0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
my congratulations on the successful result of your experiment.similar experiments I have made, and tested upon my person have not been so successful; however after a hospital visit with stomach pumping, I in fact survived (proof of which I submit by my current post).may I inquire as to the alcohol content of your elixir; and should it be > 50%; would you be interested in establishing a distribution partner?are you interested in providing a quantity of your elixir to a volunteer? (and if proven to be a non fatal; or at least not leading to blindness) how much per gallon would you be considering?
There are different aspects of models
It is to my disappointment that my reply #258, dated 12/27/18, was our last communication, and it received no response. Perhaps due to the holidays, or perhaps because both curved spacetime speculation, and gravitational wave energy density time-delay speculation are not easily falsifiable. The association between the presence of mass and the curvature of spacetime is the same as the association between the presence of mass and the gravitational wave energy density of the local space, from the perspective of the ISU model which we are simulating.
It would be nice to know if you did understand that the role that wave energy density plays in the ISU model is the same role that curved space plays in SR/GR, because light following a curved path through spacetime, and light slowed by following a path that takes it through space containing higher gravitational wave energy density, both have the same result in terms of arrival times at a distant point.
It would have been nice to have a reply from someone of your intellect in regard to my supposition that the cause of the hemispherical anisotropy might be the result of two previous parent arenas converging to form a big crunch/bang that initiated our expanding arena, and therefore the resulting hemispherical anisotropy observed in the cosmic microwave background could have been imprinted by differing density/temperature characteristics of each of the individual parent arenas.
Sorry if trying to bring out those different aspects interfered with the discussion of the absolute time simulation. Perhaps you can take us forward in that direction.[/font]
[By the way (and mainly for Halc), I've been thinking a bit about the waves that are normally called gravitational waves - the ones that don't come off stationary or non-accelerating masses. When two black holes go round each other at relativistic speed, their gravity wells don't merely move round with them creating gravitational waves as the changes spread outwards, but must also length-contract in their current direction of travel, and this ought to have a more significant impact than the first effect. If you're sitting at some distance away from them at a constant distance, you must be going up and down in their gravity wells twice for ever orbit of the black holes. That should lead to your functionality repeatedly speeding up and slowing down as a result, and that might show by looking at the frequency of light coming to you from a distant source, though you'd have to be reasonably close to the black holes for this effect to show up. I don't know if this length-contraction input to gravitational waves is normally taken into account in any way, but I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere.]
Sorry - I didn't realise you were waiting for a response. I thought you were just filling me in on how your theory solves the problem as to where the energy comes from to replace the energy that's sent out with your gravity waves, but I couldn't work out how that happens.
The gravitational wave being sent out is the lost energy - you can't both retain that energy at the black holes and also have it being radiated away.
You appear to have neighbouring universes which are part of a "greater universe", and that's fine - we can't rule out there being such things on the outside,
Interesting concept. A distant light changes color in beat with the orbiting masses nearby. Did you find anywhere that describes this? Seems plausible, but how close might you need to be for it to be measured?
...then instead of saying we can’t rule out things on the outside, can we agree that the logical conclusion is that there are things on the outside that lead to that big bang event?
The observer isn't so interested in observing the black holes though - his attention is on a distant signal source and its frequency. This source is far away not to be affected by the gravitational waves as they haven't had time to reach it.
However, the signal will be slowed along with the observer's functionality as it reaches him, so maybe the effect would be masked perfectly.
As for how close you'd need to be (if there's an effect that could be measured),
We'd need to detect the gravitational waves as early as possible, triangulate them, point a giant telescope at the source in an impossibly short time and then hope there's a suitable signal passing nearby whose frequency might be affected.
There could be (and probably are) things on the outside that have a role. I have no interest in disproving ISU, but I've commented on things where I saw potential problems which were worth mentioning just in case you hadn't already considered them carefully. If you have answers to them all and it holds together well, then all is good. Your theory will at some point be tested by AGI (along with every other theory) to see how well it fits the facts, and the best way for me to help test your theory is to complete my work on developing the AGI that will do that job better than I can, so that's why I don't want to dig too deep into it at the moment. There are so many theories around that no human has time to check them all in detail to see how well they stand up to scrutiny, so your target audience will necessarily end up being AGI rather than humans.
The issue of absolute time is a much simpler thing to explore, and it doesn't appear to be an important one for your theory - I can't see how adding an acceptance of it (or the possibility of it) to your theory would break the theory, so while I don't want to dig too deep, I would be interested to know why you're so keen for it to be ruled out in your theory. What is it in your theory that depends on absolute time not existing?
QuoteHowever, the signal will be slowed along with the observer's functionality as it reaches him, so maybe the effect would be masked perfectly.Can't be if the observer and light source are relatively stationary. Contraction cannot affect the frequency at which the light arrives at the stationary observer. If his clock runs slow, then he sees the light blue shifted. [Undefined] length contraction plays no role in that.
I don't see why the singularities need to be imminently merging.
I’m keen on time not being absolute because my whole model is built from the bottom up, through a sequence of logical steps, starting with the big bang as a given, and followed by the question, if there was one big bang event, why not multiple big bangs. My conclusion is that time simply passes, but the rate that time passes as measured by clocks is variable, governed by the local gravitational wave energy density.
Thinking that through, you get to the multiple big bang arena landscape, and the process of arena action that defeats entropy, and perpetuates the multiple big bang arena composition of the greater universe. Concluding that the greater universe has always existed is simply based on the fact that I don’t consider the alternatives of “something from nothing” and “God did it” as compatible with the scientific method, and of course, if it was ever going to come to an end, why hasn’t it?
That brings us to the sticking point in regard to absolute time. I take the term “absolute time” to mean that there is a standard or preferred rate that time passes, but instead we see that the measurement of the rate of the passing of time, as performed by clocks, is all over the map. Therefore, to my way of thinking, there is no preferred location in space where a clock would tick away at the absolute rate, there is no preferred rest frame where time is passing at an absolute rate in an infinite, multiple big bang universe, and in fact, there are no two clocks that are in relative motion to each other that will measure the passing of time at the preferred rate or even at the same rate. For me, in my model, it is a simple conclusion that the concept of absolute time is unnecessary and impractical.
1) Time simply passes everywhere in the ISU at a rate that is governed by the gravitational wave energy density profile of the local space.
3) The rate that time passes in the ISU is variable from one energy density environment to another. Since there is no standard wave energy density environment, and no preferred frame where the density is unchanging, there is no location where the rate that time passes can be referred to as absolute.
Quote from: HalcContraction cannot affect the frequency at which the light arrives at the stationary observer. If his clock runs slow, then he sees the light blue shifted. [Undefined] length contraction plays no role in that.As the gravity well warps and the observer goes deeper, his functionality slows down, but so does the signal that he's monitoring - that signal is going to move through space there at the same speed as the light in the observer's light clock, so I think it might be possible for the frequency to appear constant with the same amount of it arriving in any measured amount of time.
Contraction cannot affect the frequency at which the light arrives at the stationary observer. If his clock runs slow, then he sees the light blue shifted. [Undefined] length contraction plays no role in that.
QuoteI don't see why the singularities need to be imminently merging.You might need them to be travelling at relativistic speed for the length contraction of the gravity wells to become sufficiently big - the effect will be a lot harder to detect at lower orbital speeds as there will be very little warping.
Still, I may be underestimating the ability of gravitational wave detectors to pick up the signal from merging black holes long before the merger. It would be really good if a changing length contraction acting on a gravity well could be observed, and that might soon be possible.
…There is perfect coordination between all clocks and the amount they are slowed by the local energy density. All that coordination depends on there being a governing time which runs faster than any of the clocks.
Think about it. It cannot be. If the source is spitting a signal at 1000 Hz (hardly visible light), those signals must be reaching any stationary observer at 1000 Hz in the source frame.
But never-the-less, what about this: Maybe you could put the speed of time into the same context as that of the speed of light? Assume a perfect vacuum, and a perfect clock, and make it axiomatic that the perfect clock would tick at its maximum rate in the perfect vacuum.Given those conditions, that might serve as a conceptual definition of absolute time.
My problem with going there, is that in the ISU, that definition is not possible to implement. It is not possible to produce a perfect vacuum; it remains only a concept. So even a light clock would be slowed by the fragments of gravitational wave energy density that would invariably “fog up” an otherwise perfect vacuum.
I’m confident that you can support the concept of absolute time from a simulation. Where it gets problematic is in the specifications of the simulation, any physical apparatuses, and the physical conditions pertaining to the local environment. The best you can achieve is a conceptual explanation of absolute time, IMHO.
The real absolute time could be many magnitudes faster than that. Our entire universe could be within some outer "universe" such that the whole of our universe is running at snail pace. This would make sense too when you think about "instantaneous" action at a distance with quantum stuff.
If you don't have that faster time, you can't have a time slowed by energy density because it isn't running slower than the faster time that the model doesn't have.
If you make sure you have removed absolute time from the simulation, the simulation will cease to function correctly. Indeed, it will fail to function altogether. You cannot have coordination of different "times" without one of them governing the other(s).
It will not. So long at the path doesn't change, the frequency of the light cannot possibly change in any one frame.
Quote from: Halc on 08/01/2019 23:47:55It will not. So long at the path doesn't change, the frequency of the light cannot possibly change in any one frame.Picture a tank of water a lightyear long with a laser beam skimming over its surface. Raise the level of the water in just one second such that the light beam is now in water rather than air....You couldn't actually do that with water as it would reflect the light away on contact when you change the water height, but it could work if done with a changing gravity well instead, and the change in frequency would for a while match the change in the detector's clock (a light clock) such that no change in frequency would be detected by that observer even though there would be a real change in frequency.
Has there been an instant change in the number of waves in the light? No.
Has the light slowed down? Yes.
Has the frequency dropped? Yes, though not for the light entering the tank at the end.
The water won't work for the reasons stated, and gravity can't just be switched on, but it sort of can if you have a pair of massive rods that can be set close by or further away.
Light doesn't come in waves, it comes in photons.
Not sure how you would measure the frequency of a photon while still in there. I think it depends on if gas or gravity was the agent. Expose it to photographic film and see what color it shows. Would film in the gas show different color than film in the gravity field? How big of refraction/dilation would be needed to tell the difference?