Re: Time Dilation


"Christophe de Dinechin" <christophe@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1163259808.137690.308150@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| imi wrote:
| > Is Time Dilation scientifically proved?
| >
| > I mean is it experimented scientifically?
| >
| > Please let me know.
|
| Yes, it is proven.


Nonsense!



If you own a GPS, its accuracy depends on the fact
| that the theory of relativity was taken into account.

More nonsense.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/GPS.htm


See
| http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html.

Abject nonsense. The punk that wrote that page is never going to be
an engineer.


|
| I believe that underlying your question, there is: I just can't grok
| it.

I grok it very well.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Rocket/Rocket.htm
It's you that doesn't grok it.



| So let me try to explain it intuitively, let me know how it works
| for you.
|
| Consider someone in a car, who lets droplets of paint on the floor
| precisely every meter. You know that if you put a 1-meter rod parallel
| to the road, you will see that it aligns with the droplets.
|
| Now, let's assume that there is another road, at an angle of 60 degrees
| with the first one. Now, two cars leave droplets, separated by one
| meter, each parallel to its own road. Now, walk along two droplets on
| one road, and you will see that relative to the other road, you
| advanced only one droplet. If you know enough math, you will convince
| yourself that this is because cos(60deg) = 0.5. So the droplets on the
| other road appear "contacted" by a factor 0.5, which is the cosine of
| the angle between the two roads...

Yeah, so?


| Here is the kicker. Relativity is exactly the same thing, except that
| the road is time,

Then go downhill instead of uphill and grok yourself a time machine.
Sci-fi:

'Really, this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some people
who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It is only
another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between Time and any
of the three dimensions of Space except that our consciousness moves along
with it.' -- Herbert George Wells - "The Time Machine" - 1895.

"The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources." --Einstein

More sci-fi:

http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/

Kicker kicked.


| and for mathematical reasons that I will explain
| below, the cosine, instead of being smaller than 1, is always greater
| than 1.

HAHAHAHA!



| So instead of seeing the droplets on the other road closer,
| they appear more distant. Einstein called this cos greater than 1
| "gamma".

No he didn't, he called it "beta".


|
| When you move in space relative to me, this means the path you follow
| gets slanted relative to mine

HAHAHA!


(since your x(t) changes over time,
| something like x(t) = v * t for a constant speed v).

Well well.... v = dx/dt, but c = 0/0.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/DominoEffect.GIF



| So the path in
| space-time

Space-time huh?
How about time-mass and mass-space? Do they have slants too?



| becomes slanted, and there is a dilatation between your time
| line and mine.

Oh really...


| If, to replace droplets, you emit a pulse of light every
| second, I will see them separated by more than a second. But just like
| for the roads, it's completely symmetrical. That is, if I emit a pulse
| of light every second, you will _also_ see them separated by more than
| 1 second.

Nope. Slope is y/x. Time doesn't have three axes.
It could, of course. There are six axes in spacetime.

x² + y² + z² = c²t² Einstein
xi² + eta² + zeta² = c²tau² Einstein

tau_x = (t-vx/c²)/sqrt(1-v²/c²) Einstein
tau_y = (t-uy/c²)/sqrt(1-u²/c²) Androcles
tau_z = (t-wz/c²)/sqrt(1-w²/c²) Androcles
xi = (x-vt)/sqrt(1-v²/c²) Einstein
eta = (y-ut)/sqrt(1-u²/c²) Androcles
zeta= (z-wt)/sqrt(1-w²/c²) Androcles



| Here is the twins paradox explained in that context. If you go from one
| point to another, you know that the shortest path is a straight line.


Here is the twin paradox exposed:
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Baez/TwinParadox.htm


| If another road is not straight, it will be longer by something that is
| the integral of 1/cos(theta) where theta is the angle between the
| non-straight and the straight road. So in space, that integral is
| always greater than 1. But with time, it is always smaller than 1. In
| time, the longest path between two points is the straight line. So if
| one twin stays on earth, following a relatively straight line in
| space-time, and another starts zig-zagging in space-time, the traveling
| twin will travel a smaller distance along time. He will age less.
|
| Now for the math justifying it. If the path of the other road is
| specified by coordinates x(s), y(s), where s is some parameter. Let's
| chose a displacement primarily along y, for reasons that will appear
| shortly. WIth a little drawing and a little math, you can probably
| convince yourself that the cosine of the angle between the two is dy/ds
| / sqrt((dx/ds)^2+(dy/ds)^2). If you divide numerator and denominator by
| dy/ds, you get 1/sqrt(1+(dx/dy)^2). Now, the magic trick is to replace
| dy with i * c * dt, where i^2=-1, and you obtain the gamma of Lorentz's
| transform. The sine is i * beta * gamma in Einstein's notation.
|
| Now, the good question is: why would the time be "imaginary" like that.

The good answer is: It isn't.

| Mathematicians prefer

Name one.

| to say that space time has a signature + + + -,
| meaning that the distance is computed by ds^2=dx^2+dy^2+dz^2-(c.dt)^2,
| instead of with only additions as for space alone. It's just experiment
| that forces us to use this kind of distance. I think I have an answer
| for why it is so, but it's for another thread :-)
|
|
| Hope this helps

As much help as a tit on a bull with you providing the ***.
Mathematicians wouldn't buy your crap in a million dilated years.
Only fuckwit relativists would make such a claim.
Androcles.


.

Quantcast