0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
liquidspacetime: As a fellow aetherist, I have to argue somewhat with your model of how transmissions take place in a universal aether.According to my model of the aether (for the basic model, you can refer to my October Thread discussing how an aether would account for gravitation), the way energy transmissions occur in the aether (including transmission of light) is by conduction of a vibrating energic impulse from aetheric unit-to-unit, contiguously. There also occur simultaneous resonances "to the sides" which affect other aether units, larger "aetheroidal" units, and quantum-scale units such as the photons that we see with the naked eye. All these occur virtually instantaneously in space, via the contiguity of the aether.
In my model, the fact that atomic clocks are slower in space is because space is less energized than on earth. -Earth has a magnetic energy field, which makes the aether units vibrate faster than they do in space, so time passes faster on earth than in space.
David,Clocks do run slower in an airplane or a space vehicle (...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGIN.)
A couple of real-life examples may help to make the effects of special relativity clearer. Experiments have been carried out where two identical super-accurate atomic clocks were synchronized, and then one was flown around the world on an airplane while the other stayed at home. The clock which travelled recorded marginally less passage of time than the other (as predicted by the theory), although the difference was of course minimal due to the relatively slow speeds involved. Our fastest military airplanes can only travel at about 1/300,000 of the of the speed of light, so the time dilation effect γ is only about a ten-thousandth of 1%.
Are you sure you can trust your information source?
Even if we stay with standard physics theory, how can time pass faster in space, if a hypothetical outer-space-traveler ages less after a lengthy space voyage, than the people he had left, back on earth? -This is a familiar and generally-accepted hypothetical example in science.
With the twins paradox (it isn't actually a paradox, ...
A paradox is a statement that apparently contradicts itself and yet might be true (or wrong at the same time).
Quote from: David CooperWith the twins paradox (it isn't actually a paradox, ...I'd be careful when you say things like this since the twin paradox is an honest to goodness paradox, i.e. a "paradox" in the strictest sense of the term. Perhaps a refresher on what the term paradox would help clarify this point. See: ...sorry, you cannot view external links. To see them, please
REGISTER or LOGINQuoteA paradox is a statement that apparently contradicts itself and yet might be true (or wrong at the same time).So a paradox may indeed be true. In this case the paradox is a set of twins, obviously two people born on the same day, one of which sets off on a journey and comes back and is younger than the one who stayed home. This on the face of it seems contradictory. That's why it's called a paradox. But as we all know, it's exactly what we expect to happen should it be attempted.
Time slows down in outer space. -The key word here is "outer."
David, you may not be willing to accept the hypothesis about an occult aether technology affecting the near-earth time rate. -Perhaps, as a quantum/relativity adherent, you would be willing to entertain at least some of my aether model as correlating with the consensus concept of "Dark Energy?"
You're restating the same argument we went over before, and this time, you are phrasing it in a way that sounds like the data "disproves" my theory of aether/time.
Again, our existing data shows that time passes slower in "near space," as in a clock in a moving airplane, ...
...and time passes faster in what I say is "middle space," where a moving GPS satellite travels.
-As I've covered already, I claim that "true outer" space would be where the earth's magnetic field would not exert its influence on the clocks in a moving vehicle, and that although no experiments have been done with clocks that far out as yet, time would run slower there, due to the absence of the magnetic field.
A naive understanding of something which fails to match up with reality does not result in a paradox.
Veridical Paradox: A veridical paradox produces a result that appears absurd but is demonstrated to be true nevertheless.
Quote from: David CooperA naive understanding of something which fails to match up with reality does not result in a paradox.You're missing the point. Didn't you read the Wiki article that I posted? I posted it for a good reason. The current case is an example of what's called a veridical paradox[/b] defined as followsQuoteVeridical Paradox: A veridical paradox produces a result that appears absurd but is demonstrated to be true nevertheless. This is precisely what the twin paradox scenario is and that's why its called the Twin Paradox.
Regarding my hypothesis that time would slow if measured in an outer space region free of magnetic fields, you offer a criterion concerning the observation of the speed of light, i.e., that it should be found to slow down if time was passing more slowly in a given region of space. -This would not qualify as a criterion using my model of the aether. ... Therefore, observing the speed of light as a constant would not have anything to do with a change in the rate of time, in my aether model.
Your two theoretic points, (1) as to whether the speed of travel or the altitude has a greater effect on time, and (2) that the rate of time in clocks sent to strongly magnetic bodies in space has been measured, I don't see as bearing on the question of what the rate would be in an outer space region where magnetic fields aren't strong.
Finally, I would insert my opinion that my aether model should not have to hinge on the question of assessing how it affects the rate of time in space, in the face of these other, possibly-complicating, factors.
Quantists tend to pile on hypotheses and agree by consensus to support each other.
Mr. Cooper,You continue to cite observational data made using earthbound quantum-mediated tools, the human eye being one such tool. You then seem to be asking for a perfect "fit" with certain such data for entertaining my aether model in any way.
I'm not going to comment on your point about "light clocks" having settled any issues.
A light clock runs faster when in motion...