Speed of time ?

How does science work? And what's all this about quantum mechanics?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Ginkgo » Tue Apr 28, 2015 11:48 am

duszek wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:

Moving clocks tick slower. Special relativity.

Clocks above the earth experience weaker gravity-they tick faster. General relativity.

GPS satellites are both moving and above the earth so special and general relativity have to be taken into account.
All kind of clocks tick faster in the mountains ?

How about sand clocks ? Does sand move faster through the hole if the gravitation is weaker ? It should rather be the other way round.
There is no such thing as absolute time if you are in a particular reference frame.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3710
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Apr 28, 2015 11:53 am

The Big Bang definitely happened for it is a fact though what is not known however is what caused it to
happen or if it was the beginning of everything. For all it is is local cosmic expansion no more or no less
This does not automatically falsify the possibility of other cosmic expansions from having happened also
As for example those which are referenced by the Big Bang / Big Crunch hypothesis of cyclical Universes

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Ginkgo » Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:11 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:They don't cancel each other out if this is what you mean.
If proximity to gravity has one effect on time, and velocity has the opposite effect on time, then there must be a slope of velocity against gravity field intensity, where one effect cancelled out the other.

Unless you have mischaracterised the effects?
Satellites experience less time because less time because of their velocity. On the other hand, satellites experience more time because of their distance form a massive object ( the earth). You seem to be asking how fast would such satellites need to accelerate in order to cancel out gravitational time dilation.

Off the top of may head I don't know the answer to that question. Provided of course, this is the question you are asking.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3710
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by surreptitious57 » Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:26 pm

Ginkgo wrote:
There is no such thing as absolute time if you are in a particular reference frame
The notion of absolute time was disproved by General Relativity after Einstein discovered that if light was a constant
time and space could not be too. And which is why the four dimensions merged into one becoming spacetime. And so
while time itself may not need a medium to operate within as such it does interact with the three spatial dimensions

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8363
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Tue Apr 28, 2015 12:38 pm

Ginkgo wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
Ginkgo wrote:They don't cancel each other out if this is what you mean.
If proximity to gravity has one effect on time, and velocity has the opposite effect on time, then there must be a slope of velocity against gravity field intensity, where one effect cancelled out the other.

Unless you have mischaracterised the effects?
Satellites experience less time because less time because of their velocity. On the other hand, satellites experience more time because of their distance form a massive object ( the earth). You seem to be asking how fast would such satellites need to accelerate in order to cancel out gravitational time dilation.

Off the top of may head I don't know the answer to that question. Provided of course, this is the question you are asking.
yes you have the question.

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Ginkgo » Tue Apr 28, 2015 1:14 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
yes you have the question.
It is possible to work out the calculations, but to be perfectly honest I don't know the answer. For a start one would need to know the distance satellites orbit above the earth and how much faster on board clock are running. I would imagine there would be a particular orbiting height whereby there would be a cancellation factor.

Sorry that is as much as I know.

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny » Fri May 01, 2015 9:42 am

Sorry, but if you want to understand the time (and the matter at all), you have to forget the theory of relativity. I am allways surprised how many guys still believe in it :(

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Ginkgo » Fri May 01, 2015 11:12 am

Cerveny wrote:Sorry, but if you want to understand the time (and the matter at all), you have to forget the theory of relativity. I am allways surprised how many guys still believe in it :(
If your GPS works on your iphone then that is a good reason to believe it.

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny » Fri May 01, 2015 11:03 pm

Physics should be afraid of mathematicians and naive enthusiasts. Mathematicians are able to materialize such things as nothing, infinity or metrics, that violates the triangle inequality and the silly others are able to believe in it :(

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny » Sat May 02, 2015 7:08 am

Cerveny wrote:Speed of the time is related to the speed of the light. Nothing can overtake the time. Then "mc2" can be understood as some kind of kinetic energy of the mass moving with/along the time...
There is no "place" were to go (yet).
Last edited by Cerveny on Sun May 03, 2015 11:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

surreptitious57
Posts: 3710
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by surreptitious57 » Sat May 02, 2015 7:26 am

Cerveny wrote:
Physics should be afraid of mathematicians
The laws of physics are in mathematical form

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny » Sun May 03, 2015 11:22 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Cerveny wrote: Physics should be afraid of mathematicians...
The laws of physics are in mathematical form
They should be based on some (reasonable) model. A model is inherently materialistic and always logical..
Last edited by Cerveny on Sun May 03, 2015 8:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ginkgo
Posts: 2525
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:47 pm

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Ginkgo » Sun May 03, 2015 11:33 am

Cerveny wrote:
surreptitious57 wrote:
Cerveny wrote: Physics should be afraid of mathematicians...
The laws of physics are in mathematical form
We should be based on some (reasonable) model. A model is inherently materialistic and always logical..
That would exclude quantum mechanics.

User avatar
HexHammer
Posts: 3270
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:19 pm
Location: Denmark

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by HexHammer » Sun May 03, 2015 3:34 pm

..sigh!

User avatar
Cerveny
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 9:35 pm
Location: Czech Republic
Contact:

Re: Speed of time ?

Post by Cerveny » Sun May 03, 2015 8:36 pm

Quantum mechanics works with probabilities. Thus, it does not determine the development (the next "time" layer) uniquely. It offers only certain "smooth" changes of (discrete) values. Indeterminism of QM sharply clash theory of relativity. Mentioned "model" has stochastic feature.
Space-time thus does not "expand" but grows / condenses / crystallizes from the "Future". Each quantum interactions (measurements) fixates / glues the new element of space-time to its 4D history...

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest