0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The LIGO observatories don't measure "how" gravity changes laser light. They use lasers to measure change in space between two objects. Which suggests a flaw your underlying premise.
can we conclude that ''time dilation'' is an affect of gravity on light rather than an affect on time?
Quotecan we conclude that ''time dilation'' is an affect of gravity on light rather than an affect on time?Gravity is a static thing (as envisaged by Newton).Einstein's general relativity showed that a static gravitational field does affect time. And since time is also used to measure the speed of light, it also affects how an observer measures light in her laboratory. This effect has been demonstrated on Earth, by doing measurements on two adjacent floors of a laboratory building.Einstein's general relativity also showed that a changing gravitational field can cause ripples of gravity to spread out - these are the gravitational waves reported recently. But the effect from an event a billion light years away is very small compared to the steady, fairly strong gravitational field of the Earth.
how do you or anyone in the world consider that the rate of the cesium atom speeded up or slowed down is related to time?
This is crazy and it reminds of me of some delusional religion, the caesium atom that we use to measure time can not effect time. The rate of the caesium is not time, it is absolutely insane to think so and say so .
What you say is absolutely correct, but why do you keep saying it. You've been told before that no scientists believe that the rate of caesium is time or that it affects time. Read what Evan has written and try to understand.
Evan says that when the rate of a ''table'' slows down,
Do you actually mean the clock is a faulty mechanism and not a constant time keeper?
Are you trying to say light is time?
IN either instant neither the caesium or light is time so how can we conclude that time slows down without evidence?
You have been told many times that the caesium is used in a clock, a very, very accurate clock. Reread what Evan said, you clearly have not understood it.
Until then please listen to the professionals.
If you look at the flow of time, time moves forward to the future. Time does not cycle like a clock. We don't periodically go back to being born, unless you believe in reincarnation. But even with reincarnation, we change into something else; bug, but will not repeat. Reincarnation assumes time is a helix and not a cycle. The Cesium atom and light both cycle and repeat, therefore neither follow the true nature of time; except in the short term. We are using phenomena to measure time, that are not natural expressions of time, since time does not cycle but is unidirectional. It is like measuring linear distance with a circle. Clock time, which cycles, is a manmade convention which came from the needs of engineering; making a way to measure time that is more compact and less labor intensive. Time only moves in one direction, which is the future. We get older each day and can never repeat the past, like a clock assumes we can do. There is a disconnect. The cyclic clock is good for work or school where productivity means you need to follow a cyclic routine. Productivity could explain the cyclic clock, whose goal is to alter the nature of time; naturally changing, so people don't change; dogma, but stay in one spot in the assembly line day after day. If work was in the image of time; always changing to the future and never repeating, work would be more like games and sports, which are unique; changes, each time we play the game. The clock has to harness the spontaneity of time to make it cycle, which takes work/energy. This hidden energy is like hidden wires for a magic trick. The concept of entropy, on the other hand, is much closer to the concept of time, compared to energy, atoms and clocks. Entropy will spontaneously move in one direction; future, while never spontaneously cycling backwards, unless we add energy/work to make it go backwards. The EM force is cycling and not going in one direction. A better phenomena to measure time dilation would be an entropy clock, such as the rotten fish clock. In this clock, time is measured by the irreversible decay of the fish, until it stinks a certain amount at 10 meters. When the cat looks up, it is one unit of time. The entropy clock does not cycle, since we can't un-stink the fish even if we try. This is how time works. We can slow the flow of time, within an entropy clock, with refrigeration. Refrigeration lowers the energy that is available for the entropy increase. If there is time dilation, one would expect that the flow of time in the entropy clock should also slow, such that it will take longer for the fish to stink; decays slower. The question becomes is there any correlation between gravity and chilling, since both can slow an entropy clock? The gravitational potential energy is lower the denser the matter is packed. While the gravitational potential energy is higher the more spread out the matter is. We will get a deep space-time well from a neutron star of mass M, but a shallow space-time well from a gas cloud of the same mass M. In terms of GR, less gravitational potential energy; denser, means more time dilation. Less potential energy; temperature, also means more chill. If the universe is expanding then there is an increase in gravitational potential, which means the entropy clocks should all be speeding up.
''If you look at the flow of time, time moves forward to the future''
What do I think of this? I think you are straying into new theories rather than sticking with the question.I think you are unlikely to get answers to your questions because the disconnect between your understanding of time, and other concepts, is so great that many people have just given up trying.If you look in new theories you will find lots of examples where the level of understanding of the poster is so poor that meaningful conversation is unlikely. Look at the one about how a light bulb works for eg, little point in trying to discuss it.
I am sorry if I went off topic, but I thought it was important to point out the difference between indeterminate time; time line, and determinate time; cycles and waves. Indeterminate time is closer to the concept of entropy. Entropy does not spontaneously cycle, but follows a line to the future. Determinate time is more like a wave, that repeats itself thereby making it easy to predict the future. We as humans, align ourselves with clocks, thereby placing ourselves in a repeatable future pattern, like a wave, so we can better control the future.
Quote from: puppypower on 15/03/2016 12:31:22I am sorry if I went off topic, but I thought it was important to point out the difference between indeterminate time; time line, and determinate time; cycles and waves. Indeterminate time is closer to the concept of entropy. Entropy does not spontaneously cycle, but follows a line to the future. Determinate time is more like a wave, that repeats itself thereby making it easy to predict the future. We as humans, align ourselves with clocks, thereby placing ourselves in a repeatable future pattern, like a wave, so we can better control the future. I will reply the rest in a while, I just wanted to discuss the prediction of things, the only reason in my opinion that we can predict things, is because we can see the ''start'' and ''finish'' at the same time. i.e we do not predict a planets path, we can observe where it is going to.
Relativity tends focus on deterministic time and correlates this well. For most people this is the only expression of time that is taught in science, but not in philosophy. Deterministic time is a wave, with relativity applicable to most of the waves. Science has not done as much work with indeterminate time, which can't be fully expressed with waves and cyclic events. I have tried to show how one might include this via the concept of entropy, since this is the closest physical concept to indeterminate time.
If there is no relationship then why can't we discuss this looking for an answer?
There is a relationship but you reject the established answer and introduce new concepts. The best place to discuss those is here, far more scope to experiment with ideas.
Nobody has given me an established answer
There is no apparent obvious relationship that I can see.
Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2016 14:55:50There is no apparent obvious relationship that I can see.True
Quote from: Colin2B on 15/03/2016 16:41:17Quote from: Thebox on 15/03/2016 14:55:50There is no apparent obvious relationship that I can see.TrueSo it would be now contradictory of you if you said that there is time dilation after admitting there is no relationship?
I did not say there is no relationship.Reread what I wrote.
You inferred there is a truth that there is no apparent relationship,
Quote from: Thebox on 16/03/2016 12:43:16You inferred there is a truth that there is no apparent relationship,I inferred nothing of the sort. Please stop misquoting me, otherwise there is little point in having any conversation. You do it all the time including misquoting that photons can't be observed.I said quite clearly that I agree with your comment that "there is no obvious relationship that you can see.The rest of us can see it, you can't.Again pointless discussing anything with you.