Naked Science Forum
Non Life Sciences => Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology => Topic started by: ...lets split up... on 04/09/2012 18:31:44
-
I phrased the question as best i could. I was thinking about that theoretical example; the one where you fly two clocks set at the same time on two planes flying at the same speed around the world in different directions, and when they meet up there is a slight difference in the speed of the clocks because of how time flows differently in different parts of space.
I was wondering if it is possible for the rate of time in one area of space to change it's rate of flow, or for the rate of flow of time to change position? I imagine it to drift like smoke or a cloud through space but that's just me trying to visualize. I'm not sure how we would measure it as we are continuously moving through the universe even if we appear still. And i'm not sure if my understanding of time being relative to space is correct, enlighten me.
-
one way to think about time, and measured time. It is based upon the observer..
Time "moves" depending on the progression and expansion of matter....if nothing progresses or expands, then time basically stops...in order to have a "universally" acceptable measure, u need a universal unit to measure it by...maybe instead of using our planets spin and orbit, and decay of atoms, etc., a more unified device could be used, say the speed of light for example...
light moves at 300 K ( earth measurement ) per hour or so.. So maybe equating "times" progression to this standard might create a universal "time" standard to measure progression and or expansion.
earth is our home, it takes a certain amount of time, to spin and orbit the sun, plus there is the orbit of our moon, and the other planets in the solar system. This is broken down into 24 hr days, 60 minute hrs, 60 seconds in a minute, 365 (close) days it takes to revolve around our sun, etc. etc. etc.
But on another planet in this solar system, time would be measured according to how that planet spins, and orbits, hence an hour on this planet is not the same as a hour on earth....
Time, is a word used to measure progression and expansion.. and is dependent on your point of reference for measuring progression and expansion...
So I imagine that every intelligent species in the "super verse" ( my theory ),
has a different reference on what an "hour" is for example..........
-
Thanks for the reply but i'm not talking about measured units of time. I'm saying that if in one part of space, time flows faster than another part of space, does this difference stay constant or does it change?
I'm not sure if i agree with Time "moves" depending on the progression and expansion of matter....if nothing progresses or expands, then time basically stops...
Are you talking about movement of matter or temperature? Expands how? I don't get it.
-
Time is a effect of the room as I think. Somehow those two, the room and 'time', or at least its arrow is deeply connected. The next thing to understand about time is that it is invariant locally, meaning that it never varies for you, using that wristwatch and so that you never gain or lose 'time'. The third thing one need to see is that all 'time dilations' are a description between 'frames of reference'. A 'frame of reference' is where you are, in time and place. Another 'frame of reference' is the one you choose to observe, as that spaceships 'clock' slowing down as the ship speeds away. Space, if accepting LorentzFitzGerald contractions is a plastic thing, and 'space' is everywhere, inside us as well as outside us. And particles can deform, just as they can be found to have their constituents 'super positioned', or be a expression of a 'probability cloud'.
It's a very plastic universe.
-
Lets split up
I’m not sure I’m answering your question but here goes.
Gravitational time dilation.
The nearer you are to a mass the slower time becomes for you, so those astronauts in the space station on returning to earth are younger than us ground huggers. In theory, the people living in the bottom apartments of a block of flats age slower than those in the top apartments.
This link is interesting. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation)
As for areas of time drifting, I don’t know, but it sounds like a good idea for a science fiction story. What the physical processes are for that, I got know Idea. Spacetime near a spinning black hole is ‘pulled’ around by the black hole (frame dragging) but that’s not drifting about …unless there’s some sort of eddy …Stuck my neck out saying that, but it’s all in the interests of science fiction. :)
-
Sorry, but no :)
You will have a life span, assuming that this life span is, let's say ninety years, then it will be so no matter where you are. It won't matter for you if you're on a ship near light speed or not, you have this life span. Those ninety years to play with, no more. There's a lot of hogwash with those 'knowing', discussing relativity, probably because people don't really have the time to sit down and look at it anymore. It's quite simple looking at the arrow, it's a invariant.
-
What isn't a 'invariant' is SpaceTime, or 'frames of reference', aka room time geometries. They adapt to motion, mass and 'energy', and will express themselves differently relative other frames of reference. But your local arrow will be a 'invariant' using your local ruler and 'clock'. And as that's the way we create a 'repeatable experiment' and test in equivalent 'frames of reference' you will have to invalidate those too assuming local 'time travels'.
-
Yes, we all know rate of time runs normal in each frame, it when comparing frames via Lorentz transformations you find how each frame 'sees' the other.
Sorry, but no :)
Since you don't say what's wrong...and go on to talk of hogwash, I can only take that to mean you think it's all wrong.
People at sea level and people living on top of a mountain may live to ninety years in their own frame, but those at sea level age slower, are you saying that's wrong.
In theory, the people living in the bottom apartments of a block of flats age slower than those in the top apartments
Is that wrong.
I may have got the astronaut thing wrong because time dilation due to velocity is greater than time dilation due to gravitation as this wiki quote says Gravitational time dilation is at play for ISS astronauts too, and it has the opposite effect of the relative velocity time dilation. To simplify, velocity and gravity each slow down time as they increase. Velocity has increased for the astronauts, slowing down their time, whereas gravity has decreased, speeding up time (the astronauts are experiencing less gravity than on Earth). Nevertheless, the ISS astronaut crew ultimately end up with "slower" time because the two opposing effects are not equally strong. The velocity time dilation (explained above) is making a bigger difference, and slowing down time. The (time-speeding up) effects of low-gravity would not cancel out these (time-slowing down) effects of velocity unless the ISS orbited much farther from Earth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_dilation#Gravitational_time_dilation
You may be intrested in the bold part of the quote,my bold.
I shall take it, that since you didn't correct me on that point,I can assume you didn't know of gravitational time dilation or don't know enough about relativity to start calling hogwash from others.
About gravtational time dilation...
Look up the link about in my other post, Gravitational time dilation is the effect of time passing at different rates in regions of different gravitational potential; the lower the gravitational potential (the closer the clock is to the source of gravitation), the more slowly time passes. Albert Einstein originally predicted this effect in his theory of relativity and it has since been confirmed by tests of general relativity.
:)
-
I phrased the question as best i could. I was thinking about that theoretical example; the one where you fly two clocks set at the same time on two planes flying at the same speed around the world in different directions, and when they meet up there is a slight difference in the speed of the clocks because of how time flows differently in different parts of space.
There is a difference because of two reasons - clocks moving at relative velocity to a rest frame have time dilated, and clocks at a higher gravitational potential are fast-ticking compared to those at lower. It is not a difference in space - it is the relative velocity and relative gravitational potential
I was wondering if it is possible for the rate of time in one area of space to change it's rate of flow, or for the rate of flow of time to change position? I imagine it to drift like smoke or a cloud through space but that's just me trying to visualize. I'm not sure how we would measure it as we are continuously moving through the universe even if we appear still. And i'm not sure if my understanding of time being relative to space is correct, enlighten me.
Not really - the only time dilations we know are the ones I have sketched out above - and they are related to surrounding energies/masses, and relative velocities, but not to a peculiarity of the volume of space
-
one way to think about time, and measured time. It is based upon the observer..
Time "moves" depending on the progression and expansion of matter....if nothing progresses or expands, then time basically stops...in order to have a "universally" acceptable measure, u need a universal unit to measure it by...maybe instead of using our planets spin and orbit, and decay of atoms, etc., a more unified device could be used, say the speed of light for example...
but a universe in which nothing progresses etc has no need of time as nothing could measure or observe it. Time depends on observation just as much as distance does - but that is a bit metaphysical.
light moves at 300 K ( earth measurement ) per hour or so.. So maybe equating "times" progression to this standard might create a universal "time" standard to measure progression and or expansion.
per second perhaps. and no not earth measurement - everywhere measurement.
earth is our home, it takes a certain amount of time, to spin and orbit the sun, plus there is the orbit of our moon, and the other planets in the solar system. This is broken down into 24 hr days, 60 minute hrs, 60 seconds in a minute, 365 (close) days it takes to revolve around our sun, etc. etc. etc.
But on another planet in this solar system, time would be measured according to how that planet spins, and orbits, hence an hour on this planet is not the same as a hour on earth....
Time, is a word used to measure progression and expansion.. and is dependent on your point of reference for measuring progression and expansion...
So I imagine that every intelligent species in the "super verse" ( my theory ),
has a different reference on what an "hour" is for example..........
I would argue that you are talking about units of time, not time itself. Every species might well have different units of time - but if I told John from Planet X how the hour was calculated then he would have no trouble in using the hour; and he might well adopt it just as we in UK have adopted the alien Metric System :-)
-
Lets split up
I’m not sure I’m answering your question but here goes.
Gravitational time dilation.
The nearer you are to a mass the slower time becomes for you, so those astronauts in the space station on returning to earth are younger than us ground huggers. In theory, the people living in the bottom apartments of a block of flats age slower than those in the top apartments.
Yes - with one proviso, they age slower if measured with the watches of those living on the top storey or if they start together, go away and come back (or if both are compared from a 3rd point of view). I think that's what Yoron was getting at
...and Yoron - I really cannot see how you can shoehorn the arrow of time into this.
-
I think i'm starting to get it, thanks guys. Time flows relative to gravitational force not position in space. I don't get how velocity changes time though, but i'll google time dilation. And i wonder if any of this is linked in some roundabout way to why the graviton is a theoretical particle.
Drinks all round at my restaurant in south africa.
-
Yes - with one proviso, they age slower if measured with the watches of those living on the top storey or if they start together, go away and come back (or if both are compared from a 3rd point of view
My bold.
Yes, I took it for granted the observation has been made and tested, just like we know the effect is there because of bygone tests.
-
You're thinking that those on the mountain and those down at sea level is the 'same' right?
As they all are on one Earth for example. But relativity is about 'frames of reference' and the frame represented by the mountain top isn't the same frame of reference as the sea level. Stop thinking of planets, make a grid of 'space' in where you let 'gravity' differ. Now you only have 'points' that you reference with some numbers telling where they are in three room dimensions, and then you need one for the 'time dimension'. All of those points will now represent different frames of reference, and choosing one point arbitrarily you can measure some other point and find a gravitational 'time dilation' relative your own clock and ruler. And you can jump around and chose a new one, to then find yet another relation (time dilation).
but assuming the observers lifespan to be ninety years it won't matter what 'point' he measures from. Locally that will be his life span, no matter where he is.
-
Think of it this way. Assume we could count a sun-rays photons, freeze the sun-ray down and see them moving towards one as syrup where one are locally. Then assume one are on a spaceship and accelerate to then start to move uniformly again. Can one expect the photons to come slower at oneself now?
Because those photons becomes a 'clock' of sorts, they come with a certain speed 'c', and that speed is locally invariant. That's also why 'c' is called a 'constant'. Using this thought example you can test the logic by changing your frame work, and presume that the photons indeed should come 'slower' as we now have changed our 'speed' due to us accelerating a while ago.
In such a universe 'time' might tick differently, but the room would stay the same, and then time would become as 'streams' in a ocean, created by gravity (and motion/mass energy). But in such a universe light would have a measurable different speed also, depending on where you was. And as far as I know light has one and the same speed everywhere, so it has to be wrong.
-
What I'm trying to point out is that to assume 'time' going 'slower' locally you would need a 'universal' time to measure that ships 'local time' against, and that 'universal time' does not exist. Only between frames of reference will you see a time dilation.
What you might do though is to assume that to compensate for that 'slower photon speed' you can shrink the ship so that the distance adapts to the slowness, giving you 'c', as a speed always is expressed relative a ruler measuring a distance. But, what you do then is to shrink the whole room, not only the ships, including all the 'room' you can see in the 'relative motion'/velocity you have.
Light/Radiation is what tells you what exists, you use it together with the local size scale of what you measure to define speeds and distances. And here we might assume that the whole shebang 'shrunk' for you, in the direction of your motion, a whole universe shrinking in your 'relative' motion :) Because it's not only the ship, it's the whole room time geometry adapting to 'motion' here. And the proof of that 'motion' is in the acceleration you felt in your body before.
But as you still will measure 'c' locally on that ship (relative that shrunk room), 'c' then must become a 'invariant/constant' locally, and that's the main point I want to put forward. The whole point with a repeatable experiment is that it is made in a equivalent frame, and according to relativity all uniform motions, no matter what relative 'speed', are the same. Time and 'c' goes together in relativity. Or rather time/'c'/the room/mass/energy/uniform (relative) motion/accelerations-decelerations.. They all goes together creating the phenomena we call SpaceTime. And this is just a thought example, not a definition of 'how' 'c' and the room works :)
that constant 'c' is one of the weirdest things I know of.
(and most beautiful:)
=
Eh, girls are the other ::))
But far from me to complain, I have hypothesis's :)
(rereading it I had to put in a comma. Otherwise it sounded 'up the walls' :)
-
Imatfaal, that one you better read about elsewhere :) This is the main stream forum, although we all wander astray at times, and usually most happily so :)
-
one way to think about time, and measured time. It is based upon the observer..
Time "moves" depending on the progression and expansion of matter....if nothing progresses or expands, then time basically stops...in order to have a "universally" acceptable measure, u need a universal unit to measure it by...maybe instead of using our planets spin and orbit, and decay of atoms, etc., a more unified device could be used, say the speed of light for example...
but a universe in which nothing progresses etc has no need of time as nothing could measure or observe it. Time depends on observation just as much as distance does - but that is a bit metaphysical.
light moves at 300 K ( earth measurement ) per hour or so.. So maybe equating "times" progression to this standard might create a universal "time" standard to measure progression and or expansion.
per second perhaps. and no not earth measurement - everywhere measurement.
earth is our home, it takes a certain amount of time, to spin and orbit the sun, plus there is the orbit of our moon, and the other planets in the solar system. This is broken down into 24 hr days, 60 minute hrs, 60 seconds in a minute, 365 (close) days it takes to revolve around our sun, etc. etc. etc.
But on another planet in this solar system, time would be measured according to how that planet spins, and orbits, hence an hour on this planet is not the same as a hour on earth....
Time, is a word used to measure progression and expansion.. and is dependent on your point of reference for measuring progression and expansion...
So I imagine that every intelligent species in the "super verse" ( my theory ),
has a different reference on what an "hour" is for example..........
I would argue that you are talking about units of time, not time itself. Every species might well have different units of time - but if I told John from Planet X how the hour was calculated then he would have no trouble in using the hour; and he might well adopt it just as we in UK have adopted the alien Metric System :-)
time itself ? are you implying that 'time' is a 'thing' ? if that is true, then it has to be made out of something !!
I believe time is only an observation of events, for is it is a thing, I need to see the particles it is made up out of..
-
Time is a expression of the room. Or the room is a expression of 'time'. Or maybe they are one and the same defined through a 'constant', 'c'. Or maybe you can 'split' them? Although they become a equivalence of sorts (symmetry) to me. The arrow is simple, locally the same just as 'c' but, what is it? Without we won't discuss.
-
It might be plausible for a photon to be the carrier of progression, hence time. After all, everything ceases to exist if there is no light ( photons ), likewise if time stopped, all ceases to exist also..
For light is everywhere, and everything is always expanding, growing, progressing, etc....
E=MC2 so then T=MC2
( Time is dependent on the mass/momentum of the observer and the observers speed in there frame of reference in relation to the speed of light squared )
better yet - T2 = m2c4 + p2c2
I could buy that..