Gravity slows down time.

[arfa brane]

I think the title of the thread is accurate, but this is followed by arguments about it that seem to be based on misconceptions.

Anyway, gravity does "slow down" time, or more accurately it affects the time rate of change of everything. But the effect has to be measured by bringing clocks together, and this means moving them (you don't say?).
Once you introduce motion you introduce another physical effect; you "break" the symmetry (of the 'global' effect of the field on local frames), by how much depends on how you move the clocks together (i.e. to the same rest frame).

If you bring two clocks to the same rest frame, then obviously they no longer disagree about position. That would extend to positions of other apparently fixed objects, such as the sun (if the clocks are on the earth).

 

[chinglu]

I think the title of the thread is accurate, but this is followed by arguments about it that seem to be based on misconceptions.

Anyway, gravity does "slow down" time, or more accurately it affects the time rate of change of everything. But the effect has to be measured by bringing clocks together, and this means moving them (you don't say?).
Once you introduce motion you introduce another physical effect; you "break" the symmetry (of the 'global' effect of the field on local frames), by how much depends on how you move the clocks together (i.e. to the same rest frame).

If you bring two clocks to the same rest frame, then obviously they no longer disagree about position. That would extend to positions of other apparently fixed objects, such as the sun (if the clocks are on the earth).

We already did the move real slowly thing.

See, if you bring them together quickly, what are the times on the clock.

If you bring them together very slowly , what are the times on the clock.


You are trying to claim all clocks brought back together regardless of conditions will have the same time when they are re-united.

However, since the clocks disagree on time when brought together as in the twins experiment or a slowly moving high observer, then they disagree on time.

If they disagree on time, then they must disagree on the earth's position.

You have solved nothing.

 

[chinglu]

Nope, simply that you don't understand an iota of relativity and that you post nonsense.



Nope, just that clocks don't measure position , contrary to your crank claims. <shrug>

Are you claiming the time on an earth based clocks does not reflect the orbital and rotational positions of the earth?

 

[(Q)]

We already did the move real slowly thing.

See, if you bring them together quickly, what are the times on the clock.

If you bring them together very slowly , what are the times on the clock.


You are trying to claim all clocks brought back together regardless of conditions will have the same time when they are re-united.

However, since the clocks disagree on time when brought together as in the twins experiment or a slowly moving high observer, then they disagree on time.

If they disagree on time, then they must disagree on the earth's position.

It has been explained to that they do indeed disagree on the earth's position. What is the problem?

 

[chinglu]

Hi Chinglu.

Mate, if you re-read my post again, you will see that I indeed did address the time dilation aspect. I even addressed the logics (and even modified the scenario to highlight it) which demonstrated that your 'contradiction' was a 'contrived' one based on trivial observation/conclusions, as explained in my post.

Look, I will go even further and prove to you that it is a trivial observation. Consider further where sun-dials are used instead:

The two 'clocks systems' are identical SUN-DIALS. One is moved up and then back as per your original scenario, and then we use those same sun-dials to 'read off' the position of the sun when it is directly overhead. What do we find? The two sun-dials AGREE that the sun is overhead because the 'shadow pointer' is the same for both sun-dials irrespective of what they have experienced beforehand whatever the altitude.

So you see, 'time dilation' is only relevant in the 'mechanical clock' system dependent on pre-determined 'tick rate' according to sun-Earth system 'seconds rate' for the lower position before any motion of any clock up and back.

In both cases, for mechanical clocks and sun-dial types, any 'time dilation' becomes moot when both are again at the same lower position and using that SAME SUN-EARTH system for its reference point FROM THAT MOMENT 'anew', irrespective of any different 'counts' of mechanical mechanical clock or any prior motion of sun-dial clock.

See?

At start, in the mechanical clocks case, the 'standard' is that of the lower position for BOTH clocks. Any 'incorrect' difference is logically and automatically again 'overwritten and understood' when the moved clock is again returned to that 'correct' STANDARD from which both started.

And at start and throughout, in the sun-dial clocks case, there is NEVER any 'difference' in the shadows (except from TRANSIENT trivial angular slanting of light rays from same sun position going to different altitudes), and so both sun-dial clocks will agree at every stage of the experiment, including that the sun is overhead for both of the reunited sun-dials at 12 midday.

Your 'conclusions' are rooted in 'contrived trivialities', and not in the logical/physical essentials which I have actually highlighted in my previous and present post.

Good luck, Chinglu, and better luck in your other discussions.

Here, I will try to simplify it for you.

You bring a traveling clock back to an earth based clock and the traveling clock is time dilated.

The earth clock reads 12:00 am. The traveling clock reads 11:00 am.

Therefore, if time dilation is correct, the sun must be in 2 different places in the sky.

Since that is false, then time dilation is false.

 

[chinglu]

Hi Undefined .. Mate .. Aussie perhaps ?

I've been reading this thread. I like your explanation concerning the sundails. One of them could have travelled 'round the universe for all we know - but at the point where it is at the bottom next to the other it presents an identical 'machine' as the other (unless it was deformed - trivial) right ? No part of it's 'mechanics' have changed. So irrespective of what it's done in the past, it agrees with the other. Am I on the right track ?

Now bear with me here, because I'm still working through it .. I think Chinglus reference to sundails was therefore somewhat wrong, irrelevant perhaps, but as far as mechanical clocks are concerned, his point is that as the go up / down their mechanics should be affected by time dilation.

A different thing, no ?

The point of my reference to sun dials is to show any claimed time dilation on clocks is a reflection of a defect in the clock just like sundials are defective clocks.

 

[(Q)]

Here, I will try to simplify it for you.

You bring a traveling clock back to an earth based clock and the traveling clock is time dilated.

The earth clock reads 12:00 am. The traveling clock reads 11:00 am.

Therefore, if time dilation is correct, the sun must be in 2 different places in the sky.

That is completely ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with one clock reading different than the other. There is no problem here. The different readings do not suddenly change everything else.

 

[chinglu]

No, they wouldn't, the ship that left earth and returned would see the same sun, but their onboard guidance system would be off in the location of the sun due to time dilation. Why is this so hard for you to understand.



Of course not, that is just silly.

You cannot claim the traveling clock has a correct time when it does not correctly reflect the earth's orbital and rotational position like an earth based clock correctly reflects.

So, if you claim they agree on the earth's position, then you must claim the traveling clock is incorrect.

What you SR addicts have not yet figured out is that the earth's rotation and orbit is a timepiece and it is absolute contrary to the false assertions of relativity.

Any moving observer agrees on this absolute time.

So, if your clock claims 10 years (10 earth orbits) elapsed during your motion and an earth based clock correctly claims 12 earth orbits elapsed, then your clock is inaccurate. Its that simple.

 

[chinglu]

That is completely ridiculous. There is nothing wrong with one clock reading different than the other. There is no problem here. The different readings do not suddenly change everything else.

Try to understand what time means to humans.

It means some combination of the earth's orbit and rotation.

So, if your moving clock comes up with the wrong time, then your clock is wrong.

Otherwise, while you were moving, the earth orbits 10 tines when it actually orbits 12 times, which is a contradiction.

 

[(Q)]

Try to understand what time means to humans.

It means some combination of the earth's orbit and rotation.

So, if your moving clock comes up with the wrong time, then your clock is wrong.

Otherwise, while you were moving, the earth orbits 10 tines when it actually orbits 12 times, which is a contradiction.

I have no idea what you're talking.

There is no problem with the clock showing a different time due to time dilation, this is not a problem for humans, the earths orbit or rotation. It is not a problem at all.

 

[(Q)]

You cannot claim the traveling clock has a correct time when it does not correctly reflect the earth's orbital and rotational position like an earth based clock correctly reflects.

The clock experience time dilation, so yes, it is going to show a different time than the one on earth.

So, if you claim they agree on the earth's position, then you must claim the traveling clock is incorrect.

How many fucking times do we have to tell you, that is not a problem. Clocks have nothing to do with earth's position.

What you SR addicts have not yet figured out is that the earth's rotation and orbit is a timepiece and it is absolute contrary to the false assertions of relativity.

They may be timepieces to things that have not experience time dilation. That is not a problem at all.

Any moving observer agrees on this absolute time.

So what?

So, if your clock claims 10 years (10 earth orbits) elapsed during your motion and an earth based clock correctly claims 12 earth orbits elapsed, then your clock is inaccurate. Its that simple.

Again, one more fucking time, that is not a problem because one clock experienced time dilation so it will show a different time. It's that simple.

 

[chinglu]

I have no idea what you're talking.

There is no problem with the clock showing a different time due to time dilation, this is not a problem for humans, the earths orbit or rotation. It is not a problem at all.

So, let's see, you claim on your trip you lived 2.5 earth rotations by your clock.

When you return, an earth based clock reads 3 earth rotations and is correct.

You did not leave the solar system and you have verified this also on a continuous basis.

So, did you live 2.5 rotations when that is false since 3 rotations occurred and you know that?

And if your clock is actually correct, you will see the sun in a different position, but you do not.

That is a contradiction.

So, your clock is wrong. You lived 3 earth rotations when your failed clock claims only 2.5.

 

[arfa brane]

You are trying to claim all clocks brought back together regardless of conditions will have the same time when they are re-united.

Where did I try to claim that?

However, since the clocks disagree on time when brought together as in the twins experiment or a slowly moving high observer, then they disagree on time.

Yep, if A is true, then A is true.

If they disagree on time, then they must disagree on the earth's position.

Unless the two clocks are in the same position, or "next to" each other. How do two clocks return to the same position (a requirement so that that their times can be compared), and then disagree on that position? That's completely unlogical.

 

[chinglu]

The clock experience time dilation, so yes, it is going to show a different time than the one on earth.



How many fucking times do we have to tell you, that is not a problem. Clocks have nothing to do with earth's position.



They may be timepieces to things that have not experience time dilation. That is not a problem at all.



So what?



Again, one more fucking time, that is not a problem because one clock experienced time dilation so it will show a different time. It's that simple.

]

You seem upset since you do not understand time.

What does 24 hours mean on a clock?

It means one earth rotation.

What does one year mean on a clock?

It means one earth revolution around the sun.

Are you beginning to get a glimpse of reality with time yet?

 

[chinglu]

Where did I try to claim that?Yep, if A is true, then A is true.
Unless the two clocks are in the same position, or "next to" each other. How do two clocks return to the same position (a requirement so that that their times can be compared), and then disagree on that position? That's completely unlogical.

You are cornfused.

I did not say they disagree on their position.

I said over and over and over they must disagree on the earth's rotational and/or orbital position if they disagree on time.

 

[(Q)]

]

You seem upset since you do not understand time.

What does 24 hours mean on a clock?

It means one earth rotation.

What does one year mean on a clock?

It means one earth revolution around the sun.

Are you beginning to get a glimpse of reality with time yet?

So, what does that have to do with anything?

 

[(Q)]

I said over and over and over they must disagree on the earth's rotational and/or orbital position if they disagree on time.

That is entirely wrong. Clocks are mechanisms created by humans, they are not tied or bound to the earths rotation or orbital position.

 

[chinglu]

I have no idea what you're talking.

There is no problem with the clock showing a different time due to time dilation, this is not a problem for humans, the earths orbit or rotation. It is not a problem at all.

Of course there is a problem with time dilation.

One clock claims the earth is in one position and the other clock claims it is another.

Now, take some time to refute this statement.

 

[chinglu]

That is entirely wrong. Clocks are mechanisms created by humans, they are not tied or bound to the earths rotation or orbital position.

This is where you are confused.

Let me ask you simple questions to help you understand.

1) What is 24 hours in terms of the earth's rotation.

2) What is 1 year in terms of the earth's orbit.

 

[paddoboy]

Of course there is a problem with time dilation.

One clock claims the earth is in one position and the other clock claims it is another.

Now, take some time to refute this statement.

No. One clock claims a certain amount of time has passed, the other clock differs.
Position of Earth is irrelevant.