Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #618809 > unrolled thread

How everyone can easily know time does not dilate.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

Contents

  How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 14:50 -0700
    Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-24 16:03 -0700
    Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-24 16:18 -0700
      Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-08-24 16:28 -0700
      Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 17:41 -0700
        Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 19:34 -0700
          Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 20:12 -0700
            Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-24 20:52 -0700
        Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Gary Harnagel <hitlong@yahoo.com> - 2023-08-24 21:18 -0700
    Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-25 09:18 -0700
      Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 09:36 -0700
    Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.c.sirius@gmail.com> - 2023-08-25 13:51 -0700
      Re: How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-26 15:38 -0700

#618809 — How everyone can easily know time does not dilate.

How everyone can easily know time does not dilate.

Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed:

Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately.

For example:

The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference. 

Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
1. Aging.
2. Metabolism.
3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena.
4. Growth.
5. Chemical processes.
6.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#618812

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:50:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> 
> Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> 
> Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> 
> For example: 
> 
> The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference. 
> 
> Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> 1. Aging. 
> 2. Metabolism. 
> 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> 4. Growth. 
> 5. Chemical processes. 
> 6.
6. Nukular processes: receding stars and galaxies should evidence a decrease in brightness in addition to the doppler decrease.  This additional decrease in brightness should be proportional to gamma and be due to the decreased rate of nukular reactions brought about by time dilation.  But the brightest quasars are also the most time dilated objects.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618813

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>
> How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> 
> Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> 
> Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of
> change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate
> changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> 
> For example: 
> 
> The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in
> the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with
> ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other
> rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change)
> changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an
> unwarranted inference. 

I presume you are referring to this:

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970

It confirms the prediction of SR.  There are many more.  Atomic clocks in motion and at
different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation.

> Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> 1. Aging. 
> 2. Metabolism. 
> 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> 4. Growth. 
> 5. Chemical processes. 
> 6.

Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured.
Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618814

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > 
> > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > 
> > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > 
> > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of 
> > change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate 
> > changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > 
> > For example: 
> > 
> > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in 
> > the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with 
> > ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other 
> > rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) 
> > changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an 
> > unwarranted inference.
> I presume you are referring to this: 
> 
> https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> 
> It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation.
> > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > 1. Aging. 
> > 2. Metabolism. 
> > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > 4. Growth. 
> > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > 6.
> Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected?
"The paper was published on 16 September in Physical Review Letters1. It is the culmination of 15 years of work by an international group of collaborators including Nobel laureate Theodor Hänsch, director of the Max Planck optics institute....

...But the research group is dismantling its longtime collaboration, as there is no larger accelerator they can go to for more powerful tests. “It's been many hours in basements, in shielded rooms with noisy equipment, and in the end you get one number,” says Gwinner. “We’ve been exchanging a bunch of nostalgic e-mails.”"

15 years to get results?  For how many years did this team get bad (null) results?  This looks to me like their funding finally ran out so they published "revenge results" which are probably no more valid nor scientific than covid vaccine results. Has anyone duplicated their "results".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618816

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > 
> > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > 
> > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > 
> > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of 
> > change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate 
> > changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > 
> > For example: 
> > 
> > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in 
> > the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with 
> > ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other 
> > rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) 
> > changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an 
> > unwarranted inference.
> I presume you are referring to this: 
> 
> https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> 
> It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation.
> > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > 1. Aging. 
> > 2. Metabolism. 
> > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > 4. Growth. 
> > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > 6.
> Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected?
No. I know of no good reason why they would be affected. I know of many reasons why they would not. All kinds of processes are already known not to change their rate in the same direction and the same amount due to fast motion. For example, light clocks oriented on their side or with the beam going in the direction of the ship's motion would keep time exactly as on Earth. It would only work like Einstein's light clock when the beam moves up and down.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618821

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:41:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > 
> > > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > > 
> > > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > > 
> > > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of 
> > > change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate 
> > > changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > > 
> > > For example: 
> > > 
> > > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in 
> > > the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with 
> > > ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other 
> > > rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) 
> > > changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an 
> > > unwarranted inference. 
> > I presume you are referring to this: 
> > 
> > https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> > 
> > It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> > different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation. 
> > > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > > 1. Aging. 
> > > 2. Metabolism. 
> > > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > > 4. Growth. 
> > > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > > 6. 
> > Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> > Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected?
> No. I know of no good reason why they would be affected. I know of many reasons why they would not. All kinds of processes are already known not to change their rate in the same direction and the same amount due to fast motion. For example, light clocks oriented on their side or with the beam going in the direction of the ship's motion would keep time exactly as on Earth. It would only work like Einstein's light clock when the beam moves up and down.

There is a practical reason to believe in Gamma math for high speed time dilation besides
fundamental physics. It is necessary for space travel. We need the slow time advantage for it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618833

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:34:04 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:41:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > > > 
> > > > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > > > 
> > > > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of 
> > > > change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate 
> > > > changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > > > 
> > > > For example: 
> > > > 
> > > > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in 
> > > > the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with 
> > > > ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other 
> > > > rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) 
> > > > changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an 
> > > > unwarranted inference. 
> > > I presume you are referring to this: 
> > > 
> > > https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> > > 
> > > It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> > > different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation. 
> > > > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > > > 1. Aging. 
> > > > 2. Metabolism. 
> > > > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > > > 4. Growth. 
> > > > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > > > 6. 
> > > Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> > > Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected? 
> > No. I know of no good reason why they would be affected. I know of many reasons why they would not. All kinds of processes are already known not to change their rate in the same direction and the same amount due to fast motion. For example, light clocks oriented on their side or with the beam going in the direction of the ship's motion would keep time exactly as on Earth. It would only work like Einstein's light clock when the beam moves up and down.
> There is a practical reason to believe in Gamma math for high speed time dilation besides 
> fundamental physics. It is necessary for space travel. We need the slow time advantage for it.
I wouldn't count on it. Maybe wormholes?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618838

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 8:12:17 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 7:34:04 PM UTC-7, mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: 
> > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 5:41:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote: 
> > > > On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 3:50:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of 
> > > > > change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate 
> > > > > changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > For example: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in 
> > > > > the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with 
> > > > > ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other 
> > > > > rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) 
> > > > > changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an 
> > > > > unwarranted inference. 
> > > > I presume you are referring to this: 
> > > > 
> > > > https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> > > > 
> > > > It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> > > > different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation. 
> > > > > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > > > > 1. Aging. 
> > > > > 2. Metabolism. 
> > > > > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > > > > 4. Growth. 
> > > > > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > > > > 6. 
> > > > Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> > > > Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected? 
> > > No. I know of no good reason why they would be affected. I know of many reasons why they would not. All kinds of processes are already known not to change their rate in the same direction and the same amount due to fast motion. For example, light clocks oriented on their side or with the beam going in the direction of the ship's motion would keep time exactly as on Earth. It would only work like Einstein's light clock when the beam moves up and down. 
> > There is a practical reason to believe in Gamma math for high speed time dilation besides 
> > fundamental physics. It is necessary for space travel. We need the slow time advantage for it.
> I wouldn't count on it. Maybe wormholes?

Wormholes are BHs that lead to white holes...
white holes are hypernovas explosions that have 
never been observed. There is no evidence
for your three holes... Space doesn't fold.
But Gamma is for time slow.
Slow down in space and rate speeds back up.
It would help space travel.
Space contraction doesn't belong but
time does for a good reason...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618840

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 6:41:53 PM UTC-6, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
>
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 4:19:00 PM UTC-7, Gary Harnagel wrote:
> >
> > https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2014.15970 
> > 
> > It confirms the prediction of SR. There are many more. Atomic clocks in motion and at 
> > different gravitational potentials have been shown to undergo time dilation. 
> >
> > > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > > 1. Aging. 
> > > 2. Metabolism. 
> > > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > > 4. Growth. 
> > > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > > 6. 
> >
> > Time dilation in most such processes are predicted to be too slow to be measured. 
> > Do you have a valid theory that would explain why they wouldn't be affected?
>
> No. I know of no good reason why they would be affected. I know of many reasons why
> they would not. All kinds of processes are already known not to change their rate in the
> same direction and the same amount due to fast motion.

All of your "reasons" have no bearing on the question of time dilation as the effects of TD
are too small to measure under normal conditions.  It's easy to calculate TD effects in
each of those cases.  Are you too math-challenged to do it, or are you just being a dishonest
Wozzy?

> For example, light clocks oriented on their side or with the beam going in the direction of
> the ship's motion would keep time exactly as on Earth. It would only work like Einstein's
> light clock when the beam moves up and down.

It becomes clear that you don't even know what you're talking about.  The effect is only
apparent from OUTSIDE the ship (from a "stationary" position) in either case.  And it IS
apparent for the case with the beam along the ship's motion.

It is a simple matter to calculate based on the hypothesis that the speed of the beam is
c for observers on the ship as well of for those stationary.  And all evidence confirms that
the speed of light is the same for both.

And it's not so difficult to measure the wavelength SHIFT of em from a moving source
versus a stationary one, which refutes your vacuous assertion the the speed of light is
variable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618863

Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> 
> How everyone can easily know time does not dilate.
> 
> Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed:
> 
> Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately.
> 
> For example:
> 
> The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference.
> 
> Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include:
> 1. Aging.
> 2. Metabolism.
> 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena.
> 4. Growth.
> 5. Chemical processes.
> 6.


What you mean is that time dilation is not a constant. But even Albert
Einstein knows that.

That means you perform a time dilation experiment.

if there are no results
try another day.
if there are no results
try another day.
if there are no results
try another day.
if you get results..
then you have time dilation.

if there are no results
try another day again.

if there are no results
try at another time again.

if there are no results
try at another time again.

if there are no results
try at another time again.

if you get results..
then you have time dilation.


So, the question is...When does time dilate?

Mondays,
Tuesdays
Fridays
morning
afternoon
monthly
every half hour?

When does time dilate?


Time dilation is not a constant. But even Albert Einstein knows that.




-- 
The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable,
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
and challenge the unchallengeable.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618864

On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 9:18:42 AM UTC-7, The Starmaker wrote:
> Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > 
> > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > 
> > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > 
> > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > 
> > For example: 
> > 
> > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference. 
> > 
> > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > 1. Aging. 
> > 2. Metabolism. 
> > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > 4. Growth. 
> > 5. Chemical processes. 
> > 6.
> What you mean is that time dilation is not a constant. But even Albert 
> Einstein knows that. 
> 
> That means you perform a time dilation experiment. 
> 
> if there are no results 
> try another day. 
> if there are no results 
> try another day. 
> if there are no results 
> try another day. 
> if you get results.. 
> then you have time dilation. 
> 
> if there are no results 
> try another day again. 
> 
> if there are no results 
> try at another time again. 
> 
> if there are no results 
> try at another time again. 
> 
> if there are no results 
> try at another time again. 
> 
> if you get results.. 
> then you have time dilation. 
> 
> 
> So, the question is...When does time dilate? 
> 
> Mondays, 
> Tuesdays 
> Fridays 
> morning 
> afternoon 
> monthly 
> every half hour? 
> 
> When does time dilate? 
> 
> 
> Time dilation is not a constant. But even Albert Einstein knows that. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Starmaker -- To question the unquestionable, ask the unaskable, 
> to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, 
> and challenge the unchallengeable.

If motion varies so does atomic time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618885

On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:50:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> 
> Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> 
> Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> 
> For example: 
> 
> The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference. 
> 
> Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> 1. Aging. 
> 2. Metabolism. 
> 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> 4. Growth. 
> 5. Chemical processes. 
> 6. GRAVITY, e.g. pendulums oscillate faster in more gravity. [For pathetic attempt by relativists to rebut this please see: "Einstein versus the simple pendulum formula: does gravity slow all clocks?"]

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#618988

On Friday, August 25, 2023 at 1:51:27 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote:
> On Thursday, August 24, 2023 at 2:50:53 PM UTC-7, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: 
> > How everyone can easily know time does not dilate. 
> > 
> > Re: Case of Time dilation caused by high speed: 
> > 
> > Because time involves all rates of change, for the rate of time to change, all rates of change would have to change in unison. Therefore, experiments proving one rate changes with high speed do not prove all or any other rates change commensurately. 
> > 
> > For example: 
> > 
> > The particle accelerator experiment with Lithium ions merely measured the change in the number of transitions of electrons at one-third the speed of light compared with ions not moving. It only proved those transitions slowed. It did not prove that any other rate of change slows with speed, much less that time itself (all rates of change) changes with speed. To conclude that it proves time changes with speed is an unwarranted inference. 
> > 
> > Rates of change that have not been proven to slow at high speeds include: 
> > 1. Aging. 
> > 2. Metabolism. 
> > 3. Non-electromagnetic phenomena. 
> > 4. Growth. 
> > 5. Chemical processes.
> > 6. GRAVITY, e.g. pendulums oscillate faster in more gravity. [For pathetic attempt by relativists to rebut this please see: "Einstein versus the simple pendulum formula: does gravity slow all clocks?"]

The Grandfather clock in higher gravity counts time faster...?
Who can disprove time's dynamic rates?

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web