Physics Question Regarding the Nature of Time Dilation

Some great replies guys, thanks. I understand how physics addresses time, and I think part of the problem is simply that it is not that intuitive in some instances. I see that many of you have an interest in physics as well, which is great in my opinion. It seems that with the increase in the number of television programs, books, physicists giving interviews, etc., all dealing with the subject, the increase in interest has skyrocketed.

As far as the problem I was addressing, while I understand that time is relative to the observer, and that time must slow down in the presence of gravity or constant acceleration, I just had a very hard time relating that to the physical measuring device that is the clock, considering that it has mass, while time does not. It seems that in many different instances the mathematics are the only way to explain something adequately, because there just is no logic to what is going on. Time is intuitive to a pretty good degree though I suppose.

Well anyway, I really appreciate all of the responses, both for the help and the encouragement, since I am not the only one with physics comprehension problems, lol.

Suppose you had a ship that could continuously accelerate at one gravity. You might not know that you were on a ship at all. You could easily get to the other side of the universe in your lifetime. There may be enough time to come back. But when you got here the sun would long be dead and gone and it's child stars too.


BIG MAK W/X SPECIAL SAUCE

reply to post by JiggyPotamus


Gravity is Anti-Matter Light.

reply to post by JiggyPotamus

So my question is how can it be determined that time is actually what is slowing down, considering that it cannot be freed from the physical constraints of the measuring device, ie whatever is causing the movement?

I've asked this several times and the answer has always been over my head. I keep seeing gravity and speed affecting the parts of a clock mechanism, not time.

When it comes to 'time' what I always get is phrases that sound like nothing more than an optical illusion: One's frame of reference, perspective, viewpoint...

If I'm driving a hundred miles an hour down a road, all the streetlight poles seem to be whipping past me. This is an optical illusion. I dunno.

I was reading a fanfiction story the other day about SG1 from stargate and how SG1 and Thor created a Dyson's Sphere around a star. You know, a shell around a star so that all energy output from the star is absorbed and collected.


Basically they created a bunch of solar panels that would collect energy from the star. The solar panels had with them an "energy to mass" converter, an AI and a teleportation device so it could place more solar panels that would be made from the energy collected from the star. They used a time dilation device to increase the speed of time i'm guessing in an area including the star and the solar panels, thus completing this massive construction in 35 hours instead of 134 years.

I thought it was such an awesome idea.

I wish we knew how to convert energy into mass...

The concept of time dilation is a solution to problems with observations.


There could be other answers, if there is a lot of Anti-matter in the universe.


My theory is that Anti-Matter light is Gravity. This is not contradicted by any observed data.



If I lit an Anti-Matter candle would you see the light?

Another funny thing about it is...

Time dilation occurs in such a way that the speed of light is affected such that any observer within the frame of reference affected by time dilation sees the speed of light as a constant. (As the speed of light changes so does the clock being used to measure it. They'll stay in the same ratio.)

So in a way the speed of light is variable, allowing it to be refracted by gravity, but also a constant since it's always measured going at the same speed. It's one of those odd characteristics of relativistic phenomena. (Might also provide some possible loophole of going FTL without going FTL. You wont get there any faster than what the speed of light allows between two points as seen within that frame of reference, but time dilation effects of going "faster" would make the trip take a reasonable amount of time travel-wise for something like a spaceship traveling a couple light years.)

Originally posted by Phage

Now, no matter how fast you travel, if you measure the speed of light it will always be 299,792,458 m/s.

I submit to you we don't really know that. It is only an assumption. Those light photons could also be experiencing a time dilation effect.

Also in other parts of this universe, the laws of physics as we understand them, may not apply. Science has no absolutes, only working theories to help us get by on a day to day basis.

Originally posted by DaRAGE

I wish we knew how to convert energy into mass...

We do this all the time. It's called Fast Food.

Time is a measurement of the progression of a system toward greater entropy.
Thus, proximity to mass has a correlation to this.

I'm such a novice to this subject. Please forgive my ignorance. Has anyone ever set out to prove the tangibility of time? If time is correlated to gravity, then it is tangible. No? Gravity proves the existence of time.

physicsworld.com...

Originally posted by SinMaker
I'm such a novice to this subject. Please forgive my ignorance. Has anyone ever set out to prove the tangibility of time? If time is correlated to gravity, then it is tangible. No? Gravity proves the existence of time.

physicsworld.com...

edit on 30-3-2013 by SinMaker because: (no reason given)

Time as in what.. a dimension like physical space? Something that has a definite beginning middle and end? No one can prove that, all we have are theories. Sure we can measure what we perceive as time but that by no means says it exists as a dimension that's tangible. Time dilation itself is an unproven theory. (almost all theories of science are yet unproven, we just except them for the moment if they support the observations and can help us in life) It's akin to Star Trek science fiction at this point and probably will forever be. No matter any mathematical or perceived effects from gravity on what we call time, that measuring of time is still a function of the observation of the observer - doesn't make it any more real, only it causes our perception to change. All the math is theoretical too and it is assuming that the math is correct in the first place which can never be known, so that's a double whammy on this math. In short, science knows next to nothing as a fact or that can really ever be "provable". What we call "true" is only subjective while the observations and experiments hold up the hypothesis. This often changes with new information and all our truths and "facts" goes out the window.

reply to post by JohnPhoenix


Thanks for not making me feel like a total dumbutt. Your right of course. Everything is theory.