What form, let's assume a physical body, does time have? Your opinion. - page 58
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I will tell also that this theory does not deny travel in time. however this travel can be made only in one direction in the future. if you wish read about the paradox of twins. it can be found in wikipedia right now. i checked such possibility. besides the mass is relative but it is considered in the general theory of relativity. this theory includes the special theory of relativity as a special case. there also it is explained why for example the clock located at the base of a high-rise building ticks slower than the same clock located on a roof of the skylight.
"...it also explains why, for example, a clock located at the foundation of a high-rise building ticks slower than the same clock located on the roof of the building. all these effects with relativity of time have been convincingly proven in experiments using atomic clocks measuring time with unfathomable accuracy." - Could you please clarify which is it: the foundation clock going slower, or the TIME...?
(because, for me personally, it is NOT THE SAME THING)
"...it also explains why, for example, a clock located at the foundation of a high-rise building ticks slower than the same clock located on the roof of the building. all these effects with relativity of time have been convincingly proven in experiments using atomic clocks measuring time with unfathomable accuracy." - Could you please clarify which is it: the foundation clock going slower, or the TIME...?
(because, for me personally, they are NOT THE SAME THING)
a clock is an instrument for measuring time elapsed between two events and shows how many reference intervals of time, taken as a unit of time, are contained in the time interval. for example, in the international system of units, one second equal to 9 192 631 770 periods of radiation of cesium atom is taken as a reference interval of time.in that experiment with the foundation and the roof, two synchronized atomic chronometers were used. one chronometer was placed at the foundation and the other was placed on the roof of the building. during the experiment, after some time, there was a difference in the readings of the chronometers. there were many other experiments proving the relativity of time...
it may already exist as I read this article long time ago two or more years ago. the author of the article revealed possibilities of neutrino communication in particular the huge advantage of such communication in stock trading as it would be possible to transfer information about a quote to a recipient using neutrino communication faster than the internet as neutrinos can be transferred to the recipient.
A clock is an instrument for measuring the time elapsed between two events and showing how many reference periods of time, taken as a unit of time, are contained in this time interval or interval. For example, in the international system of units one second is taken as a reference period of time equal to 9 192 631 770 periods of radiation of cesium atom.in that experiment with the foundation and the roof two synchronized atomic chronometers were used. one chronometer was placed at the foundation and the other was placed on the roof of the building. during the experiment after some time the difference in the readings of the chronometers began to be observed. there were many other experiments proving the relativity of time...
A clock is a counter of cycles of a periodic process going on insidethis very clock (!!!).
And there is nothing else this TIMER does.
How you manage to confuse WATCH with TIME - I just wonder. (sincerely... no offence please).
An observer at the foundation may claim that his time is absolute and an observer on the roof may also claim that his time is absolute and he will be as right as the observer at the foundation. therefore it makes no sense to speak of any absolute time flowing with the same speed at all points of space. it makes sense to speak only of local times or local times and the further the observers are separated the more apparent the relativity of times.
"...the more apparent the relativity of time." - the more apparent the DIFFERENCE in the RATE of processes. What does this have to do with TIME - explain,... please
"...the more apparent the relativity of time." - the more apparent is the DIFFERENCE in the SPEEDNESS of processes. What doesthis have to do with TIME - please explain...
Here is an excerpt from a textbook on the special theory of relativity for beginners. I really hope that after reading it you will agree that time is relative.
To explain the special theory of relativity, Einstein proposed his famous mental experiment.
Let's imagine an observer M0 standing beside a railroad track. At some distance along the direction of motion we have point B. At the same distance opposite to the direction we have point A. Let it appear that at A and B lightning flashes simultaneously. The observer believes that these events are simultaneous since he sees both flashes at the same instant. since he is in the centre between them and since light travels with a constant speed he concludes that lightning has struck simultaneously at these two points.
now suppose that when lightning strikes in the direction from A to B a train moves at high speed and at the instant when both flashes occur the observer inside the train, let us call him M1, is just opposite observer M0 standing beside the track. Since M1 is moving toward one flash and away from the other he will see the flash in B before he sees it in A. Knowing that he is in motion he will take into account the finiteness of the speed of light and also conclude that the flashes occurred simultaneously.
all very well. But according to two basic postulates of the special theory of relativity (confirmed by the Michelson-Morley experiment) we may as well assume that the train is at rest while the earth is running fast backwards under its wheels. With this point of view M1, the observer on the train will come to the conclusion that the flash at B really did occur before the flash at A in the sequence he observed. he knows that he is in the middle between these flashes and because he considers himself at rest he is forced to conclude that the flash he saw occurred before the one he saw the second one.
M0 the observer on earth is forced to agree. True, he sees the flashes at the same time but now he is assumed to be moving. When he takes into account the speed of light and the fact that he is moving towards flash A from flash B he will conclude that flash B must have happened earlier.
therefore we have to conclude that the question whether the flashes were simultaneous cannot be answered in any absolute way. the answer depends on the choice of reference frame. of course if two events occur at the same point we can say with absolute certainty that they are simultaneous. when two planes collide in the air there is no reference frame in which these planes would not collapse at the same time.But the greater the distance between the events, the more difficult it is to judge their simultaneity. It is not that we simply cannot know the true state of affairs. there is no real true state of affairs. there is no absolute time for the universe by which absolute simultaneity can be measured. absolute simultaneity of events occurring at different points in space is a meaningless notion.
how?
Here is an excerpt from a textbook on the special theory of relativity for beginners. I very much hope that after reading this you will still agree that time is relative.
To explain the special theory of relativity, Einstein proposed his famous mental experiment
...
How's that?
Forget this GTR nonsense.
Atomic clocks lie relatively. In the same experiment, the quartz clock shows the same result.
Well, how?
Forget this GTR nonsense.
Atomic clocks lie relatively. In the same experiment, the quartz clock shows the same result.
Well, how?
quartz clocks are not accurate enough to perform such experiments. quartz clocks are only suitable for household clocks.
well?
quartz watches have insufficient time accuracy to perform such experiments. quartz watches are only suitable for household clocks.
how's that?