Is perception of time bent within relative gravity?

  • 1 Replies

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Offline Johan7272

  • First timers
  • *
  • 1
    • View Profile
Observation is a mere grouped interpretation of elementary electrical signals of the environment by our brain. Our brain is interactedly conditioned through nerves,to define being, distinguished from the independent 'other', being the environment, and this positioning is a part of us identifying 'other' and 'self' within the relative field. The seemingly one dimensionally measured time sequence, can be emotionally distorted by the essence of what is being experienced on the one side, and 'measured' time can be distorted by approaching a gravitational field on the other side. If a clock runs slower, approaching a gravitational field, and faster further removed from it, whilst being observed as the same by the observer within the same degree of gravitation.

A few questions pop up here.
If light is bent by a black hole gravitational field, couldn't that just be our positional observation being distorted relative to a considerable decreasing of time by means of an equally increasing of a gravitational field. If we were to be a photon, in that position, we'd observe us going in a straight line, at c speed. In our observation, the beam of light would slow down approaching the black hole, as the outer observational c would decrease in value compared to our being within a field less inflicted by gravity. Now I still don't quite get it.

If the measured 'c' stays the same, wherever you measure it, but doesn't in your relative position to a gravitational field, than shouldn't there be a newly defined relative spatial constant within a timal variable, and a timal constant within a spatial variable, depending on the degree of gravitational disformation?

As 'observation' is a mere grouped defining of elementary electrical signals of our brain, relative to the position that is defined, than can '1' still be defined in math as being a constant within dynamics, or would our mathematical constants alter if we were able to observe our relative spatial and timal dynamics from a irrelative, independant, stationary field?

Ok, if we were to observe (by sight) all time and all space at once, from out of our universe, within the conditioned logics of our perception, we would define it being a plain white field.

Than we would take a pixel within that field, and that would give us to observe a 3-D spatial frame, combined with an equally relevant time frame. But, as an observer, we could choose to 'see' more time relative to less space, or otherwise. Something that an observer 'trapped' within this universal frame, never could (being subjected to his universe).
Everybody is already well aware that there is 1 spatial dimension, than time to establish this first spatial dimension, a second spatial dimension, again time to establish the 2nd, than a 3rd spatial dimension, again, time to establish the third, and than time again to establish the grouped 3 dimensions. But as our brain is automatically wired to establish a conditioned logic of all 3 dimensions together, we are used to call it 3 dimensions + time.

Anyway, my question is, what other features would be obvious for such an irrelative constant?


Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • 2208
    • View Profile
Is perception of time bent within relative gravity?
« Reply #1 on: 06/08/2011 17:10:58 »
Johan, you have a lot of preconceptions mixed in with your questions and I didn't understand many of your statements. Time dilation, whether due to gravity or relative motion, is a real and measurable effect and not to do with perception by a human (or other) brain except for the fact that the brain has a built-in (if not perfectly accurate) clock which would be affected the same as any other time-piece.

The concept of observing our universe from outside makes no sense if the universe is defined as everything there is - i.e. there is no "outside". Your "pixel" description is (I think) to reduce space-time to simple flat space - a reasonable approximation in a small local region - but I don't really get the idea of "time to establish" spacial dimensions. You seem to be saying that the structure of space-time is dependent on the observer sensing it. This would be a novel concept and not a generally accepted idea by anyone in mainstream physics as far as I'm aware.