[Mike Gale]

My model differs in that while it holds that the observation of light is observer dependent because one can only see light when it arrives at ones location, it holds that the observation of an atom's energy and frequency, that is not at one's location, is not observer dependent but 'is' actually the differing frequency and energy that it is observed to have.

Are you proposing that a receding clock runs slower and an approaching clock runs faster, such that the round trip time is the same in both reference frames? It is possible to balance the space time books on that premise. The relative velocity of reference frames becomes observer dependent. Spatial dilation is more complicated because time passes at different rates in off-axis directions. The problem is that it is in stark disagreement with the extended longevity of muons in flight. It is also inconsistent with the Twins paradox, which is evidenced by GPS and (more directly) by flying atomic clocks on airplanes.

[timey (OP)]

No - a clock or particle of mass will never be able to measure the hypothetical third time dilation because this time dilation is inherent to space only and the clock or particle will only ever itself experience a combination of GR coordinate time dilation, and SR motion time dilation.

For a clock or particle at rest with respect to the g-field, the third time dilation will have no effect whatsoever.  But if the clock or particle is not at rest with respect to the g-field, then the hypothetical third time dilation will affect how the clock or particle moves with respect to changes in the g-field.

The ingredients and quantities can be directly derived via the acceleration/deceleration of gravity, where additional kinetic energy then DOES NOT increase mass and mass value remains constant.
Where, (scratches head, as not sure and still thinking about it):
m/a = time dilation...
- to show direction of thoughts, but perhaps better derived:
p/a = time dilation (?)
Because
p = mv
and the hypothetical third time dilation is then an integral over force, causing acceleration...

[pasala]

Friends,

I would like to add few lines, regarding my opinion on time dilation and c.

Well, it is true that time dilates for two reasons gravity and velocity. 

Gravitational time dilation is an actual difference of elapsed time between two events as measured by observers differently situated from gravitational masses, in regions of different gravitational potential.  As per Einstein huge masses such as Earth also influences tick rate of the clock.  Here it is wonder to me, it is not for criticising, but to discuss facts only, how huge masses influences clock.  As per Newton's inverse square law, gravity mainly depends on the size of mass.  But as per Einstein, uneven distribution of matter and energy in space time plays key role.  Actually, Einstein invented that gravity influences our clocks.

Ok, here the tick rate of clock is influenced by the gravity.

As per the theory proposed by me 'what exactly is gravity' it is the huge energy, which i termed it as 'energy base' is playing key role in gravity.  This potential energy is turning out as kinetic energy due to the pressure/force of hydrosphere.  Gravity on any planet mainly depends on the 'standard energy' of that planet. Gravity strength at any place mainly depends on the gap between Earth and hydrosphere. However it is also influenced by the energy dilated by Earth which works as anti gravity waves. 

The other important reason why time dilates is velocity.  In the case of gravity, the clock is influenced by the variations in the gravity.  It's ok.  But here, in the case of velocity, the source or how and what exactly is influencing the functioning of clock is not known. 

There is a big gap here, it is true that if the velocity increases, the ticking rate of clock decreases and of course it is proved.  But what exactly is influencing the clock is not known.    In the case of gravity, time is dilated due to variations in the gravity.  Here, if the velocity increases what happens to clock, and why it dilates.  Ok, we are using cesium clock, and there is no mechanical fault, still time dilates. 

Ok, in the case of gravity, it is not the fault of clock used, but it is due to gravity.  In the case  of  velocity also, there is no fault of the clock used by us, but some thing outside force is influencing the clock.  Here velocity is not an object or thing and some thing is influencing our clocks.  When the velocity increases, it is starting influencing our clocks. 

As said by timey, a clock dilating on the head of a person, never dilates age of that person. 

There is every need for us to re-think, 'what exactly is time dilation'.  Our clocks shows only elapsed time due to gravity or velocity.  In fact our clocks have no capacity to dilate the universal time.  They got to be adjusted to universal time.  It is the universal time which is standard time.

Universal time can be dilated due to various reasons.  Suppose for any reason, sun started dilating huge energy into the open area.  EMF force against the Earth increases and Earth start rotating speedily, completes sun rise and sun set within 11.55 minutes, thereby dilating 5 minutes.  In other words, in case if the Sun started dilating small amount of energy, EMF decreases and rotation of Earth slows down and sun rise and sun set will be completed by 12.05, thereby by dilating 5 minutes.  Universal time also depends on the gravity of a planet.  Suppose if the gravity of a planet weakens, sun rise and sun set also slows down.

Speed of light:
There are number of invisible things influencing speed of light.  At present we are taking two mirrors, focusing light on them and measuring the time taken to travel.

But we are feeling that outside is empty and that fresh ray is created each time.  This is not at all correct and no fresh ray is created. 

Ok, let us study it with simple example.  Let us assume that there is a water pipe and it is completely filled with water.  When the motor is switched on, fresh water coming from the well pushes the water at the beginning of the pipe and due to force/pressure water start flowing.  Here, suppose water pipe is empty,  then fresh water first accumulates in the pipe and than start flowing.  At present we are taking that water pipe is empty and it is being filled each time and than flowing out. 

This is incorrect.

In the case of our universe also, it is not empty and it is not being filled by the Sun energy.  In fact Sun energy has no such capacity.  Due to Big Bang or whatever it may, all the planets have dilated huge fundamental energy and it led to formation of  'stock of fundamental energy'.  Here on this Earth, due to formation of climate 'Energy Base' is developed and it is existing with lot of pressure. 

When we switch on the torch light, very small amount of energy, potential energy stored in the battery cell has no capacity to create a Electro magnetic force.  It simply creates a force/pressure on the existing energy ray and flow of electrons propogates light.  In the example, water pipe is not empty, when the fresh water joins, a force/pressure is created and the water at the end moves out.  This is the way and how  light travels from one place to other place.  Propagation of light at any place mainly depends on the outside energy. 

Suppose if we are on the moon, where climate is weak, naturally energy base is also weak and there fore propagation of light is weak.  Well, for that on the Earth also light varies according to gravity. 

We have tied science to certain limitations.  It is like an Elephant trainer, who ties the Elephant with a simple chain.  When compared to the strength of the Elephant this chain is nothing.  But Elephant feels that it cannot and remains within the boundary.  If what exactly is gravity is solved, all these issued will be solved and science will take a straight line of research.

Yours
Psreddy

[timey (OP)]

This thread is exploring the possibility that potential energy is related to GR time dilation, and the possibility of a third time dilation existing that applies only to the g-field itself, where the third time dilation is an integral over force and is the cause of gravitational acceleration.

[timey (OP)]

Hey Mike - shiiiiit, I just had a realisation...
Firstly, my apologies because you were right...and I was wrong.  Einstein did have to add his lambada constant to stop the universe expanding, not contracting as I said 'in error' however many posts ago.
I was muddling my own thinking somehow with the facts, but it is from realising my error that I think I've finally figured out how to go about calculating my contracting model.

I find formula easier to understand than numerical calculations because the relationships are proportional, however my understanding of symbols is lacking.  I wonder, would you help me out...?

Could you please help me run through the symbols of these maths.

G*u*v + lambada*u*v = -8*pi*G/? Tuv

G, v, and pi are clear.  Lambada value is 0.5, but could you please give me a physical description of u, which I think means 'change' and what is the symbol that 8*pi*G is divided by?  I've used a question mark, but the symbol looks like a question mark upside down.  What does it mean?
And could you clarify for me what T is symbolising here?

[Mike Gale]

Looks like a modified version of the Einstein field equation. The variables u and v are subscripted indices. They refer to rows and columns of a 2D tensor, which is just a fancy name for a matrix in this context. Summation over u and v is implied. (That shorthand was invented by Einstein.) Each index ranges from 1 to 4, corresponding to the 4 dimensions of spacetime. G with no subscripts is likely Newton's constant. G with subscripts is an element of the Einstein tensor, which is an expression of the curvature of spacetime. T_uv is an element of the energy tensor. I'm not sure what lambda_uv is. Probably a proposed extension to the cosmological constant. The funny symbol (?) would have to be c⁴. Probably a malfunction in the equation renderer. Note that T_uv belongs in the numerator, not the denominator.

[timey (OP)]

Lambda*u*v as I understand it is the cosmological constant that Einstein added to his equation, and then retracted in light of Hubble's velocity related interpretation of the red shift distance correlation.

As to the rest of what you said, I'll have to get myself some translations off the net for some of it.
I'll be back after some thinking time passes.

Thanks Mike!

[timey (OP)]

Ok - Einstein added the cosmological constant Lambada*u*v to his equation to stop the universe from expanding...

Einstein retracted his cosmological constant that stopped his rendition of GR expanding the universe when Hubble's velocity related interpretation of the red shift distance correlation gave cause for the phenomenon of expansion.

In that my model re-interprets Hubble's velocity related red shift distance correlation interpretation as being a time dilation related red shift distance correlation via a third time dilation to give physical cause for the acceleration of gravity, the spatial dimensions are now back to being Newtonian, and the curvature of space is now inherent to the open space g-field via this third time dilation.

The first expression of Einstein's equation G*u*v, and the 8*pi*G, I think can already be describing this third time dilation because of the use of G.

So without Hubble's velocity related interpretation, and without the cosmological constant, Einstein's equation leaves us with a universe that is still expanding.
Add the constant back into the equation and we have a steady state.

Physicists describe how Einstein's cosmological constant may be relevant in value as describing the acceleration of the universe via Dark Energy, but as Einstein was using the constant to stop the universe from expanding, how can this constant be used to describe an accelerated expansion?
To describe an accelerated expansion by using the value of Einstein's constant, are they considering the constant in the negative?

Like this:
Guv - lambada*u*v = - 8*pi*G/c^4 Tuv

[Mike Gale]

Ah yes. I didn't notice the missing symbol in the 2nd term. It should be Lambda * g_uv, not Lambda_uv. Lambda is Einstein's cosmological constant. (He called it cosmological because it is the same at every point in space and constant because it doesn't change over time.) g_uv is an element of the metric tensor, which is the curved space extension of Pythagorus. The metric tensor is also part of the Einstein tensor.
Don't confuse G with G_uv. They are completely different objects. One is a scalar (i.e. a 1 dimensional matrix with 1 element.) The other is an element of a 2D matrix (comprising 4 rows and 4 columns) and usually represents a function involving several variables. Same goes for g and g_uv.
Note that the T in T_uv is shorthand for total energy.

[timey (OP)]

I just lifted the equation as written in hand writing off a horizon program about about Dark Energy, supposedly as Einstien wrote it.
I daresay that the equation has been reduced to a minimal expression as per esthetics.  Less is more beautiful so I hear, which is why everyone fell in love with the Dirac equation...

Are you sure about the extra g?
In the program they were quite clear about how Einstien was annoyed because of having to add the middle term that includes lambada.  It had been simply:

Guv = 8+pi*G/c4 Tuv

And Einstien shook Hubble's hand in relief that he could ditch the lambada*u*v, although admittedly it may be my mistake and that I copied the equation down wrong.  Not impossible at-all.

Oh - and when you said numerator and denominator, which bit of the equation were you referring to please?

P.S.  When saying that G 'can' already be describing my model's third time dilation this is only because G is the gravitational constant.  Surely any maths that use G are juggling that constant?

[Mike Gale]

A positive value for the cosmological constant makes the universe expand over time. A negative value makes it collapse. Zero corresponds to a static universe.

[Mike Gale]

If Lambda = 0 then G_uv = (8*pi*G/c⁴) * T_uv.

[Mike Gale]

You might be right about how Lambda affects expansion and contraction. A positive value is likely necessary to stop the expansion. Otherwise it wouldn't make sense that Einstein abandoned the idea (by setting Lambda=0) when Hubble discovered that the universe was indeed expanding. In that case, a negative value would make it expand faster. A positive value would slow the expansion and a larger positive value would make it collapse.

[timey (OP)]

But that surely is on the basis of Hubble's velocity related red shift distance correlation.
Einstien was able to remove the constant in the face of Hubble's discovery because Hubble had provided a cause for expansion, but had to relinquish his steady state preconceptions.
Therefore the equation without the constant describes expansion, and without the constant this would be 0 right?

So - when looking at the value of Einstiens constant to describe the acceleration of this expansion, you can't add the constant to describe this acceleration, adding it to the equation causes a steady state, so it must surely be subtracted... No?



Ah yes - just saw your post.  Exactly, so subtracting it would cause acceleration

[Mike Gale]

Hubble didn't find a cause, just evidence. But otherwise I think you are correct. See my edit to my last comment.

[Mike Gale]

I don't think you can get accelerated expansion out of a constant though. You'd have to change it to a variable of some sort.

[timey (OP)]

The expansion of the universe without the Dark Energy notion wasn't thought to be a constant speed.  It was thought to be slowing down.
However - you do have a point there...

I wrote this before seeing your post:
So in order to describe a contracting universe it would be necessary to add the constant twice right?
But would that be the whole term Lambada*u*v, or Lambada*g*u*v as you say, or would it be a case of doubling the Lambada value?
The Lambada value is 0.5 so doubling that would be in as much as saying +1*u*v or +1*g*u*v (I'll have to look at the program again tomorrow to see if I wrote it down wrong)

if Einstein's equation minus the constant caused an expanding universe, there must be a rate to this expansion within the maths of the equation surely?

And... If the constant stops this rate of expansion, surely there must be an equal and equalising negative rate within that constant?

[Colin2B]

I don't think you can get accelerated expansion out of a constant though. You'd have to change it to a variable of some sort.

I assume you are familiar with ρ_vac = ρ_Λ   ≡ Λ/8πG


Sorry, equation fn on here isn't working yet so bit laborious to type out with alt codes.
Didn't mean to interrupt your discussion, I'll leave you to it.

[jeffreyH]

Combining the moment of inertia tensor with the stress energy momentum tensor is fun.

[timey (OP)]

Ah - Colin, well firstly so say so, it's starting to look like I may have to eat my hat on YouTube for you concerning G and g, but I do stand firmly by my position on the marks, in the context that I was using them.

Mike of course will no doubt recognise the maths of your interjection to understand the context, but I on the other hand could use a few words of explanation to ensure that my guess work is correct.

This is relevant to Einstein's constant as a variable, and p is what renders variability?

Jeff - Yes, thanks for that!  I'm sure it is fun for those in the know.  So what moment of inertia do you refer to, and is that relevant to Einstein's constant in relation to Dark Energy? Enigmatic-ism's aren't particularly the remit of being informative I'll have you know.