The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. Is distance an absolute invariant?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 15   Go Down

Is distance an absolute invariant?

  • 297 Replies
  • 45623 Views
  • 0 Tags

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Ethos_

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1332
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 17 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #220 on: 10/02/2016 22:21:54 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 21:52:09

I can agree that there is a dilation of the timing mechanism synchronisation to gravity of mass that is situated in a timeless 5th dimension of space-time.

As I understand your terminology, you're saying you agree that there is a time dilation of the timing device relative to the observer.

I'm going to bow out for a while, things are getting a little too congested with so many interested parties weighing in. One thought before I go however:

If the pace of time on that time dilated clock records a slowing down,  can't one also visualize the compression of length due to Lorentz contraction?

And the reason for that connection comes from how science views space and time. The current understanding regarding these two identities is; They can not be totally separated one from the other. It's the reason you'll see the term "space/time" spoken of so often. Today, science views space/time as more or less a single entity.

More on this later.......................................Ethos

 
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 22:30:55 by Ethos_ »
Logged
"The more things change, the more they remain the same."
 



guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #221 on: 10/02/2016 22:22:58 »
Quote from: Space Flow on 10/02/2016 22:13:07
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:04:26
that is an incompleteness answer, I may have to quote Gobel.

Are you sure the answer is not  - a change in the rate of time of the caesium atom?

and should time not say timing or synchronisation?
As you may have noticed and are obviously choosing to ignore the fact, I did not mention caesium atom or any matter based anything neither did I mention timing or synchronisation.
If that was what I meant, than that is what I would have said.
I am answering your direct question with a direct and complete answer and would appreciate it if you did not try to assume I ever mean anything other than what I say. I have a wife who has that kind of thing more than adequately covered.


Lol good answer , but you know and I know very well what we refer to when talking time dilation, and relative motion to a gravitational field.


I will rephrase, how do you know that there is a change in time?

By what method ?


 A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field, notice I have no need to mention time or even consider time with this one statement?

I would have to consider timing and timing synchronisation for sure, But I  am certain anything after 0 is history, and I  can not alter the rate of 0 with any thought experiment.




Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #222 on: 10/02/2016 22:33:59 »
Quote from: Ethos_ on 10/02/2016 22:21:54
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 21:52:09

I can agree that there is a dilation of the timing mechanism synchronisation to gravity of mass that is situated in a timeless 5th dimension of space-time.

As I understand your terminology, you're saying you agree that there is a time dilation of the timing device relative to the observer.

I'm going to bow out for a while, things are getting a little too congested with so many interested parties weighing in. One thought before I go however:

If the pace of time on that time dilated clock records a slowing down,  can't one also visualize the compression of length due to Lorentz contraction. And the reason for that connection comes from how science views space and time. The current understanding regarding these two identities is; They can not be totally separated one from the other. It's the reason you'll see the term "space/time" spoken of so often. Today, science views space/time as more or less a single entity.

More on this later.......................................Ethos


Thank you for the conversation, and yes one  has to compare length contraction with time dilation, and yes the way science view space-time is weird imo, I observe people sort of have two views, some people seem to explain it as light, and others explain it as minkowski space-time, the interwoven manifold, but people miss the fact that space-time meaning the space between masses, is a virtual representation of time and for vector use.

The actual time in space is not existing until the space is occupied by something that needs, a need for time. i.e us


Consider this, the past , the now, the future all move with the earth and leave no trace of history in the path behind it.




Logged
 

Offline timey

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2439
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 26 times
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #223 on: 10/02/2016 22:36:18 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
I would have to consider timing and timing synchronisation for sure, But I  am certain anything after 0 is history, and I  can not alter the rate of 0 with any thought experiment.

Box, you are talking about the here and now.  You cannot measure the here and now.

Space Flow... I also like the wife comment (chuckle)
« Last Edit: 10/02/2016 22:42:17 by timey »
Logged
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #224 on: 10/02/2016 22:38:29 »
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 22:36:18
Box, you are talking about the here and now.  You cannot measure the here and now.

Space Flow... I also like the wife comment (chuckle)


So you must agree that any effect of a measurement can not affect the here and now?


You can not measure the future either, you can only record the past .

Logged
 



Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #225 on: 10/02/2016 22:47:06 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
Lol good answer , but you know and I know very well what we refer to when talking time dilation, and relative motion to a gravitational field.
I have to strongly disagree with this statement.
I know very well what I refer to when talking time dilation.
I do not know what you refer to when talking time dilation.
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
I will rephrase, how do you know that there is a change in time?
I do not actually know anything, about anything except for the one thing I can not deny, that is that I am conscience. I exist. That is the only thing I know. Every thing else outside of that one fact is only an approximation to a truth composed of available evidence that has in some way made itself aware to my consciousness.
I do not either know or believe anything outside my own conscious being.
So having got that out, lets answer your question.
I have enough evidence accumulated over a lifetime of learning and experience to think that the closest approximation to the truth that will fit nicely with minimum discord into the jigsaw puzzle that is my internal view of reality is; that time itself is seen to dilate in any frame I observe to be in relative motion compared to me.
No other view that I have come across yet makes my reality work the way that I see it working.

You see I do not for an instant suggest that this is the way reality actually is. Tomorrow I may gain data, that explains things better and fits into my overall picture better than the current model. At such a time this present model will get dumped like a hot potato. And I still will not consider that I know the truth of it. Just a closer approximation that gives my internal view better definition.
Logged
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #226 on: 10/02/2016 22:51:56 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field, notice I have no need to mention time or even consider time with this one statement?

I would have to consider timing and timing synchronisation for sure, But I  am certain anything after 0 is history, and I  can not alter the rate of 0 with any thought experiment.

Without clear and concise explanations of what these incoherent attempts at communication are, I have to say that to me this is just gibberish..
Logged
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #227 on: 10/02/2016 22:56:59 »
Quote from: Space Flow on 10/02/2016 22:47:06
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
Lol good answer , but you know and I know very well what we refer to when talking time dilation, and relative motion to a gravitational field.
I have to strongly disagree with this statement.
I know very well what I refer to when talking time dilation.
I do not know what you refer to when talking time dilation.
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
I will rephrase, how do you know that there is a change in time?
I do not actually know anything, about anything except for the one thing I can not deny, that is that I am conscience. I exist. That is the only thing I know. Every thing else outside of that one fact is only an approximation to a truth composed of available evidence that has in some way made itself aware to my consciousness.
I do not either know or believe anything outside my own conscious being.
So having got that out, lets answer your question.
I have enough evidence accumulated over a lifetime of learning and experience to think that the closest approximation to the truth that will fit nicely with minimum discord into the jigsaw puzzle that is my internal view of reality is; that time itself is seen to dilate in any frame I observe to be in relative motion compared to me.
No other view that I have come across yet makes my reality work the way that I see it working.

You see I do not for an instant suggest that this is the way reality actually is. Tomorrow I may gain data, that explains things better and fits into my overall picture better than the current model. At such a time this present model will get dumped like a hot potato. And I still will not consider that I know the truth of it. Just a closer approximation that gives my internal view better definition.


Interesting views, however ,

space and distance exist , therefore I am.


I do not know about you , but if somebody punched me in the face, I am sure my senses shows me I am real, and the fact I can move freely and can change my own path being different to a rock, makes me believe we are quite real.  But I certainly understood your views and could certainly argue a ''matrix'' type state myself.


I understand you believe the knowledge provided of time dilation, but the thing is in no experiment do we show a change in time, we just show a change in rate of something compared to something.

Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #228 on: 10/02/2016 22:58:55 »
Quote from: Space Flow on 10/02/2016 22:51:56
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:22:58
A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field, notice I have no need to mention time or even consider time with this one statement?

I would have to consider timing and timing synchronisation for sure, But I  am certain anything after 0 is history, and I  can not alter the rate of 0 with any thought experiment.

Without clear and concise explanations of what these incoherent attempts at communication are, I have to say that to me this is just gibberish..


What does science observe in the Keating experiment!

A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field,


Ok?

Logged
 



Offline timey

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2439
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 26 times
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #229 on: 10/02/2016 22:59:09 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:38:29
So you must agree that any effect of a measurement can not affect the here and now?


You can not measure the future either, you can only record the past

A measurement of time is to record sequential events.  We can measure events happening in the here and now, at which point they become history, and we can anticipate, based on the history of events, what may happen in the future.

However, in the world of quantum it is observed that to measure an event does indeed seem to have an effect on the here and now.
Logged
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #230 on: 10/02/2016 23:05:06 »
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 22:59:09
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:38:29
So you must agree that any effect of a measurement can not affect the here and now?


You can not measure the future either, you can only record the past

A measurement of time is to record sequential events.  We can measure events happening in the here and now, at which point they become history, and we can anticipate, based on the history of events, what may happen in the future.

However, in the world of quantum it is observed that to measure an event does indeed seem to have an effect on the here and now.

The here and now is zero/naught/0

In ten minutes time the here and now will still be 0.

The rate of here and now is 0

Let me prove this to you


Count to 5

12345

count to 5 again but re-moving 1 and replacing it with 0

02345

remove 2 and replace

00345

remove 3 and replace

00045

remove 4 and replace

00005

remove 5 and replace

00000


Can you see that 0 is always equal to the position of 1?
11111
12345
00000


added - just consider, you can't measure time, you can only observe time.

Logged
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #231 on: 10/02/2016 23:13:34 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:58:55
What does science observe in the Keating experiment!

A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field,


Ok?
And what do you attribute such an observed change to?
What is the cause of this observed behavior according to you?
Logged
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #232 on: 10/02/2016 23:19:28 »
Quote from: Space Flow on 10/02/2016 23:13:34
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 22:58:55
What does science observe in the Keating experiment!

A change in the rate of synchronisation of the caesium atom relative to a gravitational field,


Ok?
And what do you attribute such an observed change to?
What is the cause of this observed behavior according to you?

I attribute the change of rate of the caesium atom being relative to motion relative to another body and bodies motion, and the cause of behaviour is the motion of accleration , an object at rest in a constant gravity inertial reference frame, i..e an object on earth Fn=a9.82m/s=N , this is constant, you are changing the constant of a9.82m/s to create an off-set


added - Hard explain, when an object accelerates away from the ground , the force decreases the masses gravity acceleration. Your making mass acceleration invert .



Logged
 



Offline timey

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2439
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 26 times
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #233 on: 10/02/2016 23:32:27 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 23:05:06
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 22:59:09
A measurement of time is to record sequential events.  We can measure events happening in the here and now, at which point they become history, and we can anticipate, based on the history of events, what may happen in the future.

However, in the world of quantum it is observed that to measure an event does indeed seem to have an effect on the here and now.

The here and now is zero/naught/0

In ten minutes time the here and now will still be 0.

The rate of here and now is 0

Let me prove this to you


Count to 5

12345

count to 5 again but re-moving 1 and replacing it with 0

02345

remove 2 and replace

00345

remove 3 and replace

00045

remove 4 and replace

00005

remove 5 and replace

00000


Can you see that 0 is always equal to the position of 1?
11111
12345
00000


added - just consider, you can't measure time, you can only observe time.

Erm, nope!  You can observe the here and now, 'this instant', and a measurement of time is a record of here and nows, which become history as you record them.  The future is an anticipation of here and nows to come.

A change in the rate of time is a dilation or contraction of the rate that sequential events occur at, but the here and now remains the here and now within those dilations or contractions.

I do not know why you describe this here and now as being zero.
Logged
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #234 on: 10/02/2016 23:37:07 »
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 23:32:27
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 23:05:06
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 22:59:09
A measurement of time is to record sequential events.  We can measure events happening in the here and now, at which point they become history, and we can anticipate, based on the history of events, what may happen in the future.

However, in the world of quantum it is observed that to measure an event does indeed seem to have an effect on the here and now.

The here and now is zero/naught/0

In ten minutes time the here and now will still be 0.

The rate of here and now is 0

Let me prove this to you


Count to 5

12345

count to 5 again but re-moving 1 and replacing it with 0

02345

remove 2 and replace

00345

remove 3 and replace

00045

remove 4 and replace

00005

remove 5 and replace

00000


Can you see that 0 is always equal to the position of 1?
11111
12345
00000


added - just consider, you can't measure time, you can only observe time.

Erm, nope!  You can observe the here and now, 'this instant', and a measurement of time is a record of here and nows, which become history as you record them.  The future is an anticipation of here and nows to come.

A change in the rate of time is a dilation or contraction of the rate that sequential events occur at, but the here and now remains the here and now within those dilations or contractions.

I do not know why you describe this here and now as being zero.

You must have missed the why thread, most members agreed with me .   Consider that anything after 0 is history, try it, try to do any measurement after zero with out it being instant history.

Logged
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #235 on: 10/02/2016 23:41:45 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 23:19:28
I attribute the change of rate of the caesium atom being relative to motion relative to another body and bodies motion, and the cause of behaviour is the motion of accleration , an object at rest in a constant gravity inertial reference frame, i..e an object on earth Fn=a9.82m/s=N , this is constant, you are changing the constant of a9.82m/s to create an off-set

I would ask you to expand on that please. And in expanding that explanation reference the fact that the effect has been shown to be measurable with one clock stationary on the Ground floor of a building, with the other clock stationary on the top floor of the same building.
Logged
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #236 on: 10/02/2016 23:54:21 »
Quote from: Space Flow on 10/02/2016 23:41:45
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 23:19:28
I attribute the change of rate of the caesium atom being relative to motion relative to another body and bodies motion, and the cause of behaviour is the motion of accleration , an object at rest in a constant gravity inertial reference frame, i..e an object on earth Fn=a9.82m/s=N , this is constant, you are changing the constant of a9.82m/s to create an off-set

I would ask you to expand on that please. And in expanding that explanation reference the fact that the effect has been shown to be measurable with one clock stationary on the Ground floor of a building, with the other clock stationary on the top floor of the same building.

I have not heard of that fact, and that would affect my reasoning. If indeed two stationary clocks, in the same building , one on the ground floor and the second on a upper floor, and the effect is observed, then I can only conclude that difference is because gravity is weaker at a distance and the upper clock is experienced less strength.  However they both would experience the same constant of Newtons and Fn unless things weigh slightly less at altitude,

I am not sure, something to with calibration maybe.




Logged
 



Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11365
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 658 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #237 on: 11/02/2016 00:00:22 »
Quote from: timey on 10/02/2016 19:21:58

Surely the special relativity effects only apply to the accelerated reference frame?

Exactly the opposite. SR concerns only the special case of constant velocity. The more general case of nonzero acceleration or position in a graviational field is called general relativity.
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline alancalverd

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • ********
  • 11365
  • Activity:
    100%
  • Thanked: 658 times
  • life is too short to drink instant coffee
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #238 on: 11/02/2016 00:02:17 »
Quote from: Thebox on 10/02/2016 23:54:21
then I can only conclude that difference is because gravity is weaker at a distance and the upper clock is experienced less strength. 

The light is beginning to dawn! Welcome to the rational world, friend.
Logged
helping to stem the tide of ignorance
 

Offline Space Flow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • 400
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Is distance an absolute invariant?
« Reply #239 on: 11/02/2016 00:15:25 »
Quote from: alancalverd on 11/02/2016 00:00:22
Quote from: timey on Today at 06:21:58

Surely the special relativity effects only apply to the accelerated reference frame?

Exactly the opposite. SR concerns only the special case of constant velocity. The more general case of nonzero acceleration or position in a graviational field is called general relativity.
Thank you for answering timey Alan. I am trying to concentrate on Thebox.
Logged
We are made of Spacetime; with a sprinkling of Stardust.
Matter tells Spacetime how to Flow; Spacetime tells matter where to go
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12] 13 14 15   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags:
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.147 seconds with 77 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.