Bob, Time increments maybe arbitrary but I don't hold the belief that the passage of time is just an illusion between each increment or event. This is a perennial metaphysical question which I don't want to get into. For example Leibniz did not think time flowed. He said time was an ordering of events. Newton thought differently.
What do you mean Cs resonant vibrations? Cs atomic clocks are affected by gravity because their "tick" rate has been observed to be slower at sea level than at higher altitudes which is a prediction of GR. Harry On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 1:27 PM [email protected] <bobcook39923@ hotmail.com> wrote: > Harry— > > > > If SO(4) physics is valid, the gravitational attraction between the earth > and the pendulum may be blocked by appropriate shields and result in a > different illusion of the passage of time relative to other measurements of > arbitrary time increments—like the rotation of the earth due to its angular > momentum being pretty constant or its orbit around the sun also being > relatively constant. > > > > This in fact may be a good “down-to-earth test to validate the SO(4) > model—i.e., blocking the effect of the earth’s gravity. The measurement of > Cs atoms resonant vibrations should also change relative to the pendulum > resonance, since blocking the earth’s magnetic field from the Cs would be > avoided in the validation test. (I think my assumption that Cs atoms > should be immune to gravity field variations is a valid conclusion per > current understanding of physics.) > > > > If validity of SO(4) were *not* established, it would also be > significant to understanding the nature of space and E-M fields. > > > > Bob Cook > > > > ------------------------------------ > > *From: *H LV <[email protected]> > *Sent: *Sunday, April 12, 2020 6:32 PM > *To: *[email protected] > *Subject: *Re: [Vo]:Re: CONCEPTS OF TIME-- > > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 11, 2020 at 5:14 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Note that our perception of the flow of time and even our measurement of > it is based on processes which may vary in > speed. IOW if the fabric of space time changes, e.g. in a gravitational > field, then the processes upon which our clocks > are based may speed up or slow down, but this doesn't *necessarily* imply > that time itself is flowing faster or slower. > It may be, but we have no object means of telling the difference. IOW our > temporal "yardstick" may change in length in > some situations. A clock can run fast or slow without the actual passage > of time changing. > > > > I agree. For example an increase in ambient temperature can change the > period of pendulum clock by increasing the length the swing arm. However, > we don't say time slows down just because it got warmer. In the 18th > century pendulums were designed so as not to be affected > > by temperature. Although we can't block the affects of gravity on a clock, > we can make sure a clock at the surface of the Earth keeps the same time as > a clock in deep space by systematically adding time to the measured time on > Earth. > > > > Harry > > >
