[guest39538]

I was going to stop thinking about  science but I must confess I am now a science ''geek''.   

When the Caesium atom is in motion does it generate a greater magnitude magnetic or electrical field around it ?

My notion is that if it does, this would explain an entropy change and a lesser ''output'' frequency.
The supposed increase in field ''blocking'' kinetic input from the ''n-field' causing less output.

[jeffreyH]

I was going to stop thinking about  science but I must confess I am now a science ''geek''.   

Thinking is good. Listening and learning is even better.

When the Caesium atom is in motion does it generate a greater magnitude magnetic or electrical field around it ?

That is a very interesting question.

My notion is that if it does, this would explain an entropy change and a lesser ''output'' frequency.

Time dilation is key to the question above. The field may move with the object but as long as the motion is inertial the field has to be the same in every direction. Otherwise you would be able to tell you were moving and not stationary. This means that for a remote observer the field is weakened with increasing velocity due to time dilation. The slowing of time applies to the action of the field. This has to include an objects gravitational field.

The supposed increase in field ''blocking'' kinetic input from the ''n-field' causing less output.

I see what you are getting at here but you need to understand how to state it in terms of mainstream science. Don't stop thinking but combine it with learning.

[guest39538]

The field may move with the object but as long as the motion is inertial the field has to be the same in every direction.

Doesn't the Earths magnetic field have a ''tail'' like distortion caused by direction of travel ?

[jeffreyH]

You have to distinguish between motion due to inertia and motion due to acceleration. The earth is always accelerating. Keep thinking along those lines though because you may get an insight you may otherwise miss.

[jeffreyH]

Forget the mathematics but just read through the following. Maybe follow up on some of the things discussed.
https://en.m.wikiversity.org/wiki/Acceleration_field

[guest39538]

Forget the mathematics but just read through the following. Maybe follow up on some of the things discussed.
https://en.m.wikiversity.org/wiki/Acceleration_field

I will read more on the link later, a picture I have in my mind at the moment  :


spin.jpg (59.23 kB . 1146x766 - viewed 2106 times)

I ''see'' when the ''object'' is in motion it ''cuts off'  the rest field.   To explain in another way , imagine a wire frame sphere submerged in a river and the river happily flowing through the sphere.
Now imagine if the sphere was spinning really fast, although there is ''holes'' in it , it will interrupt the steady flow.    It will ''absorb'' less and ''output'' less.

I will continue until I hit the nail on the head.