It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
The facor you leave out is the distance away from the Earht gravity well. SplitInfinity
It's already been tested, and as predicted by relativity, there's no effect on the clock. Source:
Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
Ummmm What do you think would be the result if you place an atomic clock inside a centrifuge? Would the Gs generated by the centrifuge cause the atomic clock to slow as mass does?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
That doesn't mean I have anything personally to do with an elephant, just like a g-force isn't necessarily a gravitational force; if g's are from centripetal acceleration in a centrifuge, it's not a gravitational force, so no time dilation is predicted.
Originally posted by consciousgod
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
That doesn't mean I have anything personally to do with an elephant, just like a g-force isn't necessarily a gravitational force; if g's are from centripetal acceleration in a centrifuge, it's not a gravitational force, so no time dilation is predicted.
If this were true, special relatively would be false. The acceleration of a space ship would be artificial like the centrifuge and dilation would not happen.
This is completely correct. Split Infinity
Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
There is no "minimum distance" to or from a gravity well that time dilation occurs. Theoretically, a clock on the ground will run more slowly than a clock 10 feet in the air. If that clock was in a plane at 35,000 feet, the difference would be greater. Put that clock at 200 miles above the ground (such as on the space station), then it would be greater still. However, there WILL still be a difference in relative time for two clocks with only a 10 foot difference in distance from the center of the gravity well.
There is no point that gravity "lets go" of a body. The effective force of a gravity well acting on another object will only slowly and incrementally decrease with distance away from the center of that gravity well.
Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
PS PS
Split, do you think time speeds could be layered in the topography of the fabric of space like winds aloft? Wind speed increasing as elevation increases. Mind you this is simply an analogy.
How do you know Michio? In the circles I am sometimes forced to run around with because of my job in Entertainment...I have found that Michio is not a very good drinker! LOL! I told him that he should get of his ass and go back to work and stop with the Celebrity Status party scene as he cannot drink shots! LOL!
Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by SplitInfinity
I keep forgetting that we are on the same page with predetermination. That we both fully understand everything that is and will occur in our universe is linked in a spiderweb of sequences back to the singularity.
We part company on the remote viewing however. Not that I don't think it will possible at a future date when science catches up to how to map out future events. I believe at this point that so call E-sensory perceptions are a result of, if I may use this cliche, a broken clock is correct twice a day. Say what time is is without looking at a clock and you will eventually get time time right eventually. I also understand how cold reading works. It's made me a real skeptic of this subject.
With that said, I'll make clear I do believe now in the multiverse theory of Dr. Kaku. I understand that all things that happen are a result of how much total energy is contained in the Universe, and other universe would have less or more total energy creating alternate possibilities. Even free choice, or freewill, whatever one wants to call it, is an illusion. All thoughts are connected to the time we are born to the time we die. Our environments we live in throughout our lives are all created out of the sequence of events linked all the way back to the singularity.
At any rate I understand what you mean now. :-)
I mostly believe in things we have evidence for.
Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by Arbitrageur
I'm just curious, do you believe in gravitons?
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
I mostly believe in things we have evidence for.
Originally posted by LilDudeissocool
reply to post by Arbitrageur
I'm just curious, do you believe in gravitons?
There are a few things I believe where evidence isn't too strong, but in the case of graviton existence, I profess to be a graviton agnostic. I'm perfectly fine with them existing, or not existing, just show me the evidence.
Regarding claims of multiverses, I'm not agnostic...it sounds like a crock of BS to me and I don't believe in multiverse theory (additional dimensions in our own universe, maybe). Though I admit the multiverse theme makes for good science fiction, and I was a fan of the "Sliders" TV show which was based on multiverse theory, that was entertainment, not science.
Originally posted by Scramjet76
reply to post by LilDudeissocool
There's no such thing as the Big Bang. I wager that scientists have misinterpreted their inflation theory and some of them are now catching on and considering more of a "Big Splat." See M-Theory.