Types Of Clocks Which Have Actually Measured Time Dilation

[AmishFighterPilot]

You have still never answered the question of why you're trolling a thread in an "alternative theories" forum. You could be the greatest expert ever, but in general your responses have been snarky and utterly useless. It doesn't matter what your opinion of this discussion is when you don't present any rational arguments. You've clearly established you're the territorial pissing type, but I've tried repeatedly to convince you to spray somewhere else.

[mrg]

Yeah, yeah, "and yo' momma".

 

Only fair, after all.  If you're not embarrassed talking silly baloney, I'm not in the least embarrassed to call you on it.

Edited May 28, 2017 by mrg

[AmishFighterPilot]

So you admit you're trolling

[exchemist]

This is inane.

Actually I don't think so. It is really a question about the nature of time, arguably closer to philosophy than to physics, but not ipso facto foolish in my view.

[exchemist]

So essentially, pure, stable substances don't experience time unless they interact with something that does.

 

Lets say you have pure gold atoms in a vacuum at absolute zero, inside a shielded satellite moving in space relative to Earth at extreme speeds, high acceleration. Does that gold experience "time"? If so, can they be said to experience dilation of time?

Well the idea of inanimate substances "experiencing" time is a bit problematic, but I sort of see what you mean. I think JM Jones, in post 87, has made the best contribution on the nature of time on this thread so far.

 

Time is the yardstick we use to measure CHANGE. If you have a hypothetical situation in which there is no change, then you have nothing that can serve as a CLOCK and no observation to which time can be applied.

 

If however any PROCESS or EVENT were to occur, that would involve a change of some sort. And then time dilation would apply to it of course.

[mrg]

So you admit you're trolling

 

I admit you're being silly.

 

As far as me ignoring you ... I could do that, and it would probably be for the best for my purposes.   However, you could just ignore me, too, and continue to rattle on.  It's not like I'm stopping you, or trying to for that matter.

Edited May 28, 2017 by mrg

[mrg]

 arguably closer to philosophy than to physics ...

 

It is entirely philosophy, and really inane philosophy at that.

 

Time, incidentally, comes to a stop for photons, as it has to for all speed-of-light particles.   The ONLY consequence of this insight is that photons CANNOT change through their existence, from creation to absorption.   It was the fact that neutrinos could change that demonstrated they were not speed-of-light particles.

[OceanBreeze]

Well the idea of inanimate substances "experiencing" time is a bit problematic, but I sort of see what you mean. I think JM Jones, in post 87, has made the best contribution on the nature of time on this thread so far.

 

Time is the yardstick we use to measure CHANGE. If you have a hypothetical situation in which there is no change, then you have nothing that can serve as a CLOCK and no observation to which time can be applied.

 

If however any PROCESS or EVENT were to occur, that would involve a change of some sort. And then time dilation would apply to it of course.

 

This is interesting. I think the correct word is inert, rather than inanimate, but I agree with the remainder of your post.

Gold is one of the most inert and therefore least reactive of metals (after platinum) the usage of the words “most” and “least” implies that it is not entirely inert. There are electrons in orbit that have orbital velocities that are time-dependent, and those orbital velocities must be subject to relativistic effects, including time dilation.

 

Whether or not these relativistic effects leave any lasting changes on the intrinsic properties of gold that we can detect and measure, is a question that perhaps our present-day physics cannot answer, but I would not relegate it to the field of philosophy. In fact, I believe it is due to relativistic effects on the electron orbitals that plays a role in determining the inertness of gold, although at the moment I cannot find a source to back me up on that score. But it is mostly a question of physics, in my view and not one of philosophy.

[OceanBreeze]

It is entirely philosophy, and really inane philosophy at that.

 

Time, incidentally, comes to a stop for photons, as it has to for all speed-of-light particles.   The ONLY consequence of this insight is that photons CANNOT change through their existence, from creation to absorption.   It was the fact that neutrinos could change that demonstrated they were not speed-of-light particles.

 

The question, as posed, has nothing to do with photons or neutrinos, so your post is inane.

[mrg]

The question, as posed, has nothing to do with photons or neutrinos, so your post is inane.

 

The question, as posed, suggests that time will stop in an inanimate object under yada yada conditions.  The only thing it stops in is a speed-of-light particle like a photon, and the only consequence of that fact is that a photon will never change.  This is an established fact, and matters not at all whether you like the facts or not.

Edited May 28, 2017 by mrg

[OceanBreeze]

The question, as posed, suggests that time will stop in an inanimate object under yada yada conditions.  The only thing it stops in is a speed-of-light particle like a photon, and the only consequence of that fact is that a photon will never change.  This is an established fact, and matters not at all whether you like the facts or not.

 

 

I see you have a problem with reading and comprehension.

 

Here is the question that in fact was posed:

 

"Lets say you have pure gold atoms in a vacuum at absolute zero, inside a shielded satellite moving in space relative to Earth at extreme speeds, high acceleration. Does that gold experience "time"? If so, can they be said to experience dilation of time?"

 

 The question asks if the gold will undergo time dilation not time stopping.

 

And, of course it will, as the electron orbitals will be slowed and contracted. This is hardly an inane question, as you claim, because the inertness of gold is due, at least in part, to relativistic effects on the electron orbitals.

 

 I suggest If you cannot even read and understand what is being asked, you might consider not replying, since most of your replies are nothing but snark anyway.

[OceanBreeze]

Yeah, yeah, "and yo' momma".

 

 

 

And, you should probably do something about that momma fixation you have.

[mrg]

 The question asks if the gold will undergo time dilation not time stopping.

 

 

It asks both questions:

 

Does that gold experience "time"? If so, can they be said to experience dilation of time?"

 

Answers:  YES; and NO.   The only thing that does not experience time is a speed-of-light particle like a photon.  Time dilation will only occur as a consequence of relative motion (ignoring gravity for convenience).  End of story.

Edited May 28, 2017 by mrg

[OceanBreeze]

 In fact, I believe it is due to relativistic effects on the electron orbitals that plays a role in determining the inertness of gold, although at the moment I cannot find a source to back me up on that score. But it is mostly a question of physics, in my view and not one of philosophy.

 

I haven't found anything yet about relativistic effects as it applies to inertness of gold, but I did dig out

something I vaguely remembered about the color of gold:

 

 The human eye sees electromagnetic radiation with a wavelength near 600 nm as yellow. As is clear from its reflectance spectrum, gold appears yellow because it absorbs blue light more than it absorbs other visible wavelengths of light; the reflected light (which is what we see) is therefore lacking in blue compared to the incident light. Since yellow is complementary to blue, this makes a piece of gold appear yellow (under white light) to human eyes.

The electronic transition responsible for this absorption is a transition from the 5d to the 6s level. An analogous transition occurs in Ag but the relativistic effects are lower in Ag so while the 4d experiences some expansion and the 5s some contraction, the 4d-5s distance in Ag is still much greater than the 5d-6s distance in Au because the relativistic effects in Ag are smaller than those in Au. Thus, non-relativistic gold would be white. The relativistic effects are raising the 5d orbital and lowering the 6s orbital.^[11]

[exchemist]

It is entirely philosophy, and really inane philosophy at that.

 

Time, incidentally, comes to a stop for photons, as it has to for all speed-of-light particles.   The ONLY consequence of this insight is that photons CANNOT change through their existence, from creation to absorption.   It was the fact that neutrinos could change that demonstrated they were not speed-of-light particles.

Haha you beat me to it with the observation about photons.

[mrg]

Haha you beat me to it with the observation about photons.

 

Thanks, EXC.   I think this question about gold and time is very much like:  "I have a mechanical clock.  If it runs down and stops ticking, has time stopped for it?"   No, the reverse, it's just stopped keeping time.

[exchemist]

Thanks, EXC.   I think this question about gold and time is very much like:  "I have a mechanical clock.  If it runs down and stops ticking, has time stopped for it?"   No, the reverse, it's just stopped keeping time.

Yes, a bit, but trying to define what time really is is something one can read quite long articles about. I think this is what our poster is groping towards.