Re: Gravitational Time Porat

From: Y.Porat (maporat_at_012.net.il)
Date: 11/23/04 

Date: 23 Nov 2004 00:29:04 -0800

"Garbi" <jeremyh@bdssc.com> wrote in message news:<41a26807$1_2@127.0.0.1>...
> You're right and a little wrong. Time should and does slow down in the
> presence of gravity - correct. You don't need to do the math, Einstein
> already did. But even an object on/at the surface of another body is
> experiencing the acceleration of gravity - even if it is not actually moving
> toward the gravitational center due to an impedence (like the ground). But
> that acceleration equates to velocity in a relative sense. So even though
> the object is not MOVING (perceivably), it still has a relative velocity.
> And, as should be obvious, the closer to the center of mass the object is,
> the greater its relative velocity. At least, that is the stance of
> Einstein's G.R.
>
> The atomic clock example is a good one. If you take 2 atomic clocks, one at
> the top of Mt. St. Helens, and the other at sea level and synchronize them,
> the clock at sea level appears to run slower. In fact, it DOES run slower.
> That's relativity.
>
> (BTW: There is a deeper reason for WHY gravity affects "time" this way - not
> explained by relativity.)
----------------------

This is my respond to Michel and Garbi:

1 thank you Michel for devoting me a thread
i never thought i deserve it .....

so thank you Michell (sp?) for the honour (that may be a do not deserve?)

now since it is a new thread here is my time definition again:
(it is of course a postulate that one can take it or leave it)

'Time is nothing but -
comparison of motions (or translation) of a tested body *compared*
to a chsen motion (or translation) reference.
time is not an independant physical entity as say mass or distance.

ie we take mass and distance as constant and on that we can define time

2 another expalnation:
you cant indentify time without some motion or translation
and not the least - you cant measure it without the above translation

even if you clock is an atomic one
if the electrons there will stop moving, it whan't work.

3 a thought experiment that i did while i was about 16 years age:
supose that all movement in our universe will stop symoltanously.
(while i say all i mean *all*
it will go on say for a 'billion years*
and then simoltanously (?) will stary at the point of motion it was
at the stop point
now thw question is :
will you or anyone detect that elaps of a billion years??

imho there are no more questions ........
and the answer is simple and clear..... 

----
now if you take movement in gravity (which is just one among many cases)
if gravity *affects* *in any way* the *movement* of the body
in its field
why wonder that it is affaecting 'its time' as well ??
TIA
Y.Porat
----------------
> 
> 
> Jeremy
> 
> "Mitchell" <macromitch@internetCDS.com> wrote in message 
> news:9c3da975.0411220017.5af9b58e@posting.google.com...
> > 'Time slows down in gravity regardless of anything moving'
> > You may not believe me. That is fine.
> > But GPS proves it.
> >
> > Atomic clocks run slower closer to the earth Porat.
> > And they're not moving in the gravitational field.
> > What more do you want?
> > The slowdown of time must be extended from motion to
> > include gravity. That is why you have it wrong.
> >
> > If gravity is space moving then you would have to be right
> > about the whole thing.
> > Mitch Raemsch          -- Light Falls -- 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
> ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Floaters and gravity
    ... The problem with that is that any floaters that appear to be moving down are actually moving up ... motions, the terminal motion of my floaters is downward (in the ... direction of gravity, ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • Re: Gravitational Time Porat
    ... > 'Time slows down in gravity regardless of anything moving' ... > Atomic clocks run slower closer to the earth Porat. ... > And they're not moving in the gravitational field. ... Why should time slow down in the presence of a gravitational field? ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Amplitude of Gravity, Instantaneous or Retarded
    ... it's only approximately true that gravity points ... towards the instantaneous position of a quickly moving source. ... It's a lot easier to talk about the electric field of a rapidly moving ...
    (sci.physics.research)
  • Re: Gravitational Time Porat
    ... presence of gravity - correct. ... the object is not MOVING, it still has a relative velocity. ... That's relativity. ... > Atomic clocks run slower closer to the earth Porat. ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Epiphone FT-140, i LOVE my WIFE! (she bought me...!)
    ... Don't be too hard on him, a decent newsreader can auto snip content! ... I used to use Gravity and that was excellent at it, since moving to ...
    (uk.music.guitar)