Gravity slows down time.

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by chinglu, Aug 18, 2013.

  1. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    Chinglu, I note you continue to ignore this ..

    Please define what a clock is/does

    It has been put to you many times, initially by RW, and a reply should be simple. Not only that, but absolutely necessary.

    But so far, you ignore this. This is VERY telling.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    I posted this list a week or so ago, but with the continuing nonsense from chinglu and others not being able to face the reality of what's happening here, I think its time to do it again........

    Tests of SR/GR:

    Cryogenic Optical Resonators : http://www.exphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/...prl78_4741.pdf
    Non-Stationary Optical Cavities : http://www.exphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/...xiv0510169.pdf
    Lorentz Invariance : Special relativity passes key test - physicsworld.com
    Time Dilation in Satellites : http://www.quantum.physik.uni-mainz...._861(2007).pdf
    Length Contraction in Heavy Ion Colliders : http://home.broadpark.no/~ccsernai/Csernai-textbook.pdf
    Relativistic Lorentz Force Tests : The effects of the Aharonov-Bohm type as tests of the relativistic interpretation of electrodynamics
    Anisotropy of Inertial Mass Tests : An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
    Time dilation in mu-mesons : Measurement of the Relativistic Time Dilation Using
    Length contraction in free electron Lasers : What is SR, how is it generated and what are its properties?
    Length contraction in Penrose-Terrell Rotations : Can You See the Lorentz-Fitzgerald Contraction?
    Penning Traps : Antimatter tests of Lorentz violation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Tests of SR/GR:

    Universality of Gravitational Red Shift : http://www.exphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/...2-PRL10401.pdf
    Gravitational Potential at Short Distances : http://www.exphy.uni-duesseldorf.de/...2-PRL10401.pdf
    Tests of Lorentz Invariance : http://relativity.livingreviews.org/...005-5Color.pdf
    Gravitational Red Shift / Pound-Rebka : http://luth2.obspm.fr/IHP06/lectures...avRedshift.pdf
    Light Deflection within the Solar System/Shapiro Delay : [astro-ph/0302294] The Measurement of the Light Deflection from Jupiter: Experimental Results
    Lunar Laser Ranging to test Nordvedt Effect : Phys. Rev. 169, 1017 (1968): Equivalence Principle for Massive Bodies. II. Theory
    Hafele-Keating Experiment for Time Dilation : Around-the-World Atomic Clocks: Predicted Relativistic Time Gains
    Thirring-Lense Effect : http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture03007.html
    Geodetic Effect : Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 221101 (2011): Gravity Probe B: Final Results of a Space Experiment to Test General Relativity
    Orbital Decay through Gravitational Waves in Binary Pulsar System PSR J-0737-3039 : Tests of General Relativity from Timing the Double Pulsar


    Needless to say all of these tests confirmed the predictions of the theory of relativity to varying, but very high degrees. No violations of any laws of relativity have ever been observed in empirical experiments and continue on
    Also, worth noting that QED [Quantum ElectroDynamics] , are in perfect alignment with QED.

    Modern day Electronic technology would be impossible to operate without SR/GR.

    SR/GR are the basis and main pillars of our modern world and are indispensable.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    Some of the links above are not working [might be old addresses] but confirmation of the facts are on the net if anyone has any doubt.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    Chinglu, I note you continue to ignore this ..

    Please define what a clock is/does
     
  8. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,713
    Perhaps chinglu can also tell everyone if time existed before the solar system and the "master clock", aka planet earth orbiting the sun, did?
     
  9. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    Indeed. You see, so far, he has not been able to meet the most basic, fundemental issues. Why bother with more complex ones ?

    When something is tainted at the source .. it is tainted.
     
  10. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Can you explain exactly why my definitions are invalid. Let's start by you and your dude defining time.

    I have made it clear. We measure time according to some predictable event in the universe like say the rotation of the earth. GPS within epsilon adheres to this standard.

    Now, it is on you folks to define time that is not connected to the earth's rotation.

    If you use an arbitrary frequency, I will point out that experiments prove that a light pulse coming out of a gravity well becomes more blue. Therefore, gravity, for some reason, changes the frequency of any given signal. So, an frequency measuring device will fail as an acceptable time device.

    Yet, all the while the signal changed frequency, the rotation of the earth remained constant.
     
  11. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Well, perhaps you can explain your clock in an accelerating universe that claims the universe is an absolute x billions years old. What clock did these astronomers use? Now, how did they relate this clock to the earth's revolution around the sun?

    Make an effort to answer.
     
  12. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    You see, in order for you to claim that my definitions do not respond to fundamental issues, you must have some definition that satisfies your yet undisclosed "fundamental issues".

    Let's assume this "fundamental issue" regarding clocks that you all claims exists.

    Then state the age of the universe in terms of this "standard".
     
  13. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Hey I heard MMX proves SR. Yet, I posted a paper from IOP that shows MMX cannot detect sagac because of the round trip light travel. Since MMX cannot refute GPS, then MMX is not null.

    Hence, since MMX is false, then SR is false. This is by logical contraposition. If SR is true, then MMX is true. So, if MMX is false, then SR is false.

    Also, GPS claims to prove SR's time dilation since the satellite is moving relative to the earth. Yet, the earth is moving relative to the satellite. SR therefore claims the earth clock should be time dilated, yet that is false, so, SR is wrong.
     
  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534


    Your definitions are invalid because they do not match observations and/or experiments.
    Again, the time of a clock is just synchronised to the earth's rotation.....that synchronisation can be altered by speed and gravitational potential [observed everyday since 1905]
    IT IS NOT HARDWIRED TO THE EARTH's ROTATION IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM

    AND AS USUAL YOU HAVE EVERYTHING ARSE UP...LIGHT COMING OUT OF A GRAVITY WELL IS RED SHIFTED.

    That doesn't mean the clock is wrong...as it has been done a thousand times with exactly the same result......It means that TIME DILATION has taken place, BOTH MECHANICALLY AND BIOLOGICALLY.

    YOU HAVE JUST PROVED YOURSELF WRONG AGAIN.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    The calculated age of the Universe has nothing to do with any clock.
    It's based on observations and data obtained by WMAP and the CMBR.
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534


    Well why don't you go make a name for yourself. Get it peer reviewed....Show us all we and the world are wrong and have been since 1905.
    You may win the Noble prize for Physics.

    Oh, and of course WHY ARE YOU IN PSEUDOSCIENCE??
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534


    YEAH YEAH SURE....blah blah blah blah...[1[ I don't believe you posted anything, [2] Whatever you post, it would not be from a reputable site, [3] If you are correct get it peer reviewed, [4] They laughed at Galileo [you are not Galileo, but they also laughed at Bozo the Clown, [5] You are in pseudoscience

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    .
     
  18. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    Let's see. I can't find any science on your part that refutes my post.

    You are a troll.
     
  19. Lakon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,117
    This si the fundemental issue I refer to; you have been asked a simple question long ago by RW so that the discussion can proceed on that basis, and you haven't provided a simple straight forward answer. That simple question is;

    Please define what a clock is / does.

    I'm not interested in all the other noise. Can you provide a simple response to this, yes or no ?
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Your posts [all of them] have been refuted over 42 pages now especially at post 822...Which makes you a liar and a fraud.

    Again.....
    [1] If you are correct, show me some observational and/or experimental evidence.
    [2] Get your stuff peer reviewed..
    [3] Why are you in pseudoscience?

    When you can do all the above, I'll nominate you for the Nobel, OK????

    Now stop embarrassing yourself and answer the questions, show some observational and/or experimental evidence, and follow the scientific method....Or forever languish in pseudoscience wallowing in your dung.
     
  21. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    I do not know how many times I can say this.

    Time for humans is defined according to the earth's rotations.
     
  22. chinglu Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,637
    There is just one problem.

    No one has refuted me in this thread.

    if you think that is true, then please be specific and post your proof.
     
  23. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    The question asked the definition of "clock", not "time". And that it isn't even the definition of "time".

    I must agree with the others here. Your unwillingness or inability to answer a simple question about the definition of "clock" makes it clear this thread really can go no further. There is no hope of you grasping/acknowledging the functioning of Relativity if you won't even display elementary-school knowledge of timekeeping.

    And no, there is nothing useful to be gained by having us spoonfeed you elementary school knowledge. Forcing us to drag you to it only serves to display the lengths you will go to to avoid knowledge.

    So if you want to change that perception and make progress in this thread, the best way to start would be to post a googled/wiki/dictionary definition of the word "clock". For example, the first sentence of the wiki article.

    P.S. Others may fall for your attempts to deflect/reboot/change the subject, but I will not. I recognize it is a game and will not play. You can't discuss how old a person is if you don't even know what time/a clock is!
     

Share This Page