quantum nature is negated.Then by applying the remit of +energy=shorter seconds to the energy, or strength of a g-field, where the acceleration of gravity is due to time dilation, this competes the picture for the cyclic model that I propose....And before you say to me why bother, relativity explains thing perfectly well, agreed, however physicists write books and programs are broadcast, especially since the discovery that expansion appears to be accelerating, that perhaps a new approach is needed to get a deeper understanding.For better or worse, here is an alternative.
Take an elastic band and make 10 marks on it, 1 cm apart. Now stretch the band. There are still 10 marks between your fingers.If two biological events are separated by 10 clock ticks on earth, they will be separated by 10 clock ticks at any other gravitational potential, as measured by the local clock. But an observer on earth might count 9 or 11 ticks of his own clock between observations of the events.No contradiction, as long as you accept that time can be dilated or compressed by gravitational potential. If the observation were due to a gravitational effect on the clock rather than time, we would expect to see different results for different types of clock, but we don't.