Time Dilation and the Speed of Light

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jun 8, 2017

Justatruthseeker said:
And yet a boat on a river that was increasing in speed, would still be accelerating, even if it was motionless in relation to the water itself.

Only accelerating relative to the land. The boat isn't in motion relative to the water, and so does no work, expends no energy, feels no accelerating force, and isn't subject to relativistic time dilation; likewise, analogously, galaxies.

...I see no reason to accept magical expanding nothing that would violate every known physical law including conservation of energy.

The increasing dark energy doesn't violate conservation of energy because the expansion of spacetime has an energetically negative equivalent gravitational complement. At any stage in the expansion, the total 'positive' energy of matter, radiation, and dark energy is exactly balanced by the 'negative' energy of gravity (e.g. spacetime is warped by mass; that warping is gravity).

Also it's worth noting that, for the universe as a whole, energy conservation is not a requirement, as it isn't subject to the symmetry constraints of Noether's Theorem.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 8, 2017

jacks said:
To be perfectly honest, I'm not even sure what "time" is. Does it exist or is it just a handy way to think about things?

Time is movement, or more precisely our measurement of movement. It is a second distance measurement to confirm the first distance measurement.

In mathematics the numerator and denominator must be related, that is you can not divide unrelated things such as yards and feet, or gallons and quarts. So for d/t to be a rational expression, then both time and distance must be the same thing.

Whether it is the distance of a point on the earths surface that takes one revolution, the distance a pendulum swings, or the distance between wave crests of EM waves, or the distance a second hand travels, in so many of those distances between the crests of those EM waves.

Radrook · Jun 8, 2017

Now, if you could literally saddle up a photon and ride, then you would reach any destination in the universe seemingly instantaneously.

BTW
I know that photons behave both like particles and waves.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 8, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Only accelerating relative to the land. The boat isn't in motion relative to the water, and so does no work, expends no energy, feels no accelerating force, and isn't subject to relativistic time dilation; likewise, analogously, galaxies.

Except I don't buy their magical expanding nothing, where the distance of galaxies is calculated as a function of their increasing velocity and distance based on redshift values, but magically not increasing velocity at the same time.

Yah right.

The increasing dark energy doesn't violate conservation of energy because the expansion of spacetime has an energetically negative equivalent gravitational complement. At any stage in the expansion, the total 'positive' energy of matter, radiation, and dark energy is exactly balanced by the 'negative' energy of gravity (e.g. spacetime is warped by mass; that warping is gravity).

Doesn't seem to be doing a very good job of balancing anything since claimed expansion is continuing to increase....

Besides, gravity only applies to non ionized matter, .1% of the universe, planetary systems. That's why it is 99% accurate in explaining non ionized matter, planetary systems, yet this 99% accurate theory suddenly needs 96% ad hoc gap filler to make the numbers match a semblance of reality the second one leaves the solar system. It simply does not apply to plasma, 99.9% of the universe and is why only particle physics and electromagnetic theory is used in any plasma laboratory. But because they once believed 99% of the universe was non ionized matter they believed it would apply everywhere and so continued to attempt to sledgehammer the wrong theory for the wrong state of matter. This of course led to epicycles after epicycles after epicycles to a tune of 96% or greater because they began with the wrong theory for the wrong state of matter.

Also it's worth noting that, for the universe as a whole, energy conservation is not a requirement, as it isn't subject to the symmetry constraints of Noether's Theorem.

Not to be rude or anything, but whatever excuse you need that helps you justify the epicycles in your mind.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 8, 2017

Time dilation is intimately related to why the speed of light remains c regardless of velocity.

You see the speed of light is totally misunderstood. It is based upon the energy content of a frame and the changes to ones clocks and rulers along with a resetting of zero points for those measuring devices.

To put this in perspective look at the speedometer on your car. Imagine that 100 mph is the speed of light. Accelerate to 50 mph. As you begin to accelerate your division marks (clocks and rulers) begin to change proportionally to the energy added from your change in velocity. Now comes the important part. You must also rotate the dial so that the zero point follows the needle.

Notice what happens. 100 mph is still 100 mph to you and can not be reached, even if you are actually traveling at what was once 50 mph. Also your velocity through space reads as zero, not 50 mph, just as it does right now despite our traveling at an unknown velocity through space.

You must understand that regardless of your actual velocity through space, it will always read as zero to you and 100 mph will be forever beyond your reach, even if you are already traveling at what was once 100 mph. As long as you continue to use your measuring devices one can never reach the speed of c as those devices, along with the zero points, continue to shift proportionally to the energy added from your change in velocity.

This is why E told us that only in frames traveling in relative motion with one another (the same approximate velocity) were the laws of physics the same. And that in frames not traveling at the same relative velocity were the laws of physics different. They are different because those frames do not share the same measurements or zero points.

But since we still call those ticks of time of different duration, seconds; and those measuring rods of different lengths, meters; one never notices the relative changes to those devices, nor the shift in zero points.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 8, 2017

As for space expansion this is easily falsified, or the CMB is, take your pick.

All sources of radiation beyond 600 mega parsecs is systematically shifted towards the red end of the spectrum. If space was expanding as is claimed, then the CMB would also be further shifting as well and not constant. Of course I sincerely believe both cosmological redshift and the CMB has been misinterprete as to what they actually are.

Radrook · Jun 8, 2017

Justatruthseeker said:
As for space expansion this is easily falsified, or the CMB is, take your pick.

All sources of radiation beyond 600 mega parsecs is systematically shifted towards the red end of the spectrum. If space was expanding as is claimed, then the CMB would also be further shifting as well and not constant. Of course I sincerely believe both cosmological redshift and the CMB has been misinterprete as to what they actually are.

Good point! Why isn't the CMB affected?

Ygrene Imref · Jun 8, 2017

Time is an evolution of events - literally. It is not a dimension. The definition of a second is described as 9,000,000,000 Cesium-133 hyperfine transitions.

When you warp space (FTL, or near c speeds,) the clock on a spaceship would read much less time than one on earth. That is because the eventualities (evolution of events) of the cosmos are compressed for the ship observer, and remain uncompressed for the objects travelling at classical speeds.

Time behaves more like a ratio of change in events per spacial dimensional change than an absolute dimension.

If we choose S to be the "action," then the energy is the change on action (in energy). This can be local, or nonlocal (WZW,) but the action determines the energy-time of a particle. In other words, the action (especially nonlocally) breaks down to the Lagrangian (equations of motion.)

Mathematically (and very basically,) the action S = int(L•dt) from t1 to t2. It is a fancy way to state that time is really a phase, and the action depends on the change in energy - evolution of ecents. It follows that the basic Lagrangian can be estimated as a change in Action over a domain (in most cases, it is time.)

In the most crude and basic of manipulations, we can derive a rough estimate for the mathematical relation of time to the action and Lagrangian:

(1/L)•dS = dt

Which states that the time interval of action of a particle is represented by the ratio of change in action and energy of a particle.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 8, 2017

Radrook said:
Good point! Why isn't the CMB affected?

Because the CMB is not what they believe it to be. The most reasonable cause has yet to be excluded, which has already led to the falsification of every theory concerning our heliosphere, not to mention what it says about the theories that led to every prediction being incorrect. Somehow despite every prediction being wrong, they refuse to accept that the theories that led to those incorrect predictions are in error.

Just a few years ago Voyager and IBEX falsified every theoretical model we had of the sun’s heliosphere. What they found was that the charged particles from the sun (solar wind) came to an almost complete stop at the heliosphere.

Now charged particles must emit radiation when decelerated equal to the amount of energy it took to accelerate them. According to quantum mechanics and quantum electrodynamics this would be in the microwave frequency.

This would of course occur in a 360 degree sphere around the sun. No other radiation has been detected in the proper frequency to account for this well known process of physics.

Since all foreground sources have not been accounted for, since we just within the last decade discovered this event that falsified every theoretical model of the heliosphere, it is impossible at this point in time to rule out this physical process as the cause of what we term the CMB.

Untill further in situ measurements are made and since no other radiation has been detected that could possibly be from this event, do not put your faith in extragalactic causes when the cause is most likely right at hand and led to the falsification of heliospheric models.

There is nothing that gives our position or velocity with respect to space any meaning whatsoever. It is simply wishfull thinking to believe otherwise.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jun 9, 2017

Justatruthseeker said:
Except I don't buy their magical expanding nothing, where the distance of galaxies is calculated as a function of their increasing velocity and distance based on redshift values, but magically not increasing velocity at the same time.

You don't have to buy into it.

Doesn't seem to be doing a very good job of balancing anything since claimed expansion is continuing to increase....

The increase in dark energy is balanced by a proportional increase in gravitational field, i.e. new spacetime. I guess it's analogous to Newton's 3rd Law.

Besides, gravity only applies to non ionized matter, .1% of the universe, planetary systems.

Gravity applies to all matter.

Not to be rude or anything, but whatever excuse you need that helps you justify the epicycles in your mind.

Lol, nice argument!

Justatruthseeker · Jun 9, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
You don't have to buy into it.

That's good, pseudoscience is not good to buy into.

The increase in dark energy is balanced by a proportional increase in gravitational field, i.e. new spacetime. I guess it's analogous to Newton's 3rd Law.

No, no, no. Spacetime itself has no gravitational field. It is "mass" which bends spacetime, then spacetime tells mass how to move. Spacetime by itself does nothing, without mass being present. Besides, you are talking as if there is a force present, yet they claim gravity is not a force at all.

Gravity applies to all matter.

Except the electromagnetic forces are 10^39 power stronger than the gravitational force. When discussing plasma we are talking about ionized single particles, not clumps of non ionized particles.

Even moon dust ignores the gravitational force when it is ionized.

Moondust in the Wind | Science Mission Directorate

"We've had some surprising results," says Abbas "We're finding that individual dust grains do not act the same as larger amounts of moon dust put together. Existing theories based on calculations of the charge of a large amount of moondust don't apply to the moondust at the single particle level."

Stop treating those single particles like larger amounts put together. They should know better, but then plasma physics isn't required reading in astronomy, even if the universe is 99.9% plasma. Go figure....

Lol, nice argument!

Thanks . Now if you would spend as much time studying plasma physics since the universe is 99.9% plasma......

Ygrene Imref · Jun 9, 2017

There is such a thing as dusty, or crustal plasma - particles that are on a nanoscale, but behave like plasmas in that there is separation of charge within the dust particle itself - and it responds to electric fields.

It is interesting, when I took cosmology, and stellar structure in university at the 3000 and 4000 level, the only prerequisite was physics I & II, and calculus 3.

It isn't until I got to Relativity on the 6000 level that QM, PDE and analysis was required - and in my case the course was on topological field theory, which is the closest to "sense" I have seen.

In QTFT, everything is non-localized. There is no magic; spooky action at a distance is justified by the field interaction from the sum of media propogator fields called "space," and the amplitudes of propogation are at, or near what we would call "localized points."

There are specific propogators, and therefore Lagrangians, to deal with dusty/crustal plasma, and the media of space is treated AT LEAST as a sum of field interactions capable of conducting oscillating types of vibrational energy. There is definitely room for the media of space to include field interactions from electroweak propogators. In fact, the math almost demands it.

Math tends to keep science in check, but lately math has become as fantastical as the disciplines that draw from it. There are some interestingly freaky ideas out now concerning the cosmos.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 9, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Only accelerating relative to the land. The boat isn't in motion relative to the water, and so does no work, expends no energy, feels no accelerating force, and isn't subject to relativistic time dilation; likewise, analogously, galaxies.

Yet the water itself possesses energy and imparts that change of energy to the boat. Likewise analogously, galaxies.

Don't believe it? Experiment, go stand still in front of the boat, although we may never see you on here again if you do.

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jun 9, 2017

Justatruthseeker said:
No, no, no. Spacetime itself has no gravitational field. It is "mass" which bends spacetime, then spacetime tells mass how to move. Spacetime by itself does nothing, without mass being present. Besides, you are talking as if there is a force present, yet they claim gravity is not a force at all.

I didn't mention a force, but there's nothing wrong with treating gravity as a force; it's just an alternative way to model it. Certainly mass causes spacetime curvature and we call that curvature gravity. In the case of an expanding universe, the manifestation of spacetime curvature (i.e. gravity) is simply the fact that space is expanding.

Except the electromagnetic forces are 10^39 power stronger than the gravitational force. When discussing plasma we are talking about ionized single particles, not clumps of non ionized particles.

Nevertheless, all matter gravitates and is influenced by gravity. The electromagnetic force may overwhelm the effects of gravity in many situations, but gravity still applies. The sun itself is a ball of plasma - if it didn't gravitate, it wouldn't hold together and there wouldn't be a solar system

FrumiousBandersnatch · Jun 9, 2017

Justatruthseeker said:
Yet the water itself possesses energy and imparts that change of energy to the boat. Likewise analogously, galaxies.

Well not quite; I must apologise for an error - my previous post should have said that the boat does feel an accelerating force, and is subject to relativistic time dilation (because it changes inertial frames). Your analogy is rather limited because water is not the spacetime metric - a boat in accelerating water flow will feel the acceleration (its inertial frame will change). This is not the case for objects in expanding spacetime (their inertial frames don't change).

Justatruthseeker · Jun 9, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
I didn't mention a force, but there's nothing wrong with treating gravity as a force; it's just an alternative way to model it. Certainly mass causes spacetime curvature and we call that curvature gravity. In the case of an expanding universe, the manifestation of spacetime curvature (i.e. gravity) is simply the fact that space is expanding.

What curvature? There is no mass to curve it.

Nevertheless, all matter gravitates and is influenced by gravity. The electromagnetic force may overwhelm the effects of gravity in many situations, but gravity still applies. The sun itself is a ball of plasma - if it didn't gravitate, it wouldn't hold together and there wouldn't be a solar system

Except the sun is one of those balls of plasma that refuse to follow the gravitational laws until they convieiently add 27% ad hoc fluff to the equation, even if it was shown to be 99% accurate without that fluff.

What you meant to say was the planets obey the gravitational laws, the sun clearly does not... So much so that they want to modify those laws, even though they need no modification, just confined to the states of matter they apply to, .1% of the universe, planetary systems, non ionized matter.

Except in the lab we use electric currents and magnetic fields to confine plasma. Don't know why in space I am suddenly expected to ignore 200 years of laboratory experimentation with plasma and the only confinement system that works with it?

Justatruthseeker · Jun 9, 2017

FrumiousBandersnatch said:
Well not quite; I must apologise for an error - my previous post should have said that the boat does feel an accelerating force, and is subject to relativistic time dilation (because it changes inertial frames). Your analogy is rather limited because water is not the spacetime metric - a boat in accelerating water flow will feel the acceleration (its inertial frame will change). This is not the case for objects in expanding spacetime (their inertial frames don't change).

Then you won't mind throwing out all the distance calculations to galaxies based upon their distance and velocity due to their redshift value?
You can't have it both ways. Either we can calculate the distance of galaxies due to their velocity by their redshift values, or we can't.

morse86 · Jun 9, 2017

Speed of light and time travel is a hoax. It's disconnected from the material world.

What does speed of light have to do with time dilation? It's just measuring speed of light output....not matter which was already materialized in the world. It's a subtle but very important distinction. It's a hoax, speed of light is useless just like e=mc^2. It's only useful in false religion $cience like "astrophysics" (mathematics disconnected from reality).

Justatruthseeker · Jun 10, 2017

You do realize frame switching is pseudoscience right? The Hafele–Keating experiment proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that frame switching has nothing to do with the rate a clock ticks, but velocity and velocity only.

Also we are not talking about the pseudoscience of cosmological redshift being misinterpreted as expanding spacetime. But the acceleration that led to their current velocities through space.

Energy was gained during the initial acceleration and is always maintained unless velocity changes.

Kinetic energy - Wikipedia

And also just like the boat the claimed expansion of space is imparting motion to those galaxies, increased motion which increases the energy gained.

Sorry, you can't have it both ways. Either motion is being imparted and therefore energy or no motion is happening. Since even cosmology agrees the furthest galaxies are increasing in distance to the point where they will one day be beyond viewing......

To then say motion is not be imparted at an increasing rate is just an excuse to attempt to justify the pseudoscience.

Justatruthseeker · Jun 10, 2017

Double post

Time Dilation and the Speed of Light

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Newbie

Junior Member

Newbie

Newbie

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency