<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by kc3mx</i>
<br />
The basic issue is the following. Does the derived time dilation reflect a fundamental property of time,ie, that time actualy slows down?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I say “NO”, absolutely not. I say it is the “clock” that is “slowing down”, with “the clock” being anything that moves, hums, vibrates, etc.
Time is a progressive numerical counting of repetitive “events” and a comparing of the duration between events with the duration between other kinds of repetitive events. But we can’t say that any particular kind of clock represents all of “true time”, since, for example, an atomic clock slows down at gravitational potentials where pendulum clocks speed up. So which represents “true time”? I say “both”, for the “type” of time they measure and, in fact, they “generate”. But the slow-down in one kind of clock does not represent the slow-down of all of "time itself" in the place where that clock is located.
How do you know what a “mile” is? You’ve got to measure it out with a tape measure. How do you know what a “foot” or a “meter” is? You’ve got to have an international convention and have a lot of nations agree, and you have to compare a “foot” and a “meter” to some other length.
I think the same principle applies to time. What is a “second”, some fraction of a day or a year. What is a year? Well, there are two kinds of astronomical time "years", for our planet, so which kind do we want to use for a "second"? Do we want a more scientific sounding “second” definition? Ok, let’s compare it to the number of oscillations of a certain kind of atom at mean sea level. But, let's don't go moving that atom up or down in elevation, because if we do, its oscillation rate will change. And by the way, we had better compare its oscillation rate to the ancient astronomical "second" so our vibrating atom won’t get out ahead of our revolving or rotating earth.
So “time” is a sequence of events, of any kind. The more stable the “duration” is between events, the better the “clock” is considered to be.
What causes time? Energy. Kinetic energy causing things to move. Every thing that moves, hums, vibrates, oscillates, etc. is a “clock”.
What is “space”? I’d say an “empty” 3-D coordinate system. We’ve got “space” inside a box, inside a room, between the earth and the sun, and even “space” inside atoms. In fact, atoms partially fill “space”, but the “space” they fill is still there, just like the “space” inside a box is still there, even if you fill it up with something.
Yes, yes, I know that these are very simple fundamental definitions, but I don’t care.
