Quantum interaction: 10,000 times faster than light

reply to post by XPLodER


ah i completely left that part out,lol no actually I'm in the instantaneous or 10000x faster camp, because i don't think you can really measure gravity using anything in the 3 dimensions, and maybe my referring to time as the 4rth wasn't based on measurement per say but in fact based on reaction and effect, if it can happen or has happened it's happening, so regardless of lights speed gravity is there i mean gravity bends light if you can pull light into a black hole then it has to be more powerful in a sense, either because it's "faster" or because it is constant

Gravity is time really the measurement is only their because of gravity.

so ya if the sun was to vanish the effects would be "instantly" felt all the planets would spin off orbit at the same time i think, kinda like of 5 people jumped all 1 foot higher then the last, if the earth vanished they would all float away regardless of who was farther away,

Originally posted by XPLodER
faster than light communication.

I would enjoy lag free gaming very much with ppl across the wold, it will of course come at a price.

Originally posted by XPLodER
reply to post by Harte

 

The Sun is stationary relative to the Earth.

in a single frame of reference yes,
as soon as you add another frame of reference, both are moving in relation to one another,
and from a truly stationary point starting between the sun and the earth,
another reference frame that sees the other two reference frames moving away at the same speed as each other,
at the same speed.
it becomes "relative" to the reference frame you perceive your view of the system.

And?

Gravity and light both act within the same reference frame that we are in.

The statement that the "Sun has moved" so many arc seconds is simply untrue, relative to the Earth.


Harte

reply to post by Harte

And?

Gravity and light both act within the same reference frame that we are in.

The statement that the "Sun has moved" so many arc seconds is simply untrue, relative to the Earth.


Harte

@
Spectral Norm
Harte

i have decided to use GPS to make the point because i think the failure to produce acurite results in the first instance was "unexpected"
in different frames of reference (ie each individual GPS satalite) light speed is still the same speed,
but time progresses at a different rate for each satalite,
but time is circularly defined as the amount of time it takes for light to travel 299,792,458 meters
or a cycle where one of the variables defines the other, and time is variable making a meter variable.
distance for GPS is calculated by how long (time) it takes a signal to travel a known distance(how many meters),


now...... time is the passage of cycles per second,(sounds odd i know)
the cycles are electromagnetic waves (signal) of a certain duration(hertz) as compared to the passage of time(seconds)
light speed (constant) is the amount of distance (meters) travelled in a certain number of cycles(seconds)

if the passage of time becomes variable, at different locations in the satalite grid,
that also means that the definition of distance is also affected

BUT

distance cant "change" as compared to an earth frame of reference,
but CAN "change" from one satalites reference frame to another,

which leads me to the conclusion that the GR/SR explanation falls over.

if the passage of time was variable,(seconds) then so too would be distance (meters) and hertz(cycles)
this means that the variables of measure, used to measure light speed would fluctuate,
"depending" on the variance of the passage of time between the satalites.

now.... if we hold that light speed is constant no matter where and how we measure it, (vacuum, air, ect)
then it is the "measure" of time (cycles per second) over distance that is wrong, but light speed is time over distance. this causes a conceptual paradox

if we hold that light speed is variable, (don't pop) then relative to each satalite time is fixed (non variable) although passage of time is different for each satalite (each clock is slowed but any amount of remainder difference will cause the clocks to de sync over time) thus the time differential

the solution,
we are slowing down our measure of the passage of time (slower clock rates) so that the speed of light (distance over a meter) is what we "expect" (at ground level) so that light travels 299,792,458 meters in one adjusted second to get correct distances when we triangulate to find distance.

now if we kept an exact second (ground reference frame) and launched satalites without slowing their clocks down to compensate we would find that the distance travelled by light in a second would appair to change from 299,792,458 meters per second to much a much higher number of meters per second.

this would make distance calculations more difficult as compared to an earth frame of reference,
but if we speed up the "ground clock frame of reference" to match the passage of time of the satalites,
ie a ground reference second is a longer progression of time to match the satalites differential of time with earth.

we would then only need to adjust the ground clock periodically (to reset the time remainder against the GPS grid)
instead of resyncing each and every GPS time offset back to ground level reference.

the velocity of the satalites is what is said to contribute to the difference in passage of time in the GR/SR model,
because under these models C is fixed

but if you can set a clock slower than 1 second, how many decimal places do you have to go to to be perfect to to remove compounding errors? and how many clocks would have to be acurite to each other if there are 15 satalites?

this means having to allocate an offset to each and every satalite depending on their specific compounding error rate and compensating for the different passage of time over time and apply it over the grid in agreement with ground time. this is not a sane thing to do just to preserve C as fixed, so that distance can be calculated.
and is not proof of validation of GR.SR

IMHO,
if we looked at time being fixed, and the speed of light as variable, we could simply adjust the ground reference and have all the satalites agree on time without offset, and have the ground offset resync to the GPS grid
and account for the differential time over distance by knowing what the difference in passage of time is between grid time/ground time per second and sending that offset to the user devices to calculate the real time distence.

if this was effective and position was correct, then it would negate one of the tenants of GR/SR
namely that light speed is variable not time,

i accept that i am no expert,

xploder

The Sun does not move relative to the Earth in any meaningful way.

I posted in this thread to make this point. The point is made. We are not "catching up" to the Sun's movement.

Harte

Originally posted by Harte
The Sun does not move relative to the Earth in any meaningful way.

I posted in this thread to make this point. The point is made. We are not "catching up" to the Sun's movement.

Harte

not since Nicolaus Copernicus have we had the collective agreement that the earth was the centre of the universe,

if i explained it incorrectly i apologise, point made

xploder