[CZARCAR (OP)]

twins arre in 2 rockets 1 traveling 2x as fast as the other or whatever. though traveling at constant speeds, the fast rocket is accelerating away from the slow1 as the distance between the 2 rockets increases as they cruise. the fast rocket is encompassing more space.

the slow twin gets 2 sealed ELASTIC containers. 1 container gets 1btu/sec. & the other gets 2btu/sec. the 2btu/sec. container expands faster & encompasses more space like the fast rocket encompassing more space? the fast rocket is encompassing more space in an accelerational manner but is the 2btu/sec. container also expanding in an accelerational manner? [like gas law on earth which i dont remember]

[Mr. Scientist]

cooling effects a molecular slowdown.
traveling near speed of light also effects an aging slowdown per einstein? wouldnt the slowed aging also involve a molecular slowdown?

Can i make it known, if you don't mind, that a very long time ago that i made a prediction that the assumptions made by relativity could be found to be erreneous. I based the idea on the fact that everything remains relative, even down to the molecular level. Would it surprise many to find in some distant future when this technoogy is available to experiment on the macroscopic level, that when one twin moves at relativistic speeds from earth and returns, to find his age has asymptotically-aged - so there is no difference between his twin?

I want it also known, that when i said this could be an inconsistency, i was ridiculed horribly.

[Geezer]

Can i make it known, if you don't mind, that a very long time ago that i made a prediction that the assumptions made by relativity could be found to be erreneous. I based the idea on the fact that everything remains relative, even down to the molecular level. Would it surprise many to find in some distant future when this technoogy is available to experiment on the macroscopic level, that when one twin moves at relativistic speeds from earth and returns, to find his age has asymptotically-aged - so there is no difference between his twin?

I want it also known, that when i said this could be an inconsistency, i was ridiculed horribly.

You certainly can. I do have a question though. How do you explain the difference in time between two atomic clocks? (See aeroplane experiment referenced above). Also, the same effect is observed with clocks on GPS systems. I understand that the relativistic effects between the terrestrial oscillators (clocks) and the oscillators on GPS satellites have to be factored into the calculations to eliminate significant positional errors. It is not necessary to travel at near lightspeed to observe the phenomena.

A theory should account for experimental and practical observations.

[Mr. Scientist]

At the time, i speculated that atomic clocks where not an incorrect proposition. Only macroscopic bodies caused the problem for me. How do we know a collection of paticles do not age asymptotically rather than one being atomic?

[Geezer]

Macroscopic bodies are composed of atoms. Why would those atoms be affected any differently than the atoms in atomic clocks?

[Mr. Scientist]

Macroscopic bodies are composed of atoms. Why would those atoms be affected any differently than the atoms in atomic clocks?

The same question in a way which has puzzled scientists for well over 100 years. Why do singular or even slight groups of loose particles exhibit a wavelength when its waveform seems to dissipate at macroscopic-sized bodies.

[Geezer]

Are you saying that a macroscopic mechanical clock, if it was possible to construct one that was sufficiently accurate, would report a different time from an atomic clock?

[Mr. Scientist]

I speculate at best.

[Geezer]

It may not be impossible to conduct the experiment. I'm a bit behind on high stability clock technology, but these days it might be possible to build a non-atomic clock that is sufficiently stable to conduct a test on a satellite. Would a crystal consisting of a millions of molecules be sufficiently macroscopic for the test?

[Mr. Scientist]

It may not be impossible to conduct the experiment. I'm a bit behind on high stability clock technology, but these days it might be possible to build a non-atomic clock that is sufficiently stable to conduct a test on a satellite. Would a crystal consisting of a millions of molecules be sufficiently macroscopic for the test?

It's not impossible... It requires quite a lot of energy though, and by conventional wisdom, would far exceed a spacecrafts capabilies.

[Geezer]

It may not be impossible to conduct the experiment. I'm a bit behind on high stability clock technology, but these days it might be possible to build a non-atomic clock that is sufficiently stable to conduct a test on a satellite. Would a crystal consisting of a millions of molecules be sufficiently macroscopic for the test?

It's not impossible... It requires quite a lot of energy though, and by conventional wisdom, would far exceed a spacecrafts capabilies.

I'm not suggesting that the clock would have to travel very fast. The experiment would be to put an atomic clock and a crystal clock on a satellite, or even an aircraft, and see if they keep the same time or not. However, I'm not confident state-of-the-art crystal clocks (crystal oscillators) are sufficiently stable to conduct such an experiment.

[Mr. Scientist]

No. But i am. I am still waiting for the macroscopic twin experiment to be performed to a high-speed or relativistic accuracy. Not those which involve non-organic components.

[Geezer]

Then perhaps you better explain exactly what you mean by "macroscopic". Your earlier definition implied that non-macroscopic was limited to a small number of atoms (as in the atoms in an atomic clock).

By that definition a crystal oscillator is clearly macroscopic.

Apparently, we are now required to accept that macroscopic (by your definition) only applies to organic components.

Would you kindly make up your mind and define what you mean by "macroscopic".

Perhaps it only applies during months that do not include an "R".

[Mr. Scientist]

I had hoped you might have come to realize i am specifically talking about humans that can internally-experience time.

[Geezer]

OK. Are you limiting it to humans, or would other animals experience the same phenomenon?

[Mr. Scientist]

OK. Are you limiting it to humans, or would other animals experience the same phenomenon?

Only to humans. I have no other evidence that animals experience and know the passing of some time.

[PhysBang]

What about the experiments with the atomic clocks where humans were in the same plane as an atomic clock. Isn't that a test with humans involved?

[Geezer]

OK. Are you limiting it to humans, or would other animals experience the same phenomenon?

Only to humans. I have no other evidence that animals experience and know the passing of some time.

Dogs maybe? Our Scottie gets fed at the same times every day. She starts whining like crazy if we are late with her food.

[Mr. Scientist]

What about the experiments with the atomic clocks where humans were in the same plane as an atomic clock. Isn't that a test with humans involved?

Does no one ******** listen here?


Lee was right - no one reads the threads before answering. I said, and for the very last time ''time delay on an extreme record''. Humans have not experienced that yet.

[Geezer]

What about the experiments with the atomic clocks where humans were in the same plane as an atomic clock. Isn't that a test with humans involved?

Does no one ******** listen here?


Lee was right - no one reads the threads before answering. I said, and for the very last time ''time delay on an extreme record''. Humans have not experienced that yet.

Obviously, we can't listen, but we can read. I just did a search on "time delay on an extreme record", and the only occurrence is in your latest post. Perhaps you said something else.

Anyway, what about dogs?