• #### Pendulum Clock or Atomic Clock

From Jack Liu@21:1/5 to All on Thu May 4 12:26:21 2023
So, the greater the gravitation, the slower the time, as the general relativity announced ?

Not so absolute! The greater the gravitational pull, the slower time is in some cases; the faster time is in others. General Relativity is a bit like a coin toss, a game of chance.

The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves, while the atomic clock moves slower. As far as the "speed of time passing" is concerned, gravitation has exactly two opposite effects, just as a coin has both sides. That is to say,
whether it is Gravitational Time Dilation or gravitational.

Time Contraction depends on which type of mechanical device they choose in advance.

If you don't want to take chances, then, which one should you choose between pendulum clocks or atomic clocks?

Relativity resists absolute time and attaches importance to relative time, so all relative time is equal. Since relative time is equal, these two kinds of locks should also be equal. There is no reason to choose one type of clock to exclude another.

If a relative time is superior to another relative time, obviously, this is to create another absolute time in disguise, which is not what Relativity is willing to do.

Since two types of equal clocks lead to contradictory conclusions, then you have to accept two contradictory systems of relativity theory, corresponding to different types of clocks: the general relativity of pendulum clocks and the general relativity of
atomic clocks; of gravitational time effects, one causes time dilation and the other causes time contraction. Both sets of theories are equally correct.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Tom Roberts@21:1/5 to Jack Liu on Thu May 4 14:32:10 2023
On 5/4/23 2:26 PM, Jack Liu wrote:
[... complete nonsense]

You seem to not understand that the entire earth is part of the
timekeeping mechanism of a pendulum clock. This makes your discussion completely useless -- In "The greater the gravitation, the faster the
pendulum clock moves" you are simply changing the calibration of the
clock, which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the "gravitational time
dilation" of GR.

Tom Roberts

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn@21:1/5 to Jack Liu on Thu May 4 23:09:33 2023
Jack Liu wrote:
So, the greater the gravitation, the slower the time, as the general relativity announced ?

No. The greater the spacetime curvature, the less proper time elapses, provided the reference frame is at relative rest to the source of the curvature:

https://www.quora.com/profile/Thomas-Lahn/https-www-quora-com-What-affects-gravitational-time-dilation-large-masses-or-high-speeds-relative-to-those-masses-answ-1

(The greater the spacetime curvature according to GR, the greater also the gravitational acceleration, too, according to NG. But that does not mean
that gravitation and time are directly related. “Gravitational time dilation” is a /convenient misnomer/, like all “gravitational” terms in GR.)

Not so absolute! The greater the gravitational pull, the slower time is
in some cases; the faster time is in others. General Relativity is a bit
like a coin toss, a game of chance.
No, you simply do not understand it (yet).

The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves,

It does not matter how the clock works with which proper time is measured.
It applies to all clocks, that is, *proper* clocks. Clocks measure time,
but that does not mean that time is defined by what a clock shows.

In particular, a pendulum clock is based on gravitation, so it is not a
proper clock when the conditions for its proper operation are not met.

However, this also shows that gravitation is only an apparent force, just as general relativity postulates. By switching to a different, free-falling reference frame, i.e. a different coordinate system, you can make
gravitation disappear:

--
PointedEars

Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn@21:1/5 to Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on Thu May 4 23:11:56 2023
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
However, this also shows that gravitation is only an apparent force, just as general relativity postulates.

The proper term is “_fictitious_ force” instead.

--
PointedEars

Please do not cc me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Thu May 4 23:24:35 2023
Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

On 5/4/23 2:26 PM, Jack Liu wrote:
[... complete nonsense]

You seem to not understand that the entire earth is part of the
timekeeping mechanism of a pendulum clock. This makes your discussion completely useless -- In "The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves" you are simply changing the calibration of the
clock, which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the "gravitational time
dilation" of GR.

Yes indeed. A better way of making some physics out of it
is to use orbital motions as a clock rather than pendulums,
like Huygens and Roemer already did with the satellites of Jupiter.
(pendulum clocks are limited to stabilities of order 10^-8)

This raises the good physics question:
Is the time defined by atomic clocks the same time
as the time derived from tracking motions in the solar system?

This -is- of course a test of general relativity,
because it translates to the question how accurate
general relativity can predict the motions.
The answer so far is yes, to accuracies of about 10^-10 or 10^-11.

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to Tom Roberts on Thu May 4 22:21:58 2023
On Thursday, 4 May 2023 at 21:33:36 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote:
On 5/4/23 2:26 PM, Jack Liu wrote:
[... complete nonsense]

You seem to not understand that the entire earth is part of the
timekeeping mechanism of a pendulum clock. This makes your discussion completely useless -- In "The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves" you are simply changing the calibration of the
clock, which is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from the "gravitational time
dilation" of GR.

Of course it's completely different; it is real,
not gedanken.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to J. J. Lodder on Thu May 4 22:29:24 2023
On Thursday, 4 May 2023 at 23:27:03 UTC+2, J. J. Lodder wrote:

This raises the good physics question:
Is the time defined by atomic clocks the same time
as the time derived from tracking motions in the solar system?

This -is- of course a test of general relativity,
because it translates to the question how accurate
general relativity can predict the motions.
The answer so far is yes, to accuracies of about 10^-10 or 10^-11.

What a nonsensical lie. Even the predictions of
your Shit are that it isn't, and, of course, your
idiocy is local and time derived from tracking
motions in the solar system is not.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From The Starmaker@21:1/5 to Jack Liu on Fri May 5 09:06:18 2023
Jack Liu wrote:

So, the greater the gravitation, the slower the time, as the general relativity announced ?

Not so absolute! The greater the gravitational pull, the slower time is in some cases; the faster time is in others. General Relativity is a bit like a coin toss, a game of chance.

The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves, while the atomic clock moves slower. As far as the "speed of time passing" is concerned, gravitation has exactly two opposite effects, just as a coin has both sides. That is to say,
whether it is Gravitational Time Dilation or gravitational.

Time Contraction depends on which type of mechanical device they choose in advance.

If you don't want to take chances, then, which one should you choose between pendulum clocks or atomic clocks?

Relativity resists absolute time and attaches importance to relative time, so all relative time is equal. Since relative time is equal, these two kinds of locks should also be equal. There is no reason to choose one type of clock to exclude another.

If a relative time is superior to another relative time, obviously, this is to create another absolute time in disguise, which is not what Relativity is willing to do.

Since two types of equal clocks lead to contradictory conclusions, then you have to accept two contradictory systems of relativity theory, corresponding to different types of clocks: the general relativity of pendulum clocks and the general relativity
of atomic clocks; of gravitational time effects, one causes time dilation and the other causes time contraction. Both sets of theories are equally correct.

It was a CucKoo-Clock where Albert Einstein
produced Relativity from...
(he wake up everyday and looked at the cuckoo clock out the window.)
(it drove him cuckoo)

let's re-create Einstein's Clock experiment.

and he noticed one CucKoo-Clock
CucKoo a little quicker
than the other
CucKoo-Clock.

In otherwords, the chicken
said CucKoo CucKoo CucKoo
before the other
CucKoo-Clock.

What caused the CucKoo-Clock
to CucKoo a minute later?

So, you're sayin a CucKoo-Clock clock and a atomic clock show different times?

So, if you got a a CucKoo-Clock and a atomic clock, which clock 'shows' the correct time?? Einstein's clock or the bomb clock?

CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo...

What CucKoo time is it? It's five past CucKoo.

My CucKoo is slow.

CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoooooooooooooooooooooooooh.

--
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge
the unchallengeable.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From Jack Liu@21:1/5 to The Starmaker on Fri May 5 10:42:38 2023
On Friday, May 5, 2023 at 11:05:59 AM UTC-5, The Starmaker wrote:
Jack Liu wrote:

So, the greater the gravitation, the slower the time, as the general relativity announced ?

Not so absolute! The greater the gravitational pull, the slower time is in some cases; the faster time is in others. General Relativity is a bit like a coin toss, a game of chance.

The greater the gravitation, the faster the pendulum clock moves, while the atomic clock moves slower. As far as the "speed of time passing" is concerned, gravitation has exactly two opposite effects, just as a coin has both sides. That is to say,
whether it is Gravitational Time Dilation or gravitational.

Time Contraction depends on which type of mechanical device they choose in advance.

If you don't want to take chances, then, which one should you choose between pendulum clocks or atomic clocks?

Relativity resists absolute time and attaches importance to relative time, so all relative time is equal. Since relative time is equal, these two kinds of locks should also be equal. There is no reason to choose one type of clock to exclude another.

If a relative time is superior to another relative time, obviously, this is to create another absolute time in disguise, which is not what Relativity is willing to do.

Since two types of equal clocks lead to contradictory conclusions, then you have to accept two contradictory systems of relativity theory, corresponding to different types of clocks: the general relativity of pendulum clocks and the general
relativity of atomic clocks; of gravitational time effects, one causes time dilation and the other causes time contraction. Both sets of theories are equally correct.

It was a CucKoo-Clock where Albert Einstein
produced Relativity from...
(he wake up everyday and looked at the cuckoo clock out the window.)
(it drove him cuckoo)

let's re-create Einstein's Clock experiment.

and he noticed one CucKoo-Clock
CucKoo a little quicker
than the other
CucKoo-Clock.

In otherwords, the chicken
said CucKoo CucKoo CucKoo
before the other
CucKoo-Clock.

What caused the CucKoo-Clock
to CucKoo a minute later?

So, you're sayin a CucKoo-Clock clock and a atomic clock show different times?

So, if you got a a CucKoo-Clock and a atomic clock, which clock 'shows' the correct time?? Einstein's clock or the bomb clock?

CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoo...

What CucKoo time is it? It's five past CucKoo.

My CucKoo is slow.

CucKoo, CucKoo CucKoo, CucKoooooooooooooooooooooooooh.

--
to think the unthinkable, mention the unmentionable, say the unsayable, and challenge
the unchallengeable.

To Starmaker

You did make point by those cuckooooooooo clock.
Here lesson for Einstein: don't take reading of whatever clock as Time. Don't take the reading of experiment atom clock at different latitudes as Time to prove gravitational time effect .
Those kind of experiments are all trash, which might be able to prove clock slowing down but not time slowing down.

Jack

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From RichD@21:1/5 to Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on Fri May 5 11:08:32 2023
On May 4, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
However, this also shows that gravitation is only an apparent force, just as
general relativity postulates.

The proper term is “_fictitious_ force” instead.

Einstein cautioned against this extreme "gravity isn't a force"
meme, it's too much of an abstraction.

He noted that iron is heavy -

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
• From carl eto@21:1/5 to All on Fri May 5 16:13:23 2023
Einstein general relativity (1916) is based on Maxwell's equations that are not gravitational. And this shit about gravitational wave and time is justify horse shit but more dumb fucks cannot tell the difference.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)