[timey]

If you have a test particle at location 2 radii from centre M (Earth) where the acceleration of gravity is (off top of head) in the region of 4.25m/s^2...
...where you see /s^2, what length of second^2 is that?
The answer is:
/standard second^2...
...where a standard second is a measure of time derived at ground level Earth.

My suggestion of a 3rd time dilation of the g-field - that affects the time directly for m=0 only, but has an indirect affect upon m by affecting m's motions in the m=0 space of the g-field - has longer seconds at r=2radii.

Instead of calculating acceleration held relative to the standard second, if one were to calculate the acceleration at r=2radii held relative to the 3rd time dilation length of second at r=2radii then the measure of acceleration held relative to that longer second would be in the region of 9.807m/s^2, as opposed to holding the acceleration at r=2radii relative to the standard second where the acceleration would be 4.25m/s^2.

The acceleration at any r from M (Earth), as measured held relative to the length of second at that r, will always be in the region of 9.807m/s^2.

So - when one takes the measure of acceleration at each r from M as per held relative to the standard second, where near Earth is 9.807m/s^2, and by r=2radii the acceleration has decreased to 4.25m/s^2, this can tell one by how much a 3rd time dilation second has become longer at each r.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

If you have a test particle at location 2 radii from centre M (Earth) where the acceleration of gravity is (off top of head) in the region of 4.25m/s^2...
...where you see /s^2, what length of second^2 is that?
The answer is:
/standard second^2...
...where a standard second is a measure of time derived at ground level Earth.

My suggestion of a 3rd time dilation of the g-field - that affects the time directly for m=0 only, but has an indirect affect upon m by affecting m's motions in the m=0 space of the g-field - has longer seconds at r=2radii.

Instead of calculating acceleration held relative to the standard second, if one were to calculate the acceleration at r=2radii held relative to the 3rd time dilation length of second at r=2radii then the measure of acceleration held relative to that longer second would be in the region of 9.807m/s^2, as opposed to holding the acceleration at r=2radii relative to the standard second where the acceleration would be 4.25m/s^2.

The acceleration at any r from M (Earth), as measured held relative to the length of second at that r, will always be in the region of 9.807m/s^2.

So - when one takes the measure of acceleration at each r from M as per held relative to the standard second, where near Earth is 9.807m/s^2, and by r=2radii the acceleration has decreased to 4.25m/s^2, this can tell one by how much a 3rd time dilation second has become longer at each r.

I'm not even going to try to unpick that lot.

[timey]

Why not?

It's not as though the concept is difficult Jeff...
If m is travelling metres of space towards M where at every radius seconds are becoming progressively shorter, m will experience acceleration.

All I have outlined is a means of converting the physics measurement of m/s^2 acceleration of the g-field into a time dilation related phenomenon.

The only difficulty you will no doubt encounter within this simple mathematical conversion - 'cos let's face it, the maths of that conversation, although beyond my capabilities, are not difficult - is related to your pre-conceived understanding of time dilation.
...where taking on board new ideas is more difficult for some than others...

[timey]

In addition to post above:
I might not be able to remember names well, but I remember the details of all the conversations I take part in...

Please see below where I have interjected my suggestion into your own method of thinking in brackets.

Consider a sine wave. Nothing to do with light or gravity. Forget those. If the wave length (second length) is constant we can move (at constant speed) along the wave (metres of distance) marking it off at regular intervals. Everything will be constant and cyclic. Now if we start again but this time continuously vary the intervals (seconds) at which we mark off the wave (metres of distance) using a function (3rd time dilation) to determine the increase or decrease in the steps (length of seconds) we can see how this can make it appear that something (acceleration) has changed. If we were blissfully unaware that our function (3rd time dilation) existed then we may come to the conclusion that it was the wave (metres of distance) that was changing.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

You have modified my original post to suit your own purposes. I never wrote the words in the brackets. Don't put words into my mouth. It won't help your cause.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

Why not?

It's not as though the concept is difficult Jeff...
If m is travelling metres of space towards M where at every radius seconds are becoming progressively shorter, m will experience acceleration.

All I have outlined is a means of converting the physics measurement of m/s^2 acceleration of the g-field into a time dilation related phenomenon.

The only difficulty you will no doubt encounter within this simple mathematical conversion - 'cos let's face it, the maths of that conversation, although beyond my capabilities, are not difficult - is related to your pre-conceived understanding of time dilation.
...where taking on board new ideas is more difficult for some than others...

The answer to that is stop making it difficult by inventing unscientific terminology.

[timey]

Post: 84
Yes - I quite clearly stated that I had added my suggestion in brackets to your method of thinking, therefore I have not put words in your mouth.
I have placed my suggestion into a context that I had hoped would be on familiar ground to you within your own understanding.

Post: 85
That's exactly what everyone said about Einstein's terminology 'relative'...
One cannot describe a 'new idea' without invoking 'new terminology'.  I just don't know how I would describe a 3rd time dilation without distinguishing this time dilation from SR and GR time dilations.
Since you are the critique here, taking on board that no-one has ever tried to describe a 3rd time dilation before, have you any suggestion as to the scientific terminology I may use to describe this 'extra phenomenon' of time dilation that would then be acceptable to you?

...and Jeff, I am not piddling around on a forum, I am posting on this forum in search of a mathematician to calculate my model, and I'm very serious about my mission.
So when you say:

Ok let's take you at face value. How does your vector space operate with respect to the gravitational field? Even simple equations will do.

I am taking you at face value, as a person who is NOT 'piddling about'...

[jeffreyH (OP)]

Ok. So SR is concerned with inertial frames with no acceleration. The time dilation is the consequence of the velocity. GR is concerned with both non inertial frames, those supported against gravity, and the inertial frames of freefall. Even though accelerating in freefall no force is felt. Which is the same as in an SR frame with no acceleration. You have to first determine why the free-fall frame is inertial. It is thought that the effect of mass on spacetime is the cause. Consider this. There cannot be quanta in the gravitational field if it is simply a case of mass curving spacetime that causes acceleration. This would imply a continuum. A continuum cannot be quantised. There are other considerations which I won't go into now.

[timey]

I am talking with Mike about GR and SR on my 'is there a discrepancy with the equivalency principle' thread in the context of Jim Al-Kahlilli's Relativity mobile phone app that calculates the phone's altitude and relative speed telling one by how much faster or slower they have aged due to their daily routines.
(This app and gravity itself is discussed on this program "Gravity and Me: The force that shapes us", is available on BBC Iplayer, and is well worth a watch.)

My post 488 is using the premise of that app to illustrate that SR and GR time dilations are a physical reaction for mass 'in' the local, and that these time dilation effects bear no consequence on the sequential events of the local.

The great thing about this consideration is that it is using a real life experiment that is using GR and SR calculations to deduce a physical reality.  I'd be happy for you to join the conversation there, where the discussion has developed from the consideration of applying a time dilation factor to the increase in the frequency of electron transitions causing the black body to emit higher frequency photons when +temperature energy is added, where the mission is then to recalculate the ultraviolet catastrophe under the remit of variable seconds where +energy=shorter seconds.  Under this remit the quantum nature of the energy relation to frequency is negated for a continuum which is then compatible with gravity.

Consider this. There cannot be quanta in the gravitational field if it is simply a case of mass curving spacetime that causes acceleration. This would imply a continuum.

My suggestion states that it is the acceleration that is causing the 'appearance' of space curvature.  The acceleration is caused by the fact of the length of seconds at decreasing radius to M becoming shorter in length, and that this 3rd time dilation factor is caused by the gravity field of M.
m moving in this gravity field will be subject to both GR and SR time dilations, but the open space of the g-field surrounding M will not be affected by the GR and SR time dilations for the reason that open space is m=0...
This notion is making a clear distinction between mass energy, and g-field energy.

I have made a full study on the considerations one must make if one is constructing a theory of everything Jeff.
The purpose of my mission is to unite the standard model with gravity where the point particle model and the wave function model are both described as one within the premiss of a uniting theory.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

What on earth this '3rd time dilation' is I can't fathom. As far as I know there is only one time dilation. It is always related to a velocity. Whether that be a constant velocity or an instantaneous velocity derived from an acceleration. This depends upon inertia which in turn depends upon a quantity of mass. Why complicate a straightforward situation with no benefit to be had?

[timey]

Jeff - in conventional physics there are 2 time dilations.
One is GR time dilation that is observed of a clock at altitude.
And the other is SR time dilation that is observed of a clock in relative motion.

Watch the program I suggested.  Listen to what they say about the Relativity app, inclusive of Jim's admission of a mistake in his calculations.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

The time dilation of SR is a special case of the time dilation of GR hence why it I called special relativity. It simply omits the gravitational field and uses flat spacetime exclusively. This is contained within the framework of general relativity. They are only distinguished to show differences caused by the presence or absence of a gravitational field. To make them distinct entities is an artificial device.

[timey]

Tell that to NIST who have conducted tests and found that SR effects are observed at speeds of less than 30mph.
And GR effects at 1 metre altitude.

As said you'd be advised to watch the program I suggest and listen to what the professionals say before proceeding with this line of discussion.

[jeffreyH (OP)]

Tell that to NIST who have conducted tests and found that SR effects are observed at speeds of less than 30mph.
And GR effects at 1 metre altitude.

As said you'd be advised to watch the program I suggest and listen to what the professionals say before proceeding with this line of discussion.

Being held at 1 metre altitude the object is being held against gravity and therefore is subject to a force and this results in acceleration. From this you can determine an instantaneous velocity. An object moving at 30mph has a non zero velocity. Therefore both have a time dilation caused by velocity. It is the same difference.

[timey]

... And what about the circumstance of your clock being held at altitude, and moving at 30mph?
... What about the equatorial bulge where an observer at sea level is subject to an increased GR time dilation relative to an observer at polar sea level, that is cancelled out exactly by the SR time dilation caused by the increased centripetal acceleration at the equator relative to the decreased centripetal acceleration of the polar location?
...Seriously Jeff, you should watch the program that I suggest and listen to what professionals such as Professor of Physics Jim Al-Khalilli and Kip Thorne are saying.
... Or are you posting on the basis that your education surpasses that of these professionals in the field?

[kymere]

Is there a vector space that can be used with linear combinations that is representative of a non-linear space such as that of the gravitational field? If this exists can it be formulated as an energy vector space?

As gravitation increases at a single point in the three dimensional space-time fabric of the universe, the tension on this fabric will increase causing a "stretch" in the fabric, but not the three dimensional space (measurable distance). Knowing that light is a mass-less form of energy, when light travels through the stretched fabric of space-time caused by the intense gravitation, more light is able to fit in a point of three dimensional space. In theory, the amount of light perceived is the rate at which information and time moves. Gravitation, hypothetically, is a four dimensional force that acts in the plane of the three dimensional reality. Gravitation can directly affect the amount of energy and wavelengths that fit in three dimensional space. Light and the rest of the electromagnetic spectrum can act in the fourth dimension of reality as it gives reality movement, perception, information and time.  When a hole forms in this fabric of space-time due to intense gravitation in a single point (black hole), all of time and possible future information that can be perceived from space at a distance will occur at the singularity simultaneously. Likewise, as one were to observe matter enter the singularity and event horizon, they will appear to freeze in time relative to the observer. The general theory of relativity states that an observer must perceive light at the constant speed in measurable three dimensional distance. Entering the singularity must punch another linear timeline through the space-time fabric of reality because the information that enters this hole completely disappears from the universe.

In short, gravitation and mass-less electromagnetic energy may very well be four dimensional forces that influence one another directly.