On Wednesday, February 5, 2014 4:36:02 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Brent, and anyone else since Brent is not answering my more difficult > questions, > > Take this example: > > Consider A on the earth and B in geosynchronous orbit directly overhead. > By definition there is NO relative motion whatsoever. > > Nevertheless A's clock runs slower than B's and both A and B agree on that. > > This is because A is deeper in earth's gravity than B is. Brent says "more > proper time nearer Earth". > > So how could geometry possibly explain this effect since there is NO > relative motion in space, therefore no STc effect. Brent previously told us > that "everything is geometry" and "acceleration does NOT slow time". > > But isn't this entirely an acceleration effect, that A's 1g gravitational > acceleration is greater than B's centrifugal acceleration, so that A's > clock slows relative to B's? > > What is your analysis of exactly how this comes about in detail. What's > the proper way to analyze this case? Is there a geometric analysis? Is > there an Epstein diagram? > > > Hi Edgar, it's been a few days since I've been on this thread and since no one else has answered you I'll have a go, though bearing in mind relativity is not a strong suite - there's no relative movement, but the item on earth is moving a hell of a lot slower - Relativity says gravity is not a force but explained by the geometry of spacetime. So the fact the item is on the surface doesn't seem to change that there's a geometric explanation for why it doesn't fly off at 1000mph
> > -- 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.
