0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The atomic clock would work best. Any gravity-based clock (an hourglass or a pendulum-style clock) would have problems.
Aren't you just asking about the accuracy of the clocks in different places in the gravitational field?
[straight lines in curved space time or force field].
It's quite hard (least it was for me) to get ones mind around the idea that time does not march along at a constant rate throughout the Universe.
firstly does the theory of relativity therefore postulate that mass at the centre is older than mass at the surface.
So therefore does that mean the theory of relativity postulates that the mass at the centre is travelling at a different speed?
The effects I'm talking about are based on the general theory of relativity, so it just has to do with things at different points in a gravitational field, without accounting for their relative motion. They measure time differently even if they're standing still with respect to each other.
As I then will have to reconsider my idea of SpaceTimes geodesics, well, at least it seems so to me.=
It would mean that the clock at the center of the earth would measure one revolution of the earth relative to the sun slightly longer than a clock at the surface, meaning that the mass at the centre is travelling slower at over a kilometre every time the sun reaches its zenith relative to a fixed point,[one day] so is it not time running slower but just accuracy of the clocks in different strengths of force field.
the mass at the centre is travelling slower at over a kilometre every time the sun reaches its zenith
because speed is a measure of distance in time.
Jp why would it decay slower in the middle of the Earth?The closer you come to a neutron star the slower your clock will be relative the rest of the universe, right? Are you saying that if I burrowed my way into the exact middle of that neutron star, I would get an even slower clock? Although gravity would be 'nulled' in there?
Would you agree to it having an importance to what one should see those SpaceTime geodesics as, any which way? It seems so to me. If I assume that there is an equivalence to it, what will it do that 'rubber sheet' analogy? And if it isn't, what would that mean? That you can be weightless without free falling? Isn't that a 'anti gravity' concept?
I actually think you're right, though. The usual description of time slowing down as you move towards a massive object assumes you're outside of the object. The equations have problems once you pass through the outer crust of the massive object. I think it makes sense that at the center, where you're essentially in free fall, you should experience the same passage of time as in empty space. I don't know GR well enough to be 100% sure, but it makes sense to me as an educated guess.
It is said that a atomic clock runs faster at altitude proving time runs faster the weaker the gravity field, so if you placed an atomic clock at the centre of the earth and ignoring the gravitational effects of the sun and the moon, it would run considerably faster because it would seem to the atomic clock that the mass of the earth did not exist now if you placed a hour glass egg timer along side it, it would not run at all so doing the total opposite as regards our ways of measuring the passage of time. So which method should i use to cook my eggs when visiting the centre of the earth [straight lines in curved space time or force field].
Assuming we test both ideas, orbits and that 'deep shaft' and get conclusive evidence stating that time do 'speed up' inside the middle,
As for your egg timer I'm not sure what you mean? Are you thinking of a glass one, using sand for its time measures? Or are you thinking that 'times arrow' will change
I'm still not sure I understand the concept we're discussing Gem Sometimes I think I do but then, just as sudden, I feel that I lost all sight of it again.
Are you thinking that the geodesics might look the same at a far spot in space, as it does inside the middle Geezer? I had that disturbing feeling too yesterday thinking of it, like a flat paper (two dimensional) with mass creating the three dimensions we see. Then mass could make a 3D description of a 2D space..
Ah well. Prosaic is cool too And I can proudly say that I'm one step behind My view is turning into an Copernican one )
Just to repeat my previous post on this topic, I think that bending of space-time, and thus time dilation, is caused by mass. Gravity is an effect of bent space-time, not the other way round. And mass bends space-time