On Wednesday, January 29, 2014 12:17:56 AM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote:
>
> Brent,
>
> But the twins DO AGREE on whose clock ran slower.
>
> So I don't see your point if you use the twins as evidence...
>
> Edgar
>
 
It may be a bad idea stepping in here, because I would rate my knowledge of 
Relativity about  'average to poor layperson'. 
 
But hey, if the experts aren't hitting your buttons, why not give the naïve 
a go? The experts will hopefully tell me if what I say is wrong. 
 
OK, so look, let's grant that when the twins arrive back at the same 
location, you are absolutely correct they share a p-time at least local to 
where they are, on the grounds they have different clock-times, yet still 
share the same moment. 
 
The question now is what other than that common termination location,  if 
anything, is necessary for p-time to be more than a phenomenon local to 
where the twins meet up again,  in fact be universal? 
 
Specifically, is there anything you can think of about the respective 
end-to-end journey of each twin, that would either have to be present for 
p-time to be universal, or have to not be present? 
 
I'm interested to hear your views, but will offer a candidate effect that I 
think must be near the boiler plate of what relativity theory says. 
 
If one twin travels extremely fast - I don't know how near, but a lot 
nearer the speed of light than the other twin. Do they not both have to 
experience the same like-for-like p-time at all points in their respective 
journeys? 
 
But Relativity says something like, the twin going very fast, might 
experience a passage of one week, correspondingly ageing one week, his 
clock reading one week elapsed. While the other twin moving slow, might 
experience a passage of 10 years, correspondingly ageing 10 years, his 
clock reading 10 years elapsed. 
 
Can we allow that the slow moving twin just stands still waiting for the 
fast moving twin to return? Not important but if that's acceptable it makes 
everything that little bit more simple.  
 
Either way, their respective journey's terminate back at the same location 
and time, such that they shake hands. We are supposing your p-time theory 
is correct at that location and time, for the reason you offer, which is 
the very different clock times, yet same place and time all the same. 
 
What are the senses in which p-time existed at all points for both twins? 
And what are the senses the twins experienced time very differently?
 
One sense they experience a common p-time could be that both twins agree 10 
years had passed on Earth, if say Earth was where their respective 
journey's began and terminated. From that we might say that the fast moving 
twin, and the standing still twin both experienced each instant of that 10 
years in p-time. Just the fast moving twin zoomed through instants much 
more rapidly. If you agree this is a way p-time is universal, then we shall 
suppose you are correct here also, and consider implications of that. 
 
If they both experience each next instant of p-time, exactly synchronized, 
just one whizzing through while the other going through at the normal rate. 
Isn't the implication that their different experiences of the passage of 
time is non-fundamental, the fundamental being that p-time was synchronized 
and universal in every respect throughout? 
 
In which case, isn't the implication of that, the twin traveling much 
faster who thinks he experiences just a week, actually ages 10 years, given 
that each instant of p-time is universal and constant and synchronized? 
Thus both twins arrive at the same location, with different clock-times 
representing the different experiences, but p-time ultimately governing 
everything as both twins having aged 10 years? 
 
Otherwise, what sense is p-time universal? How can the twins experience a 
synchronized p-time throughout their journeys if one twin not only 
experiences one week not 10 years, but ages one week too? Surely the 
implication is that they did not experience every same instant of p-time. 
Or if they did, only in some non-fundamental sense? 
 
Or, if they don't have to experience a synchronized p-time each instant of 
their different journeys, what sense is p-time universal? If only the sense 
of where they meet, that's not universal, it's local. If someone stands 
still, while someone else goes in a big loop back to that position, it's 
pretty intuitive that they will meet up at the same place and time. This 
regardless of what laws of space and time are true? 
 
Sorry for the long windedness. And also, if I've missed the point or 
misconceived something. I would appreciate that being pointed out if 
possible though. 

On Monday, January 27, 2014 3:27:54 PM UTC-5, Brent wrote:

> On 1/27/2014 7:48 AM, Edgar L. Owen wrote: 
>> > Jesse, 
>> > 
>> > First this doesn't have anything to do with present moment theory, only 
>> with standard 
>> > physics. 
>> > 
>> > 2nd, hopefully it's just a matter of you using different semantics than 
>> me as to what is 
>> > meant by absolute and relative. I'll explain once more. 
>> > 
>> > In the case of time dilation effects caused by gravitation or 
>> acceleration the effects 
>> > are absolute in the sense that both observers agree on them. Take 2 
>> observers A in a 
>> > gravitational well and B not. In this case B observes A's clock SLOW, 
>> and A observes B's 
>> > clock rate SPEED up. They AGREE as to this effect. 
>>
>> They can't agree on that.  They can only agree via signals the their 
>> clocks *appear* to 
>> run at different rates.  Just like the twins in the SR twin paradox. 
>>
>> > AND the clock time difference PERSISTS after A and B meet up afterwards 
>> when their 
>> > clocks are again running at the same rate. Therefore in my terminology 
>> it is an absolute 
>> > effect. It is a real and actual effect, that both observers agree upon. 
>> This is well 
>> > understood and confirmed because it's used in GPS calculation 
>> corrections all the time. 
>>
>> Yes, it's real that they have traveled through different intervals of 
>> spacetime - just 
>> like the twins in the twin paradox. 
>>
>> You seem determined to ignore the basic principle of GR, it is a 
>> *geometric theory of 
>> spacetime*  Geometry doesn't make clocks change speed. 
>>
>> Brent 
>>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to