Maths to explain time.

[nebel]

Basement of tall building (more gravity

just having fun here: gravity in basements is lower, because
(surface's max gravity falls off in both directions, inward and out) see topic, "where is more gravity, inside or out?".
if the basement is deep enough, like reaching down to the center, gravity drops to zero. time to max. If the building is massive enough, gravity will pull up even more, less basement gravity with mass all around. and,
better build your tall buildings near the Equator, no speed effects on the poles, just a nice twist., this.
thank you, Amber, we are having a great time with this. Found a piece of amber once on the beach with an enclosed insect, it's body having defied increase in entropy for the longest time.
I am voting with you, time is fundamental. flight through time without formulae.

 

[Michael 345]

How do you know what he is thinking?

??? Who

That is what I did not say.

I know you didn't say that
You said

You may be thinking about weightlessnes a condition that depends in part upon gravity.

To which I said no BUT for satellites

Weightlessness is a balance between the satellites falling to Earth (yes gravity) and the speed of the satellite pushing it over the horizon

But did you weigh either of them?

No for the simple (?) reason there is no way to place a bench with scales in any area in the space around Earth

Turtles all the way down

 

[amber]

??? Who



I know you didn't say that
You said



To which I said no BUT for satellites

Weightlessness is a balance between the satellites falling to Earth (yes gravity) and the speed of the satellite pushing it over the horizon



No for the simple (?) reason there is no way to place a bench with scales in any area in the space around Earth

Turtles all the way down

A Satellite is not weightless , it still experiences the force of gravity and follows a curvature path because of this. If it were not for the force of gravity and Newtons of weight , the Satellite would travel a straight path and travel away from the Earth. In a free fall situation a person aboard a falling craft will fall with the craft and seem weightless. I vaguely remember seeing something once, where aeroplanes go up and down to simulate the affects of weightless. A person or object could only be weightless if they were at a position in the Universe where forces did not act.

 

[Michael 345]

I have a time dilation question for you kind people.

In the Caesium atom experiment , if a person(s) could count out aloud, fast enough to count the frequency of the caesium atom, when one person is counting slower , does this not just mean they are counting slower?

If counting fast enough to capture each oscillation OK

If counting fast but only capture every 3rd 5th or what ever they are not counting caesium atom oscillations. You are counting SOME of them

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Yes they would most certainly be out of synchronisation. But would counting slow affect time?

It would ruin the song thats for sure.
If you are counting the intervals slow thats ok so long as you keep up I guess but ... I may as well type slow for slow readers..neither makes sense.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Who

The person I replied to...Nebel

No for the simple (?) reason there is no way to place a bench with scales in any area in the space around Earth

Try some digital scales by placeing them upside down on the ground that should do it.
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

gravity in basements is lower

But in fact, the Earth's core is substantially more dense than the outer layers (mantle and crust), and gravity actually increases a bit as you descend

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/18446/how-does-gravity-work-underground



Just having fun but I take time to check details. If I made a defect in my list sure point it out
But I think I got the info right

 

[Michael 345]

Try some digital scales by placeing them upside down on the ground that should do it.

Damn gazumped again

Did that

I can report Earth weighs more than 120 kg

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Damn gazumped again

Did that

I can report Earth weighs more than 120 kg

How did you see the read out?
Alex

 

[amber]

Try some digital scales by placeing them upside down on the ground that should do it.
Alex

The scales would then be measuring their own weight.

 

[Michael 345]

A Satellite is not weightless , it still experiences the force of gravity and follows a curvature path because of this

NO

It follows a curved path because its speed counter balances gravity

Satellites are able to orbit around the planet because they are locked into speeds that are fast enough to defeat the downward pull of gravity

A satellite maintains its orbit by balancing two factors: its velocity (the speed it takes to travel in a straight line) and the gravitational pull that Earth has on it. A satellite orbiting closer to the Earth requires more velocity to resist the stronger gravitational pull.

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/content/why-don’t-satellites-fall-out-sky

Weightlessness

Counterintuitively, a uniform gravitational field does not by itself cause stress or strain, and a body in free fallin such an environment experiences no g-force acceleration and feels weightless

 

[Michael 345]

How did you see the read out?
Alex

The readout stuck at max with a + sign

The scale are smart and stop and hold at the top weight registered

Was told by the salesman the feature allowed fat people who could not see their toes the ability to step off the scales and back away until they could see the readout

 

[amber]

NO

It follows a curved path because its speed counter balances gravity

Satellites are able to orbit around the planet because they are locked into speeds that are fast enough to defeat the downward pull of gravity

A satellite maintains its orbit by balancing two factors: its velocity (the speed it takes to travel in a straight line) and the gravitational pull that Earth has on it. A satellite orbiting closer to the Earth requires more velocity to resist the stronger gravitational pull.

https://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/content/why-don’t-satellites-fall-out-sky

Weightlessness

Counterintuitively, a uniform gravitational field does not by itself cause stress or strain, and a body in free fallin such an environment experiences no g-force acceleration and feels weightless

If gravity did not have a hold on the satellite it would fly off into space and not follow a curvature path. The speed stops it falling to Earth and gravity stops if flying off into space.

 

[Michael 345]

The scales would then be measuring their own weight.

Not when I step on the back of the scales

PS this is a joke sub thread running

 

[Dywyddyr]

I do not think you could have such a box, but if you had a box that could stop loss and gain of energy then I assume time would stop for the interior of the box.

Why?

But would counting slow affect time?

No.

 

[Michael 345]

If gravity did not have a hold on the satellite it would fly off into space and not follow a curvature path. The speed stops it falling to Earth and gravity stops if flying off into space.

Which is not what you first posted

A Satellite is not weightless , it still experiences the force of gravity and follows a curvature path because of this.

No mention about the speed of the satellite giving the impression only gravity counted

I'm done here

 

[amber]

Why?

Because how can a state of entropy change if it were enclosed in a special box . There would be no loss or gain so the state and energy contained should remain the same. I think it would be similar to Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier's work and that nothing is ever lost or gained, but in the scenario of a special box, it includes photon energy.

 

[amber]

Which is not what you first posted



No mention about the speed of the satellite giving the impression only gravity counted

I'm done here

You did not read it how I thought I had wrote it if you can follow that.

 

[Dywyddyr]

Because how can a state of entropy change if it were enclosed in a special box . There would be no loss or gain so the state and energy contained should remain the same. I think it would be similar to Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier's work and that nothing is ever lost or gained, but in the scenario of a special box, it includes photon energy.

Ah right.
So you have decided - arbitrarily - that a change in entropy is what "causes" time (with no evidence, no supporting argument) and therefore you're arguing the conclusion from that premise. IOW a circular argument based on an unsupported premise.

 

[amber]

Why?


No.

You say no, counting slow would not affect time, yet we say when the detector in the Caesium clock counts slow, it affects time, why?