User Tag List

Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 12345613 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 636

Thread: about Bob's article on absolute or relative time

  1. #31
    Over 750 post club Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    815
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2370
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Flipper - I see no need to "get" relativity. There is no need to insist that anything other than the clock is being affected when you take it up a mountain.

    It does not matter if the clock is highly accurate and not overly susceptible to gravitational effects or if it is inaccurate and very susceptible. Relativity simply is not a necessary consideration.
    The world of physics begs to differ.

    As I understand it, one of the great things about Einstein's relativity equations is that they allow you to make pretty accurate predictions regarding the effects of time dilation. You can calculate very accurately what effect a gravity differential between two frames of reference will have on two clocks using the equations for general relativity. You can also calculate fairly precisely what the effect of velocity will be on time dilation between two frames of reference using the equations for special relativity.

    So let's say you were right and that time isn't relative due to gravitational differentials - the differences between a high clock and a low clock isn't due to the curvature of space time but is rather some as-yet-unexplained other effect of gravity.

    The general relativity equations predict the time differences extremely accurately regardless. You can calculate (and then observe) the difference due to gravity between a clock on the ground and a clock on a jet plane that is flying at a set altitude and velocity.

    However, Einstein's theory of special relativity predicts that velocity differences between frames will also create time dilation effects. So the clock on the plane is traveling at a constant altitude and speed away (or towards) your clock on the ground, and using the equations of special relativity, we can predict what the relative dilation will be.

    Now remember, we have already accounted for the gravitational difference.

    So this specific experiment has already been carried out a number of times and each time, the time dilation effects for both general and special relativity has been predicted and the results were found to be in agreement with the predictions.

    If you remove gravity as a factor, we still find that time is relative when velocities are different between two frames of reference. Explain that.

    Also, if you're looking for a non-clock-related test of general relativity, the Gravity Probe B experiment is a pretty good example. General relativity predicts that large bodies warp space/time around them. Using 4 ultra-sensitive gyroscopes, the Gravity Probe B experiment was able to measure this effect and found that it agreed with predictions to within one percent.

    Which makes sense again, when we look at both general and special relativity. Special relativity says that light's speed in a vacuum is always constant (an observation that has stood up to experimental testing), yet we see that large objects are able to refract and bend light moving through the vacuum of space (another prediction of general relativity). These observations can both be true if we accept that space/time is being warped by gravity.

    If Newton's concept of gravity and time as an absolute measure were correct, you might expect Newtonian mechanics to be effective at predicting the amount of deflection a light beam would encounter due to massive gravity.

    As it happens, this is not the case.

  2. #32
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    960
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    There is no need to add the qualifier.
    Yes, there is. It makes my statement true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    The clock on the hill showed a different time to the one off the hill. That difference can be attributed to the effect of gravity upon the clock.

    Do you not agree with Phy that gravity can and does affect different things to different degrees. Thus your claim that "brainwaves and heartbeats, thoughts and emotions, would all be equally affected" is demonstrably wrong, not to mention completely bizarre. How can gravity affect thoughts and emotions?

    Did you really just say that?

    ....

    Dude, how heavy is your happiness?
    Re-read what I wrote, but this time make an effort to understand it.

    Your thoughts and emotions are physical processes, just like your heart beat, and the oscillations of cesium emissions. They are therefore subject to the same time dilating effects of gravity as the atomic clock is. There's nothing magical about an atomic clock that makes it particularly susceptible to the effects of relativity. You would get the same results with an extremely accurate mechanical clock.

    (Often times it helps to assume at least some intelligence in your debate opponent. Obviously I don't think happiness has mass outside of the physical components from which it is constructed. Fun to mock, perhaps, but you pretty much look like an idiot.)

    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe
    Thus your claim that "brainwaves and heartbeats, thoughts and emotions, would all be equally affected" is demonstrably wrong
    I'd love to see your demonstration. I agree with ThePhy.

    And, as Flipper brings up, how do you explain special relativity when gravity is taken out of the picture? (Not to imply that you've actually explained anything about the observations thus far)
    Last edited by Johnny; May 11th, 2009 at 08:25 PM.
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

  3. #33
    Journeyman dan1el's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    50
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    There is no need to add the qualifier. The clock on the hill showed a different time to the one off the hill. That difference can be attributed to the effect of gravity upon the clock.

    Do you not agree with Phy that gravity can and does affect different things to different degrees. Thus your claim that "brainwaves and heartbeats, thoughts and emotions, would all be equally affected" is demonstrably wrong, not to mention completely bizarre. How can gravity affect thoughts and emotions?

    Did you really just say that?
    He meant that they'd all be slowed down or sped up an equal amount. You'd have to try quite hard not to understand that if you had any idea what you were talking about.
    "[Knut Hamsun] was very poor and weathered the deep winter of Chicago by wearing news paper under his clothes; his colleagues liked to touch him to make him crackle."

  4. #34
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    960
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    180
    Quote Originally Posted by dan1el View Post
    You'd have to try quite hard not to understand that if you had any idea what you were talking about.
    QFE.
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

  5. #35
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,309
    Thanks
    421
    Thanked 11,952 Times in 8,541 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147842
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePhy View Post
    But what you are saying now is significantly different than what you have already admitted was wrong in your first post in this thread. You said that the two clocks would be affected in “much the same way” by a change in gravity. In fact they would be affected dramatically differently.
    The two clocks are affected in the same way, by gravity

    The two clocks are not affected to the same degree, by gravity.

    An apple falling to the ground and the moon orbiting the Earth are related in a similar way. They are both gravity driven effects, but the resulting observations are different due to the different physical setups.

    This is simple physics, uh, ThePhy. What does that name mean, anyway?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  6. #36
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,309
    Thanks
    421
    Thanked 11,952 Times in 8,541 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147842
    Quote Originally Posted by Flipper View Post
    As I understand it, one of the great things about Einstein's relativity equations is that they allow you to make pretty accurate predictions regarding the effects of time dilation. You can calculate very accurately what effect a gravity differential between two frames of reference will have on two clocks using the equations for general relativity. You can also calculate fairly precisely what the effect of velocity will be on time dilation between two frames of reference using the equations for special relativity.
    The exact same calculations are possible by assuming that gravity is affecting the clock.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  7. #37
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147883
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePhy View Post
    Do you understand what Einstein's theories really do say?
    Is the relativity of time relevant to the relativity of speed?

    Quote Originally Posted by Flipper View Post
    Presumably you must be talking about Bizarro Einstein.

    The regular one entitled the second section of the first part of his paper on special relativity "On the Relativity of Lengths and Times".
    And?


  8. #38
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,309
    Thanks
    421
    Thanked 11,952 Times in 8,541 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147842
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    Yes, there is. It makes my statement true.
    It is an attempt to make your position logically valid. There is no need to add complication to the assumption that gravity affects the clock.

    Your thoughts and emotions are physical processes
    How heavy is your happiness? What makes a husband love his wife? What chemicals are necessary for a good idea?

    just like your heart beat, and the oscillations of cesium emissions. They are therefore subject to the same time dilating effects of gravity as the atomic clock is.
    But the observations do not support this idea.

    ThePhy has already pointed out that gravity exerts effects upon devices to different extents. One is perfectly justified in accepting the influence of gravity as being responsible for the differing observations (PREDICTION: a heartbeat and an atomic clock are not affected to the same degree by a change in gravity). No relativity necessary.

    There's nothing magical about an atomic clock that makes it particularly susceptible to the effects of relativity. You would get the same results with an extremely accurate mechanical clock.


    But there has been a lot of effort made to ensure that an atomic clock is not susceptible to the conditions. The day you find a way to hide the effects of gravity on an atomic clock you be sure and tell us, OK?

    (Often times it helps to assume at least some intelligence in your debate opponent. Obviously I don't think happiness has mass outside of the physical components from which it is constructed. Fun to mock, perhaps, but you pretty much look like an idiot.)
    So you'll have the studies done that show us where happiness comes from?

    I'd love to see your demonstration.
    A water clock and an atomic clock will not be affected to the same degree by a change in gravity.

    I agree with ThePhy.
    Well, that's interesting. That only leaves you with whom to disagree!
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  9. #39
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    960
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    180
    Stripe,

    I'm done arguing relativity with you for now. You clearly have large gaps in your understanding of the subject and I lack both the knowledge and time to identify and fill those gaps for you. Suffice it to say that there are literally volumes of free information on the internet regarding both the experimental and mathematical basis for both special and general relativity -- all of which support the position I have been arguing during the course of our conversation. Hopefully others with a more complete understanding of relativity and a little more patience with your ignorance will pick up the conversation, though I doubt they will have any more success (certainly not for their lack of effort).

    As to the physiologic basis for emotions, you will not find any experimental support for the notion that emotions, thoughts, etc. are anything more than physiologic processes. I, however, have a world of medical literature at my disposal for taking the counter position. I can think of about 30 things more interesting and fruitful than holding your hand through the literature only to end up with you throwing science out the window for whatever pet idea you've imagined up for today.
    “There's nothing I like less than bad arguments for a view that I hold dear.” - Daniel Dennett

  10. #40
    Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    18,309
    Thanks
    421
    Thanked 11,952 Times in 8,541 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147842
    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
    Stripe,

    I'm done arguing relativity with you for now.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    When the world is a monster
    Bad to swallow you whole
    Kick the clay that holds the teeth in
    Throw your trolls out the door

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  11. #41
    Old Timer
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    496
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    The two clocks are affected in the same way, by gravity

    The two clocks are not affected to the same degree, by gravity.

    An apple falling to the ground and the moon orbiting the Earth are related in a similar way. They are both gravity driven effects, but the resulting observations are different due to the different physical setups.

    This is simple physics, uh, ThePhy.
    Right, simple physics. Your choice of a falling apple and the moon orbiting the earth is instructive, since both of those are governed by exactly the same law. Put the apple at the moon’s orbital distance and speed, and it would follow the path the moon does.

    As already shown, this is exactly what is not true between a gravity clock and a cesium clock. Put in a similar situation of reduced gravity, one will give results highly discordant with the other.
    What does that name mean, anyway?
    That is exactly right.

  12. #42
    Over 750 post club Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    815
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2370
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    The exact same calculations are possible by assuming that gravity is affecting the clock.
    Um, no they aren't. Quite aside from the applied assumption that physicists are unable to calculate and therefore account for the effects of general relativity before doing the experiment, it has been also done with multiple clocks at the same altitude. If they're at the same altitude, perhaps you can explain how gravity affects them differently?

    Furthermore, relativistic time dilation has been measured in particle accelerators where very concentrated beams of particles are accelerated to very high speeds across flat trajectories and exceed their observed decay rates at rest over relativistically predictable distances. I would like to to know how you could account for that with gravity.

    Similar time dilation effects have been observed in the constant rain of muon particles caused by interactions in the upper atmosphere. Scientists have observed the decay time for such a particle at sea level. Yet detectors track a much larger number of muons than their particle decay rates should allow.

    The excess of particles is explained by relativistic time dilation - they are traveling close to the speed of light and from our perspective of their frame of reference, time passes much slower.

    So now its my turn.

    First, explain the results above in terms of gravity.

    Second, why don't you explain to us in a bit more detail how gravity works on atomic clocks and what the key differences are between your explanation and that of general and special relativity?
    Last edited by Flipper; May 12th, 2009 at 07:48 AM.

  13. #43
    Over 750 post club Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    815
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2370
    Quote Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post
    And?
    And what? You could read the paper online for yourself1 and decide whether you think Einstein was talking about the relativity of time.


    1 Hypothetically speaking, anyway. We both know you won't.

  14. #44
    Black Rifles Matter Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    16,833
    Thanks
    649
    Thanked 9,966 Times in 6,976 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147809
    Quote Originally Posted by Flipper View Post
    Well both special and general relativity require relative time.
    So they are both wrong? I always knew that Tesla and Newton have more sense.

    So, lets go back to the begining, before the Clintonesque double talk started.

    Quote Originally Posted by fool # 12
    The clock being a day ahead dosn't mean that it's in the future.
    I would agree. And that is the point of the OP. The clock is not in a different time. Or is fool wrong? He isn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jokia
    Thats like making an arbitrary distinction between length and the measurement of length. There is no quantitative difference between the measurement of time and the passage of time..
    So, which one of you is right?

    They aren't the physical manifestations of a phenomena called "time", they're just mechanical devices constructed to represent a human idea.
    That isn't what Jukia said. So you agree with fool?
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  15. #45
    Does Whatever A Light-House Can Lighthouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Anderson, IN
    Posts
    20,725
    Thanks
    1,182
    Thanked 13,384 Times in 10,249 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147883
    Quote Originally Posted by Flipper View Post
    And what? You could read the paper online for yourself1 and decide whether you think Einstein was talking about the relativity of time.


    1 Hypothetically speaking, anyway. We both know you won't.


    Not the issue at all. The issue is that it is not necessary for time to be relative in order for speed to be relative. Or for temperature to be relative. Or for anything else to be relative for that matter.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us