0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Ok,What causes entropy?Why can't we measure entropy of a photon?If perpetual motion in the electron of mass is energy than why does mass have entropy?
If Time were simply a dimension invented by man, time could not speed up and slow down, as has been shown scientifically.
Time doe snot
Quote from: Thebox on 23/03/2017 15:26:00Time doe snot Who's clock should we use?
Ah yes the magic one.
To answer the question posed in the title of this thread, the speed of time is one second per second or one year per year or whatever unit of time per whatever unit of time. Einstein taught us that my seconds (or years or whatever) are not necessarily the same as yours so the real question is how they differ. SR answers that question and it all boils down to one's perception of light speed, which is the only unambiguous way to measure distances in space.
which is the only unambiguous way to measure distances in space.
In which frame? Different dilations have different lengths before it would be recognized as a different position in space. Same for tick rate distances
Quite clearly you have failed to consider what is wrote in this thread.
Quote from: Thebox on 31/03/2017 21:58:22Quite clearly you have failed to consider what is wrote in this thread.Quite clearly you have a flawed understanding concerning the theory of Relativity. There simply is NO "Universal common now" or a universal common present for which we might use as a "Standard" where we could reference other frames of time against,.............period!
Let me change the question for those who do not understand the question.At what pace does the present become the past?
Quote from: Thebox on 01/04/2017 02:31:57Let me change the question for those who do not understand the question.At what pace does the present become the past?All depends on one's personal frame MrBox. If you are traveling at a significant percentage of c, your seconds will advance at a much slower rate compared to someone at rest. If you are presently influenced by a strong gravitational field, your seconds will advance much faster, and also, compared to a different frame. Remember however, defining someone at rest is only a relative consideration. An absolute position of rest is impossible to define. These individual factors make it impossible to establish any definitive universal or common rate for the passage of time. It all depends on your personal frame and how those seconds are viewed from the observers position.
I have indeed read the other posts and I realize this discussion has devolved into speculation about the nature of time and and absolute reference frames. My point is that the answer to the question posed in the title is trivial and the real question is how do my seconds differ from yours. SR answers that question, but it doesn't address the question of why. You can speculate all day about that and believe what you like. Maybe it's turtles all the way down. It won't make a shred of difference because it won't change any of the observables or the manner in which they are related.Goc has misconstrued the concept of unambiguous measurements. It does not equate to an absolute reference frame. It simply means that a measurement made in one context can be reliably transposed to another. It requires a common factor, which is light speed in the case of SR.I might add that any serious discussion about the nature of time must address the relationship between entropy and the arrow of time. Sean Carroll does a bang up job of that in his book From Eternity to Here.