Question about the density of a moving clock

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by quantum_wave, Feb 23, 2010.

  1. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Would someone, anyone please post what they know about whether an energy density differential can be caused by acceleration of a clock vs. a “rest” clock, i.e. does energy density have anything to do with why the accelerated clock runs slower?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,105
    Well you could easily look at a person in a car seat. As you increase speed your mass is pushed into the seat as the seat in the car is pulled into acceleration. Initially to begin with you'd feel the force and as you get up to a speed and cruise the force is relaxed as you become unified.

    You could suggest that the effects on a clock would only be for the length of acceleration in regards to clocks with moving parts, however I'm pretty sure that such effects of acceleration is minimal when it comes to Atomic clocks. (I doubt it would generate a large enough time dialation for measurement)
     
    Last edited: Feb 23, 2010
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    No. Special relativity doesn't have physical clocks, they are simply a way of visualising the coordinate time. Even if you consider something physical which can measure time you can use ones which don't have volume. For instance, muons are unstable point particles which measure time in the sense that their decay rate varies with their relative velocity. There's no change in energy density in a single muon yet it can last a lot longer if its moving quickly relative to you.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    OK, that acceleration that we all can experience is part of what I am getting at. Acceleration feels like we are being pulled backward into our seat by the gravitation force of a massive object behind us. We "feel" like we are heavier. I want to equate the "heavy" feeling due to acceleration to a concept of being slightly more dense as a result of the force that is accelerating us.

    It may be very tiny at human tolerances but accelerating to relativistic velocities would magnify the energy density effect wouldn't it?
     
  8. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    This concept of energy density due to acceleration may be the same topic as SR, but right now I am talking about physical motion of clocks moving relative to each other. If one is said to be at rest and one is moving, I am considering that there would be a difference in their density. Maybe it is like the tidal effect and both clocks are effected differently by their different gravitational surroundings considering the acceleration to be the same as a gravitational effect on the "moving" clock that isn't experienced by the "rest" clock.
     
  9. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Oh crap, let's get this over with

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    . I have just written this way-to-long post and am not any happier with it than you will be.

    I have a speculative scientific mind that tends to focus on the boundary between the known and the unknown and explores the possibilities that could be discovered.

    Here at SciForums speculation is a lonely business. Some refuse to discuss it, some insist on rebutting it by painting us as idiots and deluded fools, and some insist it requires credentials that have proved to be obtainable by idiots and deluded fools.

    Those statements shouldn’t inflame most of you but some of the credentialed idiots and deluded fools have their mission so have fun with me. For the time being there are few rules here in Pseudoscience though I sense changes coming that will end the freewheeling atmosphere where all sorts of speculation, from reasonable and responsible to idle and on to fanciful get aired.

    I’m at turning point in my speculations after actively speculating for six or seven years and after a lifelong interest in science that I kept active on the side throughout a successful professional career in a non-scientific field. A few of you know that I am a speculator and are familiar with Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) and maybe those few wish I would move on to where ever that turn leads if it means I just go. You will get your wish when new rules come to the “pseudo arts” forum since the only fun I have on line is speculation about reasonable and responsible possibilities. I luv being a woo woo and I have no lack of self respect while being dumped on about it.

    The idea that energy density can affect the rate at which time passes on an accelerated clock is just part of a bigger and interconnected set of speculations that all fall under the heading “Quantum Wave Cosmology”. The thinking that translates to a possibility that energy density can slow a clock is based on a sequence of speculations.

    I don’t mind being called a woo woo by the professional idiots and deluded fools but technically I listen and accept legitimate falsification to keep my ideas current and cleanly in the category of reasonable and responsible speculation and not idle fantasy. I’ve gotten over debating that there can be a methodology to speculation and I employ a methodology and stand by it. My speculations are reasonable and responsible and you, yes you, haven’t proved otherwise.

    This is meant to be a thread that discusses the speculative idea that energy density can affect the rate at which a clock measures time. The reason I include all this word salad and rhetoric is because everything is connected and if you don’t see what things I am speculating about to come to this clock/energy density speculation then you don’t have enough information of help me. I readily admit that is thread is based on speculation about some new physics that were required to come up with my speculations about the cause of the Big Bang. You can help me by showing me the science that falsifies my speculation if you understand that the speculation includes some new physics identified early on in QWC that comes into play in the clock speculation.

    All of my speculations including this "energy density of clocks" speculation go back to the cause of the Big Bang, an imponderable. In my QWC lexicon, an imponderable is something that science does not yet have an answer for. Speculation can be said to be ideas about imponderables.

    To start the speculation I have clearly explained in my other threads that I have developed a speculative position on the imponderable cause of the big event. I say “big event” instead of Big Bang because the Big Bang has connotations that I am talking about ideas from within Big Bang Theory, General Relativity, and Inflation Theory. Much of what I speculate about does fall within the existing standard cosmology but QWC only uses the facts and observations that support BBT and does not accept the fundamental aspect called the mathematical singularity which is at the heart of Big Bang Theory and depicts the zero volume infinitely dense point of space. The QWC big event (big bang) occupies a finite volume of space within a greater universe that is spatially infinite. The big event includes a finite amount of energy within a greater universe which has an infinite amount of energy. The big event includes a start point in time in an arena that lies within a greater universe that has always existed.

    I have often tried to engage the forum members in my step by step speculations but no one has actually gone very far before they throw up their hands and start the woo woo accusations. I have continually modified QWC to repair any falsified ideas. There is nothing in the current set of ideas that anyone has falsified. I have even gone to the extent to attempt to remedy all complaints, even to the point of unnecessary disclaimers like setting up age restrictions for people to read my documents and abandoning axioms and replacing them with “basic ideas” upon which QWC is based. I’m over worrying about boiler plate and now I just accept the criticism, wait for true falsification of any of QWC, and am now preparing to move on into the philosophy of QWC. But first, this energy density discussion has to take place and I need to air my ideas about it to give you a chance to falsify it for my benefit.
     
  10. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    What I am asking is if there is anyone who considers that the acceleration of a clock to relativistic speeds (should that be velocities?), relative to a clock at rest, could increase the energy density of the accelerated clock and make it run slower than the rest clock.

    I am wondering if acceleration acts as a retardant to the motion of particles due to an increase in the density of the object. Or on the other hand, does the lack of relative acceleration provide a level of “lubrication” in the motion of particles that is gradually removed as an object is accelerated toward relativistic speeds?
     
  11. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    The concept for discussion in this thread is really just relative energy density. I did a graphic which I posted at ToeQuest in a discussion about light lensing to show my conception of the effect of light passing through a high energy density field surrounding a massive object in space:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Pincho Paxton Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,387
    I've posted a few times that I don't believe in Relativity, and that the clocks are undergoing energy differences. The two planes scenario with atomic clocks is an example of atomic energy through atomic energy transfer. I don't believe in time as a physical entity. I think that time is a flat Earth argument that should be laughed at. First though, you have to understand atoms better, and then you will understand energy transfer better.
     
  13. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    This seems the wrong place to post that. You should post it where it belongs or start a thread in which you support your ideas with observational evidence or testable methods for showing that you are on to something.
    This thread is about something else completely. Please don't hijack it.
     
  14. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    Obviously you don't practice what you preach.
     
  15. Jack_ Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,383
    The logic of SR claims clocks run differently because of different light emission points in the frames not energy densities. Since SR supports the always measure at c in any frame view, reciprocal time dilation is a necessary condition of this view.

    That is the physical reason.
     
  16. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    I know. And I guess you know that I am asking if anyone has thought through the energy density angle. If you go by accepted scientific theory you wouldn't consider there to be any merit to any such energy density ideas. But then, you also don't have a speculative scenario about any new physics related to energy density that goes along with the big crunch scenario leading up to our big bang event. That angle has speculation that matter is composed of energy in quantum increments and the functioning of mass takes place within a range of energy density. As the density of an object approaches the upper limit of energy density matter functions less efficiently and at a maximum limit of energy density matter ceases to function. That is the basic idea.
     
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2010
  17. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    Jack, the idea is that mass is a gravitational charge and has energy density that is in some ways similar to the energy density of an electrical field with its charge density and electrical potential at any point and even electrical field gradients within solids. I’m simply asking, is anyone here familiar with the limits of the energy density of an electrical field? Is anyone here familiar with the concept of energy density of a gravitational field? Would there be limits to such a field based on density? How would matter function near those limits? If there is science here I would like to hear about.
     
  18. quantum_wave Contemplating the "as yet" unknown Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,677
    This idea isn’t interesting to anyone here is it?

    This is from the glossary of QWC:

    Clock: any device or method of measuring time; the revolution of the Earth is a clock, the frequency of strontium 90 is a clock, my Mickey Mouse watch is a clock

    Clock environment: Any and every clock has an environment in which it operates; the energy density in which a clock operates governs the rate at which time is measured by the clock; Acceleration increases the energy density of a clock and makes it run slower than if the clock is at rest relative to an accelerating clock
     

Share This Page