From what I've read, relativity predicts its own breakdown "with distance-time going away," thus, concomitantly, its own buildup "with distance-time oncoming." You can't look at it 1-dimensionally! Not even just 2-dimensionally! According to 11-dimensionality, not even just 10-dimensionally!
Asking google's AI : "measuring gravitational time dilation on earth"
Answer :
"To measure gravitational time dilation on Earth, scientists use highly precise atomic clocks placed at different altitudes, comparing the timekeeping rates between them, where a clock at a higher altitude will tick slightly faster due to the weaker gravitational pull at that height; this is most notably demonstrated by the need to adjust clocks on GPS satellites to account for time dilation caused by their orbit around Earth."
So it does appear that time runs at different rates depending on the clock's position in a gravitational field. Not an expert on this, but it seems relatively straightforward.
Answer :
"To measure gravitational time dilation on Earth, scientists use highly precise atomic clocks placed at different altitudes, comparing the timekeeping rates between them, where a clock at a higher altitude will tick slightly faster due to the weaker gravitational pull at that height; this is most notably demonstrated by the need to adjust clocks on GPS satellites to account for time dilation caused by their orbit around Earth."
So it does appear that time runs at different rates depending on the clock's position in a gravitational field. Not an expert on this, but it seems relatively straightforward.
Last edited:
It's not how it runs in place, it's how it keeps regarding magnitude of differing distance times and constant change needing to be adjusted to, in those magnitudes. Plus the Earth is changing instant to instant including its magnetosphere. I, in my own careers, have worked with the necessity of global precision time keeping and it never happened, never kept, for long. The Earth and solar system factors wouldn't let it stay with the precisionist quantum particle-orientated time-keeping clocks. The only factors we could adjust were the clocks, bringing in time adjusted precisionist clocks, sending out the ones then out of whack. That work is approaching fifty years ago now, so I have the actual personal working background to know of what I speak.
Last edited:
By the way, it has been proven that you can't find much more stupidity than that of Google's AI!
It is still as always with such "artificial intelligence," garbage in, garbage out! There is an old movie, among a few others that speak to the same machine utopian-intelligent supremacy, everyone should watch, 'Forbidden Planet'.
The most lasting intelligent species are those that spread and dilute themselves far and away over the frontier universe, branching out, to survive by avoiding the unwise perfect "spike" of their own 'id' of intelligence.
It is still as always with such "artificial intelligence," garbage in, garbage out! There is an old movie, among a few others that speak to the same machine utopian-intelligent supremacy, everyone should watch, 'Forbidden Planet'.
The most lasting intelligent species are those that spread and dilute themselves far and away over the frontier universe, branching out, to survive by avoiding the unwise perfect "spike" of their own 'id' of intelligence.
Last edited:
Yes, but Cat’s point about instruments (measurements) gives us the objectivity needed to distinguish science from, say, philosophy.
Yes, that’s nice. Cat likes to note that the map is not the territory, Orienting the map does indeed require logic.
It appears to be accurate on this one. There are measurements of gravitational time dilation by various means. Here is only one of them, and was not found using any AI source.
And it comes from this very site:
"Einstein's 'Time Dilation' Gets Pinpoint Measure Thanks to Wayward Satellites"
Einstein's 'Time Dilation' Gets Pinpoint Measure Thanks to Wayward Satellites
Scientists have used the Galileo 5 and Galileo 6 spacecraft to measure 'gravitational time dilation' more precisely than ever before, two new studies reported.
It's still RELATIVE physics! And I worked with clocks based for precision on QUANTUM physics!It appears to be accurate on this one. There are measurements of gravitational time dilation by various means. Here is only one of them, and was not found using any AI source.
And it comes from this very site:
"Einstein's 'Time Dilation' Gets Pinpoint Measure Thanks to Wayward Satellites"
Einstein's 'Time Dilation' Gets Pinpoint Measure Thanks to Wayward Satellites
Scientists have used the Galileo 5 and Galileo 6 spacecraft to measure 'gravitational time dilation' more precisely than ever before, two new studies reported.www.space.com
Do you call that interaction? Is it studying back? At so many light years away? Interaction?
Cat
Sure. Some have said science is a conversation with Nature.
I'm unclear what you mean. Are you asking if a simple observation is an interaction? It is an interaction with the message, but not the messenger. Astronomical lights are the message and astronomers now, remarkably, understand the messengers.
RECIPROCAL
done, given, or felt equally by both sides. reciprocal affection. 2. : related to each other in such a way that one completes the other or is the equal of the other. reciprocal agreements
"Some have said science is a conversation with Nature.
Yes. It is a conversation which, by definition, is an interaction between . . .
The conversation is the interaction. Not science and/or nature, but the conversation between.
*******************
This is NOT an interaction. We cannot communicate or react (interact) with Andromeda Galaxy whilst we are over 2.5 million light years apart. Vide
INTERACTION is TWO WAY. Vide communication with, or reaction to.
Two million people seeing something on TV is not interaction they must communicate with or react TO EACH OTHER (person and TV station)
One person phoning the TV station is. This is 2-way INTER action.
Maybe we have another case where we have two different languages.
Cat
done, given, or felt equally by both sides. reciprocal affection. 2. : related to each other in such a way that one completes the other or is the equal of the other. reciprocal agreements
Sure. Some have said science is a conversation with Nature.
I'm unclear what you mean. Are you asking if a simple observation is an interaction? It is an interaction with the message, but not the messenger. Astronomical lights are the message and astronomers now, remarkably, understand the messengers.
"Some have said science is a conversation with Nature.
Yes. It is a conversation which, by definition, is an interaction between . . .
The conversation is the interaction. Not science and/or nature, but the conversation between.
*******************
This is NOT an interaction. We cannot communicate or react (interact) with Andromeda Galaxy whilst we are over 2.5 million light years apart. Vide
INTERACTION is TWO WAY. Vide communication with, or reaction to.
Two million people seeing something on TV is not interaction they must communicate with or react TO EACH OTHER (person and TV station)
One person phoning the TV station is. This is 2-way INTER action.
Maybe we have another case where we have two different languages.
Cat
Last edited:
Only circumstantially possibly interacting: Separate but entangled, entangling, spontaneously concurrent (t=0) REALTIME NOW (t=0) instant moment.
The faster a traveler, including Einstein's traveler always, cuts through a curvature (like Alexander the Great cut through the Gordian Knot), the more the space (the hyperspace) contracts between points A and B. the more the real-time traveler disappears from all observation of the rearward observer (thus the more the physic of relativity has completely broken down between traveler and rearward observer) leaving only the relative light-time, time-dilated, holographic mirage of a traveler fallen behind in the wake of the reality of the traveler.
Some would say then that the real-time traveler has to have achieved faster than light travel to achieve the above. In a sense, they would be right on the money . . . if that is the only way to do away with the idiocy of the nonrelative real-time (object) traveler on the unobservable -- from the rear -- spot in the universe being "time dilated!"
It is sheer idiocy to so flatly deny so constantly that there are two travelers involved in the picture, not one! One real and unobserved! One relative and observed! TWO TRAVELERS (though the same traveler, one of the traveler in the box, one of the traveler outside the box) . . . NOT JUST ONE!!!!
Geez can't people get out of their lock of strictly 1-dimensional thinking, even if only to reach 2-dimensionality in thinking!
Stephen Hawking said it was difficult for him to think in two dimensions of anything, much less three. It's not that hard once you see, once you can think, in the Schrodinger-like split screens (at once the black hole horizon-like split-screens) . . . inside the horizon of the box, and outside the horizon of the box, at one and the same time. If you have to take the unobserved and unobservable real traveler, versus the observed and observable relative traveler, faster than the speed of light to split the screen into two dimensionalities, then do it!
The faster a traveler, including Einstein's traveler always, cuts through a curvature (like Alexander the Great cut through the Gordian Knot), the more the space (the hyperspace) contracts between points A and B. the more the real-time traveler disappears from all observation of the rearward observer (thus the more the physic of relativity has completely broken down between traveler and rearward observer) leaving only the relative light-time, time-dilated, holographic mirage of a traveler fallen behind in the wake of the reality of the traveler.
Some would say then that the real-time traveler has to have achieved faster than light travel to achieve the above. In a sense, they would be right on the money . . . if that is the only way to do away with the idiocy of the nonrelative real-time (object) traveler on the unobservable -- from the rear -- spot in the universe being "time dilated!"
It is sheer idiocy to so flatly deny so constantly that there are two travelers involved in the picture, not one! One real and unobserved! One relative and observed! TWO TRAVELERS (though the same traveler, one of the traveler in the box, one of the traveler outside the box) . . . NOT JUST ONE!!!!
Geez can't people get out of their lock of strictly 1-dimensional thinking, even if only to reach 2-dimensionality in thinking!
Stephen Hawking said it was difficult for him to think in two dimensions of anything, much less three. It's not that hard once you see, once you can think, in the Schrodinger-like split screens (at once the black hole horizon-like split-screens) . . . inside the horizon of the box, and outside the horizon of the box, at one and the same time. If you have to take the unobserved and unobservable real traveler, versus the observed and observable relative traveler, faster than the speed of light to split the screen into two dimensionalities, then do it!
Last edited:
Similar threads
TRENDING THREADS
-
Basic Error: The accelerating Universe conclusion - reason- Started by Gibsense
- Replies: 188
-
-
-
Definition of Universe requires clarification, to enable discussion
- Started by Catastrophe
- Replies: 36
-
Just a couple of questions please about just how far back we can model.- Started by Starstruck
- Replies: 12
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram