- Thank you received: 0
Paradoxes and Dilemmas
- tvanflandern
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
22 years 5 days ago #4028
by tvanflandern
Replied by tvanflandern on topic Reply from Tom Van Flandern
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[makis]So basically there is no universal time since, if we see a clock some place very far in the universe will will have no way of knowing if it is corrected or not. Therefore, in an emtpy universe there can be universal time, but as soon as a gravity potential is introduced, time universality is lost. I think Einstein's ghost will haunt us forever.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
Clocks at sea level all tick at the same rate. Clocks on mountains must be corrected to run at the rates they would have if they were at sea level. GPS clocks must be corrected to run at the same rate as clocks on Earth. Clocks anywhere in the universe can be corrected to run at the rate of Earth clocks. Doesn't that meet your idea of a "universal time"?
In any case, "gravitational clocks" (as in the force peaks from a binary pulsar) would be unaffected by speed or potential, and could serve as universal as well. -|Tom|-
Clocks at sea level all tick at the same rate. Clocks on mountains must be corrected to run at the rates they would have if they were at sea level. GPS clocks must be corrected to run at the same rate as clocks on Earth. Clocks anywhere in the universe can be corrected to run at the rate of Earth clocks. Doesn't that meet your idea of a "universal time"?
In any case, "gravitational clocks" (as in the force peaks from a binary pulsar) would be unaffected by speed or potential, and could serve as universal as well. -|Tom|-
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Larry Burford
- Offline
- Platinum Member
Less
More
- Thank you received: 0
22 years 5 days ago #3888
by Larry Burford
Replied by Larry Burford on topic Reply from Larry Burford
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>... would ultimately require speeds of c^2 ...<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>
???
c^2 is not a speed. Speed has units of distance over time, not distance^2 over time^2. And not (distance over time)^2
Is this a typo?
Regards,
LB
???
c^2 is not a speed. Speed has units of distance over time, not distance^2 over time^2. And not (distance over time)^2
Is this a typo?
Regards,
LB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
22 years 5 days ago #3889
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
Patrick says it takes more effort to walk to the front of a train than walking to the rear of the train. Can this be true or is there some error here?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
22 years 4 days ago #3892
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
Two items come to mind reading the latest post here; First, the train thing is about time and if it takes more effort to go foward at a rate of speed near C than to go in reverse then Patrick is right. Second, if time is measured from the moment of the BB; do clocks on mountain tops run slow?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
22 years 2 days ago #4299
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
It seems to me you are playing games with symbols by saying things like C="0" and other such items. The idea I'm wondering about is the comment on setting time at a start at the moment of the BB start. Doing so should end the slow running clock caper.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
22 years 2 days ago #3933
by Jim
Replied by Jim on topic Reply from
Don't leave out the point that it takes exactly the same effort to run to the front or back of the moving plane or train. Your prior example was then false the walk to the front of the train did not require more effort than the walk to the rear. At ~C speed this is just the reverse-it takes more effort to walk to the front,right?
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.320 seconds