Ed Wood
Okay, here's a question for you wonderful people out there it is a purely Relativity question.

I would appreciate it if we could avoid blathering on about aether, ether or pure B.S. personal theories. Things are complicated enough as it is.

I'll put it in it's most basic broadest terms first we can narrow it down later

Relative to time on the surface of earth how slow/fast does time progress on the 'surface' of the sun?

There are 2 parts to this question

1. General Relativity (Rate of time due to Gravity)
2. Special Relativity (Rate of time due to Speed)

Relative to time on the surface of earth how fast/slow does time progress on the 'surface' of other celestial objects?

Have a nice day
Ed Wood

synthsin75
1. Having a higher gravity, the time rate on the sun would be slower than that on earth.

2. From the perspective of the observer, at rest wrt to the earth, the faster speed of the sun would also cause it to be observed to have a slower time rate. But this would be reversed from the perspective of the sun.
Ed Wood
The question is how much slower.

I have some ideas on how to go about getting the answer but would like input from others.

Would the Schwarzschild metric be sufficient to get a rough Idea?

Maybe the heavy lifting already been done.
If so the question then becomes:
Is there an experimental like Pound–Rebka that I can just run with.

Any Ideas?
Maxila
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 13 2012, 08:10 AM)
Okay, here's a question for you wonderful people out there it is a purely Relativity question.

I would appreciate it if we could avoid blathering on about aether, ether or pure B.S. personal theories. Things are complicated enough as it is.

I'll put it in it's most basic broadest terms first we can narrow it down later

Relative to time on the surface of earth how slow/fast does time progress on the 'surface' of the sun?

There are 2 parts to this question

1. General Relativity (Rate of time due to Gravity)
2. Special Relativity (Rate of time due to Speed)

Relative to time on the surface of earth how fast/slow does time progress on the 'surface' of other celestial objects?

Have a nice day
Ed Wood

I thought this was a good question and did a google search under "gravitational time dilation". There was a lot of good information available in the links that came up and I was surprised to learn if you wish to strive for a great deal of accuracy how complicated the calculations could get (you could consider not only the Earth, it's relative motion, and the Sun, but the other gravitational bodies in the solar system too).

Suffice it to say after all the calculating, I read someone say the difference should be only on the order of a few nanoseconds, which sounded about right. I didn't include the links because I looked through a lot of them and they were all in the first page or two under the search I mentioned.

Maxila

P.S. If you have trouble finding good information in your own search I'd be happy to search again and put the links I found here.
Confused1
If a projectile were fired from the surface of the Earth with sufficient velocity to escape the Earth's gravitational field and on the right trajectory to arrive at the surface of the sun - is there any way the change in velocity could be used to derive (predict) the red-shift? Assume weak fields everywhere? IF this 'works' would it be a satisfactory answer to parts (1) and (2) of the OP?
-C2.
Confused1
Continuing the previous post.. (this is exploratory NOT exemplary)

For simplicity let's just drop our missile (from a great distance) and let it fall into the Sun.
Looking at gravitational potential here:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_potential

the potential V at a distance x from a point mass of mass M is
V = GM/x or (my symbols) V = GM/R
For a falling body the PE appears as KE (waves arms wildly) so PE=mV=1/2(mv^2) so v= √(2GM/R)
if we stayed with SR we'd be looking at a gamma factor of √(1-2GM/(Rc^2)) which looks remarkably like the result obtained here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_time_dilation for a non-rotating black hole - is this (can it be?) pure chance?

-C2.

I don't have in mind that this would work for strong fields but it might just be 'fit for purpose' to (partially) answer the OP .. or total nonsense (of course).
krash661
What if, time is in the same vacuum as light?
Light being particles, time being a wave,
the particles are carried in this wave?
Confused1
Sorry krash661 I'm continuing my last two posts.
If we had to fire (say) a missile back from the surface of the Sun to arrive at the surface of the Earth with zero velocity we could calculate the initial velocity out (as above) from knowing the difference in gravitational potential. Using SR we (seem to) get the pretty much the same answer (for time dilation) as working outwards using the equation based on the Scharzchild radius - as long as we don't get too close. Is it interesting and/or correct to use gravitational potential* (V) and SR to get a result?
-C2
I was always told to avoid fields (difficult) and use potentials (nice easy scalars) wherever possible.
Ed Wood
just roughing the math with an answer I am not sure is really accurate I got

7 nano seconds Roughly from what I can gather
This would mean 1 second on the surface of the sun would last
1 second + 7 nano seconds relative to 1 second on the earth.

.22 seconds per year

That would mean that For 4.5 billion the sun has experienced approximately very approximately 315 years less time than the earth.

Now that is a pretty minor difference.

However:

What about supposedly primordial black holes?
How much time has passed relative to the earth or the universe for that matter? 0?

Confused1
http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-246594.html
krash661
QUOTE (Confused1+May 17 2012, 04:59 AM)
http://www.physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-246594.html

there's another physics forum, awesome
Confused1
QUOTE (krash661+)
there's another physics forum, awesome

Yes, there's physicsforums.com and bautforum.com and sciforums.com and probably many more, however (IMHO) none are of quite the same quality as physforum. -C2.
krash661
QUOTE (Confused1+May 17 2012, 09:55 AM)
QUOTE (krash661+)
there's another physics forum, awesome

Yes, there's physicsforums.com and bautforum.com and sciforums.com and probably many more, however (IMHO) none are of quite the same quality as physforum. -C2.

ok, thanks for the info
AlexG
Physicsforums.com is a highly moderated site which restricts itself to real, mainstream physics.

SciForums.com falls about halfway between this site (a very undermoderated nut and fruit farm) and Physicsforums.
Robittybob1
QUOTE (AlexG+May 17 2012, 06:33 PM)
Physicsforums.com is a highly moderated site which restricts itself to real, mainstream physics.

SciForums.com falls about halfway between this site (a very undermoderated nut and fruit farm) and Physicsforums.

I knew I had come to the right place. But you have stayed here too! Why is that Alex?
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Robittybob1+May 17 2012, 02:40 PM)
Why is that Alex?

Some men just want to watch the world burn.
Beer w/Straw
QUOTE (Robittybob1+May 17 2012, 06:40 PM)
I knew I had come to the right place. But you have stayed here too! Why is that Alex?

The Oracle told me I was the wisest person in the world, just like Socrates in his time. But unlike Socrates, who journeyed afar looking for people to best him and prove the Oracle wrong. I stayed on easy mode.
Confused1
Here we go gathering nuts in May..
brucep
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 13 2012, 01:10 PM)
Okay, here's a question for you wonderful people out there it is a purely Relativity question.

I would appreciate it if we could avoid blathering on about aether, ether or pure B.S. personal theories. Things are complicated enough as it is.

I'll put it in it's most basic broadest terms first we can narrow it down later

Relative to time on the surface of earth how slow/fast does time progress on the 'surface' of the sun?

There are 2 parts to this question

1. General Relativity (Rate of time due to Gravity)
2. Special  Relativity (Rate of time due to Speed)

Relative to time on the surface of earth how fast/slow does time progress on the 'surface' of other celestial objects?

Have a nice day
Ed Wood

We can use the first component of the Schwarzschild metric to get the ratio

dt_rshell sun / dt_rshell earth

In geometric units

M_sun = 1477m

r_sun = 6.96E8m

dt_rshell earth = 1

So

dt_rshell sun = (1-2M_sun/r_sun)^1/2 dt_rshell earth

dt_rshell sun / dt_rshell earth = (1-2*1477m/6.96E8m)^1/2 = .999997877

For every tick on the surface of the earth there is .999997877 tick on the surface of the sun.

Or

For every tick on the surface of the sun there is 1.000002123 ticks on the surface of the earth.

Not much delta for the weak field.
Confused1
CODE

[Using data from physicsforum ]
[and gravitational potential + SR ]
2.0000000000000E+30 [ Sun_mass = 2.0e30 ]
7.0000000000000E+08 [ Sun_radius = 7.0e8 ]
2.0000000000000E+30 [ M=Sun_mass  ]
2.9979245800000E+08 [ c=299792458 ]
6.6730000000000E-11 [ G = 6.673e-11 ]
0.9999978786509     [ sqrt(1-(2*G*M)/(R*c*c)) ]
1.0000021213536     [ 1/sqrt(1-(2*G*M)/(R*c*c)) ]

[Compare with Brucep's result ]
0.9999978778713     [ sqrt(1-2*1477/6.96E8) ]
1.0000021221332     [ 1/sqrt(1-2*1477/6.96E8) ]

Edit .. I suspect a (my) Newtownian assumption about the relationship between radius and gravitational potential will start to fail (badly) as we approach a black hole .. at a fair distance (as in this example) it should 'work' - comment invited.
Edit2.. for convenient formatting the result is on the left (the program wasn't really written for this sort of calculation).
AlexG
QUOTE (Confused1+May 17 2012, 04:24 PM)
Here we go gathering nuts in May..

Ed Wood
QUOTE (brucep+May 17 2012, 10:19 PM)
We can use the first component of the Schwarzschild metric to get the ratio

dt_rshell sun / dt_rshell earth

In geometric units

M_sun = 1477m

r_sun = 6.96E8m

dt_rshell earth = 1

So

dt_rshell sun = (1-2M_sun/r_sun)^1/2 dt_rshell earth

dt_rshell sun / dt_rshell earth = (1-2*1477m/6.96E8m)^1/2 = .999997877

For every tick on the surface of the earth there is .999997877 tick on the surface of the sun.

Or

For every tick on the surface of the sun there is 1.000002123 ticks on the surface of the earth.

Not much delta for the weak field.

Thank you brucep.

Ed Wood
So my original assumptions were off a bit and I made an error in years so with Bruceps' number I got.

Ticks on Sun vs Earth_____________________A=______0.999997877
Seconds in a year________________________B=______31556926
Seconds per year________________________C=A*B___31556859
Difference per year_______________________D=B-C___66.9953539
Approximate formation of earth years ago____E=_______4,500,000,000
Seconds difference over 4.5 billion years_____F=D*E____301479092549.533
Difference in years over 4.5 billllion years____X=F/B_____9553.5

Apparently I need an HTML editor.
Confused1
Embed within [ code] [ /code] tags (no space) to force fixed pitch text
CODE
fixed pitch here
12345 678
brucep
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 19 2012, 03:01 PM)
So my original assumptions were off a bit and I made an error in years so with Bruceps' number I got.

Ticks on Sun vs Earth_____________________A=______0.999997877
Seconds in a year________________________B=______31556926
Seconds per year________________________C=A*B___31556859
Difference per year_______________________D=B-C___66.9953539
Approximate formation of earth years ago____E=_______4,500,000,000
Seconds difference over 4.5 billion years_____F=D*E____301479092549.533
Difference in years over 4.5 billllion years____X=F/B_____9553.5

Apparently I need an HTML editor.

I've posted this before, in several forums, but it might be interesting for you based on comments you've made in your thread. Skip the derivation and go to the result.

Problem 7, page 4-32, Exploring Black Holes.\

The derivation

If you put the derivative of the effective potential term (from the equation of motion) into quadratic form (to find critical values) you get

r*^2 - L*^2r + 3L*^2 = 0

Where

r* = r/M, and L* = L/mM

Then divide through by L*^2 and manipulate to get

r*^2/L*^2 = r* - 3 [saving this for a later
substitution]

Setting dr = 0 in the Schwarzchild metric and
substituting dphi = (L*/r*^2)dTau the metric becomes

dTau^2 = (1 - 2/r*)dt^2 - (L*^2/r*^2)dTau^2

To find the ratio dTau^2/dt^2 divide through by the
bookkeeper time dt^2 and simplify to

(dTau/dt)^2 = (1 - 2/r*) / (1 + L*^2/r*^2)

Now substitute 1/(r*-3) for L*^2/r*^2 and simplify to

dTau/dt = (1 - 3M/r)^1/2

This following example uses the time travel equation in a way which might be interesting to you. Note that the time intervals dTau and dt are different but that they both measure time intervals as recorded by a clock in a specific coordinate system. dt for Earth and dTau for the spaceship orbiting the black hole.

Abe signs on with the crew of 'Warp Drive 1' while Bill remains on Earth. Warp Drive 1's maiden voyage is to visit a solar mass (M = 1477 meters) black hole, free fall to a knife edge orbit just outside the photon sphere at r = 3.000001M, remain in orbit for 172,800 seconds (Two Earth days) wristwatch time (dTau), and then return to Earth arriving ~ 9.5 years in Earths future. During the warp phase of the journey the ship remains in an inertial rest frame so the difference in wristwatch rate for Abe and Bill is minimal during this phase of the journey.

Lets make a prediction, before the ship leaves, to test General Relativity. What will be the difference in elapsed wristwatch time, dTau, for Abe with respect to the elapsed coordinate time, dt, for
Bill when they meet upon Abe's return? Keeping in mind that dTau is measured with Abe's wristwatch (shipframe) and the coordinate time for
Bill is measured with Bill's wristwatch (Earthframe).

From the Schwarzchild geometry a time travel equation

dTau/dt = (1-3M/r)^1/2

Substituting 172,800 seconds for dTau, 3.000001M for r, and 1477 meter for M, then solving for dt

dt = 172,800s / 5.7735x10-4 = 299298529.2s

Since there are 3.156x107 seconds / Earth year

299298529.2 seconds / 3.156x107 seconds / Earth year
= ~ 9.48 Earth year

When Abe returns the twins can determine whether the prediction was correct by just comparing clocks.

So you might play with this in the weak field. Set r for an orbit around the Sun. This equation includes the gravitational and SR component of time dilation.

dTau/dt = (1-3M/r)^1/2
Whitewolf4869
If you want to know what time it is then look at the clock!
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (AlexG+May 17 2012, 06:33 PM)
Physicsforums.com is a highly moderated site which restricts itself to real, mainstream physics.

SciForums.com falls about halfway between this site (a very undermoderated nut and fruit farm) and Physicsforums.

As much as I hate to say it.
I totally agree with you Alex.
There's nothing here.
Just a place to play with crazes.
Here's something to ponder.
What is the purpose of this forum?
My perception is that it was created by a power hungry sociopath with multiple personalities.
rpenner
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 21 2012, 02:38 PM)
a power hungry sociopath with multiple personalities.

brucep
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 21 2012, 02:38 PM)
As much as I hate to say it.
I totally agree with you Alex.
There's nothing here.
Just a place to play with crazes.
Here's something to ponder.
What is the purpose of this forum?
My perception is that it was created by a power hungry sociopath with multiple personalities.

Must be a place where you play with yourself.
krash661
QUOTE (brucep+May 21 2012, 07:01 AM)
Must be a place where you play with yourself.

lol
krash661
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2...ortation-record

Physicists claim new quantum-teleportation record

" Physicists in China claim to have teleported the quantum states of photons nearly 100 km in free space, breaking the previous record by a factor of 100. The development could pave the way for satellite-based quantum communication, or fundamental tests of quantum mechanics over long distances. "

Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (brucep+May 21 2012, 03:01 PM)
Must be a place where you play with yourself.

Do you suffer from little man syndrome too Butter cup? Lol
brucep
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 21 2012, 09:02 PM)
Do you suffer from little man syndrome too Butter cup? Lol

You're just another scientific illiterate trolling this site. IE dumb sh*t dunce stool candidate.
Whitewolf4869
LOL
brucep
QUOTE (krash661+May 21 2012, 04:22 PM)
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2...ortation-record

Physicists claim new quantum-teleportation record

" Physicists in China claim to have teleported the quantum states of photons nearly 100 km in free space, breaking the previous record by a factor of 100. The development could pave the way for satellite-based quantum communication, or fundamental tests of quantum mechanics over long distances. "

This is the scientific paper describing the experiment.

Teleporting independent qubits through a 97 km free-space channel
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.2024v1

Thanks for posting the article. I'm going to read the paper after I finish some business.
brucep
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 21 2012, 02:49 AM)
If you want to know what time it is then look at the clock!

It's time you get tossed for trolling this thread with nonsense.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (brucep+May 21 2012, 09:35 PM)
This is the scientific paper describing the experiment.

Teleporting independent qubits through a 97 km free-space channel
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.2024v1

Thanks for posting the article. I'm going to read the paper after I finish some business.

Ya go depost some feces for the worms.
You sure haven't contributed any thing to the human race!
Ed Wood
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 21 2012, 10:08 PM)
Ya go depost some feces for the worms.
You sure haven't contributed any thing to the human race!

Confused1
@Brucep - ace post - thanks. -C2.
brucep
QUOTE (Confused1+May 17 2012, 11:57 PM)
CODE

[Using data from physicsforum ]
[and gravitational potential + SR ]
2.0000000000000E+30 [ Sun_mass = 2.0e30 ]
7.0000000000000E+08 [ Sun_radius = 7.0e8 ]
2.0000000000000E+30 [ M=Sun_mass  ]
2.9979245800000E+08 [ c=299792458 ]
6.6730000000000E-11 [ G = 6.673e-11 ]
0.9999978786509     [ sqrt(1-(2*G*M)/(R*c*c)) ]
1.0000021213536     [ 1/sqrt(1-(2*G*M)/(R*c*c)) ]

[Compare with Brucep's result ]
0.9999978778713     [ sqrt(1-2*1477/6.96E8) ]
1.0000021221332     [ 1/sqrt(1-2*1477/6.96E8) ]

Edit .. I suspect a (my) Newtownian assumption about the relationship between radius and gravitational potential will start to fail (badly) as we approach a black hole .. at a fair distance (as in this example)  it should 'work' - comment invited.
Edit2.. for convenient formatting the result is on the left  (the program wasn't really written for this sort of calculation).

I'm pretty lame about using code to model a calculation. The result you get isn't Newtonian and the input equations are from the metric. You should get the GR result in the strong field also. So this becomes very interesting. In the weak field the delta between the remote coordinate frame and the local proper frame is minuscule. We've shown that in Ed's thread. The event horizon is where the delta is maximum. The signal bearing probe falling into the black hole passes the EV at the speed of light. The remote bookkeeper reckons the probes path ends at the EV. Lets speak of the velocity of the probe measured in each frame. c in the local proper frame and 0 in the remote coordinate frame. Same for time. 1 tick in the proper frame 0 tick in the remote coordinate frame. Both frame measurements are equally valid. The GR prediction for the remote frame: the signal from the probe will 'wink out' as the probe draws closer to the EV and be redshifted out of existence as the probe falls past the EV. This particular prediction was confirmed by the following HT observation. It was also touted as the first direct evidence for black holes.

'Death Spiral' Around a Black Hole Yields Tantalizing Evidence of an Event Horizon
http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/archive/r.../2001/03/video/
The simulation video of the HT observation.
http://imgsrc.hubblesite.org/hu/db/videos/...-a-low_mpeg.mpg

BTW-It's great you're taking a real interest in this science. Have you been studying a particular text? If not you should get a good one like Spacetime Physics by Taylor and Wheeler. Lots of fun problems with good direction for studies outside the classroom.
brucep
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 22 2012, 03:16 PM)

Good thread Ed. Since you did the calculation for r_ sun surface try the same calculation with the other equation. Now r becomes r_sun surface orbit.

dTau_sun orbit = (1-3M_sun/r_sun orbit)^1/2 dt_earth

Or the ratio

dTau_sun orbit/dt_earth = (1-3M_sun/r_sun orbit)^1/2

There's another small delta in the microsecond range. I think.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 17 2012, 09:35 AM)
just roughing the math with an answer I am not sure is really accurate I got

7 nano seconds Roughly from what I can gather
This would mean 1 second on the surface of the sun would last
1 second + 7 nano seconds relative to 1 second on the earth.

.22 seconds per year

That would mean that For 4.5 billion the sun has experienced approximately very approximately 315 years less time than the earth.

Now that is a pretty minor difference.

However:

What about supposedly primordial black holes?
How much time has passed relative to the earth or the universe for that matter? 0?

What is the point of this?
Maybe I'm just stupid but I can't understand how this could ever be useful information.
Do you think some one could live on the sun or even a Jupiter sized planet?
We can't acuratly predict the weather on earth let alone predict anything else.
We don't even know why elliptical galaxies are diffrent from spiral galaxies.
In case you didn't realize it the human race is still in the stone age when comes to phyisics acording to Einstein.
In geologic time a human lives for a millisecond and in cosmic time it would be a fraction of that.
Why are you obsessed with time?
That's my problem what's yours?
brucep
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 11:56 PM)
What is the point of this?
Maybe I'm just stupid but I can't understand how this could ever be useful information.
Do you think some one could live on the sun or even a Jupiter sized planet?
We can't acuratly predict the weather on earth let alone predict anything else.
We don't even know why elliptical galaxies are diffrent from spiral galaxies.
In case you didn't realize it the human race is still in the stone age when comes to phyisics acording to Einstein.
In geologic time a human lives for a millisecond and in cosmic time it would be a fraction of that.
Why are you obsessed with time?
That's my problem what's yours?

You can't predict anything because you're a friggin ignoranus. You're just trolling this site with a higher level nonsense than the cranks.
Mazulu
QUOTE (brucep+May 23 2012, 12:15 AM)
You can't predict anything because you're a friggin ignoranus. You're just trolling this site with a higher level nonsense than the cranks.

90% of your posts are you calling people names. Only 10% (or less) of your posts actually include physics content.
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 22 2012, 09:30 PM)
90% of your posts are you calling people names. Only 10% (or less) of your posts actually include physics content.

100% of your posts are bullsh*t.
AlexG
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 06:56 PM)
Maybe I'm just stupid...

I don't think there's a 'maybe' involved here.

There's a reason you've been banned at other sites, and you demonstrate it with every vacuous post.
Whitewolf4869
I'm sure you know your math Butter Cup!
I just think those that are gifted should put there gift to good use.
I'm sorry but I don't know what it's like to be a little man hiding behind a computer monitor
It must really suck!
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 10:22 PM)
I'm sorry but I don't know what it's like to be a little man hiding behind a computer monitor

Are you saying that you are a big man hiding behind a computer monitor?
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (AlexG+May 23 2012, 02:17 AM)
I don't think there's a 'maybe' involved here.

There's a reason you've been banned at other sites, and you demonstrate it with every vacuous post.

I was only banned from one site for stating that the site was government sponsored and there's a lot of universities that rely on funding to support there physics and other departments.
What would happen to all those employees if suddenly the standard theory was proved to be completely wrong?
The only way that they can protect them selves is to create a dictatorship and that's exactly what is happening.
History is repeating it self once again.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 02:40 AM)
Are you saying that you are a big man hiding behind a computer monitor?

Ha Ha I could be a woman for all you know.
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 10:41 PM)
I was only banned from one site for stating that the site was government sponsored and there's a lot of universities that rely on funding to support there physics and other departments.
What would happen to all those employees if suddenly the standard theory was proved to be completely wrong?
The only way that they can protect them selves is to create a dictatorship and that's exactly what is happening.
History is repeating it self once again.

It never ceases to amaze that people can be so ignorant of how the scientific institution works.

What would happen if a standard theory was proven wrong?
The scientists that did the work would get a Nobel Prize.
The university the scientist works for would get a huge amount of prestige.
The fellow employees would quickly learn the new science and teach it to their students.

Every. Single. Scientist is in the game to overthrow existing theories. That's the f*cking point of being a scientist.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 02:57 AM)
It never ceases to amaze that people can be so ignorant of how the scientific institution works.

What would happen if a standard theory was proven wrong?
The scientists that did the work would get a Nobel Prize.
The university the scientist works for would get a huge amount of prestige.
The fellow employees would quickly learn the new science and teach it to their students.

Every. Single. Scientist is in the game to overthrow existing theories. That's the f*cking point of being a scientist.

You just proved that you are an idiot.
You obviously have very little life experience.
Talk to me in about say 30 years
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 11:03 PM)
You just proved that you are an idiot.
You obviously have very little life experience.
Talk to me in about say 30 years

So you're an angry, jaded crank. Oh goodie.
Whitewolf4869
I'm not angry
I'm just an observer
I tell it the way I see it
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 11:15 PM)
I'm not angry
I'm just an observer
I tell it the way I see it

"The way you see it" is wrong. You didn't object to anything I said, you just acted like a jaded, angry a-hole.
Mazulu
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 02:12 AM)
100% of your posts are bullsh*t.

No, but yours are.
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 22 2012, 11:26 PM)
No, but yours are.

Can anyone around here come up with anything better than "I know you are, but what am I?" comebacks? Seriously people.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 03:25 AM)
"The way you see it" is wrong. You didn't object to anything I said, you just acted like a jaded, angry a-hole.

Your such a funny little guy
Aren't you late for your duty shift on the Enterprise!
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 22 2012, 11:31 PM)
Your such a funny little guy
Aren't you late for your duty shift on the Enterprise!

See? It's not that hard. A little creativity takes you a long way.

Now, you still don't have any objections to what I said?
Whitewolf4869
Sorry I wasn't listening
What did you say that I'm not responding too?
flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 22 2012, 10:57 PM)
It never ceases to amaze that people can be so ignorant of how the scientific institution works.

What would happen if a standard theory was proven wrong?
The scientists that did the work would get a Nobel Prize.
The university the scientist works for would get a huge amount of prestige.
The fellow employees would quickly learn the new science and teach it to their students.

Every. Single. Scientist is in the game to overthrow existing theories. That's the f*cking point of being a scientist.

This.
Mazulu
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 03:30 AM)
Can anyone around here come up with anything better than "I know you are, but what am I?" comebacks? Seriously people.

Most of what I read around here is namecalling. The standard response to namecalling is: "I know you are but what am I?"
Mazulu
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 02:57 AM)
It never ceases to amaze that people can be so ignorant of how the scientific institution works.

What would happen if a standard theory was proven wrong?
The scientists that did the work would get a Nobel Prize.
The university the scientist works for would get a huge amount of prestige.
The fellow employees would quickly learn the new science and teach it to their students.

Every. Single. Scientist is in the game to overthrow existing theories. That's the f*cking point of being a scientist.

The Standard Model works just fine as a particle theory for strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions. It doesn't move us forward to trash it. In contrast, it would move us forward if we came up with a testable theory of how quantum mechanics interacts with gravity (curvature of space-time).

It would also move us forward if we brought back the aether for reconsideration. Such an aether would have to explain both quantum mechanics and general relativity. Let us presuppose that the aether is made out of wave-functions which are themselves a naturally occuring phenomena. Every object, every meteor, planet, or spaceship can be thought of as a quantum system. The space-time continuum would have to interconnect with all quantum systems. The space-time continuum itself would have to be a quantum system too.
brucep
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 03:58 AM)
This.

Internet public forums are an intellectual wasteland. To bad for Ed's thread. Ineffective moderation = exponential bullshit. I joined about 3 years ago. There was bullshit but also many interesting posters. You being one of them. Most left because the bullshit level got out of hand. To bad. Over at SciForums mazulu told AN he has BS degrees in physics and electrical engineering. The audacity to fib like that. Maybe he believes that. Part of his grand delusion.
Ed Wood
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 23 2012, 03:52 AM)
Sorry I wasn't listening
What did you say that I'm not responding too?

Why? What is your objection to the information presented in the thread? To this point I cannot see it.

AlexG
WW is simply a troll.
Mazulu
QUOTE (brucep+May 23 2012, 05:51 AM)
Internet public forums are an intellectual wasteland. To bad for Ed's thread. Ineffective moderation = exponential bullshit. I joined about 3 years ago. There was bullshit but also many interesting posters. You being one of them. Most left because the bullshit level got out of hand. To bad. Over at SciForums mazulu told AN he has  BS degrees in physics and electrical engineering. The audacity to fib like that. Maybe he believes that. Part of his grand delusion.

I have a BS in physics and a BS in electronics. Where do you get off calling me a liar?
brucep
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 23 2012, 08:29 AM)
I have a BS in physics and a BS in electronics. Where do you get off calling me a liar?

You're a liar. You don't have anything of the sort. If you did you wouldn't be such an illiterate ignoranus. You're either a liar or you're mentally ill. Delusional.
Whitewolf4869
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 23 2012, 06:09 AM)

Why? What is your objection to the information presented in the thread? To this point I cannot see it.

I have no problem with your thread other than its a compleat wast of TIME
Can't you put your superior intellect to good use?
You could get the master Axex, FLy Boy and Butter Cup to help.
You could become the fantastic four and take over the world!
After all only a super hero can go to the sun and survive.
It is very important to know how fast you would age once you get there.
Mean while us simple earthlings will stay home and worry about simple things like sustainable energy and food!
Ed Wood
QUOTE (Whitewolf4869+May 23 2012, 10:54 AM)
I have no problem with your thread other than its a compleat wast of TIME
Can't you put your superior intellect to good use?
You could get the master Axex, FLy Boy and Butter Cup to help.
You could become the fantastic four and take over the world!
After all only a super hero can go to the sun and survive.
It is very important to know how fast you would age once you get there.
Mean while us simple earthlings will stay home and worry about simple things like sustainable energy and food!

Sustainable energy?

There is no such thing other than nuclear and that presents it's own set planet wide Mass extinction problems.

The simple fact is this planet cannot support 6,840,507,003 billion people for very long.

We will have to populate space and spread our seed through the universe or disappear.

Eventually there will more likely than not be something that threatens the earth to the point that we will have to leave or go extinct.

It would be nice to know what we're doing before we have to.

I get that you don't see the need for any of this stuff.

You must believe the earth will never run out of resources, nothing will ever threaten the earth, and probably ZPE is real and exploitable.

I hate to be the one to break it to you but:

The earth cannot support 6,840,507,003 + for very long.
Sustainable energy is not sustainable.
Nuclear is dangerous.
The earth will run out of resources.
There are mass extinction events in the earths' future.
ZPE don't work.

We as a species must be prepared to leave this planet.

It would be nice to know or at least have some idea about what happens when we do.

There are other outlying solutions that will come from the exploration.

Like say maybe slowing the rate of time in a local frame can possibly lead to lower energy requirements for Fusion. Admittedly not part of this discussion, and way the heck out there but I don't think out of the realm of possibility.

Other than the pure pursuit of raw knowledge those are my motivations others may not share them.

If you are opposed to my motivations keep spamming my thread with your whinny B.S. or contribute and be part of the solution. If you can't contribute walk away just walk away.

flyingbuttressman
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 23 2012, 01:30 AM)
The Standard Model works just fine as a particle theory for strong, weak and electromagnetic interactions.  It doesn't move us forward to trash it.  In contrast, it would move us forward if we came up with a testable theory of how quantum mechanics interacts with gravity (curvature of space-time).

It would also move us forward if we brought back the aether for reconsideration.  Such an aether would have to explain both quantum mechanics and general relativity.  Let us presuppose that the aether is made out of wave-functions which are themselves a naturally occuring phenomena.  Every object, every meteor, planet, or spaceship can be thought of as a quantum system.  The space-time continuum would have to interconnect with all quantum systems.  The space-time continuum itself would have to be a quantum system too.

The Standard Model works. Believing in aether doesn't magically allow technology to be built from it.
QUOTE
Most of what I read around here is namecalling. The standard response to namecalling is: "I know you are but what am I?"

It's also the laziest and most childish response possible.
Mazulu
QUOTE (flyingbuttressman+May 23 2012, 03:27 PM)
The Standard Model works. Believing in aether doesn't magically allow technology to be built from it.

It's also the laziest and most childish response possible.

Actually, an aether idea does help . If you guess the right kind of aether, it tells you more information about nature. More information about nature lets you come up with better ideas for new experiments that can test for new phenomena that we didn't know was possible.

In my approach, the space-time continuum itself is made out of naturally a occurring wave function phenomena. The idea is that every particle, planet, and spaceship is a wave-function quantum system; then all quantum systems are tied together by the wave-functions of the space time continuum. But there is an unexpected requirement. Wave functions have to take on the responsibility of implementing relativity, invariance of c, and gravity. Since wave functions can also become things like particles, rocks, planets and stars, then why can't space-time itself be made out of wave-functions too?

If this set of suppositions were true, or at least considered plausible, then we would have to expect that gravity fields are, in some way, a wave function phenomena. There would have to be some wave-function that produces a gravity field. If we knew what that wave function looked like, we could try an experiment. I woud argue that the wave-function that implements gravity should look similar to frequency shifting light. We could try to reproduce a range of electromagnetic frequencies (a frequency shift, rapidly and repeatedly). The experiment would be to detect a change in the laboratory's gravity field while the frequency shift emitters are emitting.

AlexG
If Mazulu actually got a BS in physics, it's a condemnation of whatever school he was in.

The BS is simply BullShit.
Ed Wood
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 23 2012, 06:12 PM)
Actually, an aether idea does help . If you guess the right kind of aether, it tells you more information about nature. More information about nature lets you come up with better ideas for new experiments that can test for new phenomena that we didn't know was possible.

In my approach, the space-time continuum itself is made out of naturally a occurring wave function phenomena. The idea is that every particle, planet, and spaceship is a wave-function quantum system; then all quantum systems are tied together by the wave-functions of the space time continuum. But there is an unexpected requirement. Wave functions have to take on the responsibility of implementing relativity, invariance of c, and gravity. Since wave functions can also become things like particles, rocks, planets and stars, then why can't space-time itself be made out of wave-functions too?

If this set of suppositions were true, or at least considered plausible, then we would have to expect that gravity fields are, in some way, a wave function phenomena. There would have to be some wave-function that produces a gravity field. If we knew what that wave function looked like, we could try an experiment. I woud argue that the wave-function that implements gravity should look similar to frequency shifting light. We could try to reproduce a range of electromagnetic frequencies (a frequency shift, rapidly and repeatedly). The experiment would be to detect a change in the laboratory's gravity field while the frequency shift emitters are emitting.

No matter how many times you post that it still won't work.

That is why I asked @ the beginning of the thread to limit this discussion to relativity. If you want start another thread and ask everyone to limit their replies to AWT please do so.
brucep
QUOTE (Mazulu+May 23 2012, 06:12 PM)
Actually, an aether idea does help .  If you guess the right kind of aether, it tells you more information about nature.  More information about nature lets you come up with better ideas for new experiments that can test for new phenomena that we didn't know was possible.

In my approach, the space-time continuum itself is made out of naturally a occurring wave function phenomena.  The idea is that every particle, planet, and spaceship is a wave-function quantum system; then all quantum systems are tied together by the wave-functions of the space time continuum.  But there is an unexpected requirement.  Wave functions have to take on the responsibility of implementing relativity, invariance of c, and gravity.  Since wave functions can also become things like particles, rocks, planets and stars, then why can't space-time itself be made out of wave-functions too?

If this set of suppositions were true, or at least considered plausible, then we would have to expect that gravity fields are, in some way, a wave function phenomena.  There would have to be some wave-function that produces a gravity field.  If we knew what that wave function looked like, we could try an experiment.  I woud argue that the wave-function that implements gravity should look similar to frequency shifting light.  We could try to reproduce a range of electromagnetic frequencies (a frequency shift, rapidly and repeatedly).  The experiment would be to detect a change in the laboratory's gravity field while the frequency shift emitters are emitting.

brucep
QUOTE (brucep+May 22 2012, 09:35 PM)
Good thread Ed. Since you did the calculation for r_ sun surface try the same calculation with the other equation. Now r becomes r_sun surface orbit.

dTau_sun orbit = (1-3M_sun/r_sun orbit)^1/2 dt_earth

Or the ratio

dTau_sun orbit/dt_earth = (1-3M_sun/r_sun orbit)^1/2

There's another small delta in the microsecond range. I think.

Ed

We found the ratio

dTau_sun surface / dt_earth surface = (1-2M_sun/r_sun)^1/2 = .999997877

The ratio for the equation derived from the effective potential of the Schwarzschild equation of motion.

dTau_sun orbit / dt_earth = (1-3M/r_sun orbit)^1/2 = .999996816

The delta being .000001061 less ticks while orbiting the sun at r=6.96E8m than at rest with the sun surface.

The difference is the SR component for orbital velocity.

v_orbit sun surface = 437025.6m/s

Converting to geometric units

v_orbit sun surface = 437025.6m/s / c = 1.456752E-3

So the ratio

dTau_sun orbit / dt_earth surface = (1-v_orbit sun^2)^1/2 = .999998939

So summing the gravitational and relative velocity components

(1-.999997877) + (1-.999998939) = .000003184 tick

And for the derivation from the effective potential of the equation of motion

(1-.999996816) = .000003184 tick

Ed Wood
Thank you.
brucep
QUOTE (Ed Wood+May 24 2012, 11:00 PM)
Thank you.

I'll just pass on a little more. The remote Bookkeeper frame of reference for the Schwarzschild geometry is a boundary condition. This observation is being made in flat spacetime far away. So dt_bkkpr = 1 tick. In the weak field we can pick any remote frame to = 1 tick because the actual delta between where we set our remote frame and the bkkpr frame is trivial.

For example the ratio

dt_earth surface / dt_bkkp = (1-2M_earth/r_earth)^1/2 = .999999999

a nano second delta. A trillion ticks would pass in the earth frame before the delta would be 1 tick. No wonder nobody guessed that time and length intervals are relative.

krash661
QUOTE (brucep+May 21 2012, 01:35 PM)
This is the scientific paper describing the experiment.

Teleporting independent qubits through a 97 km free-space channel
http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.2024v1

Thanks for posting the article. I'm going to read the paper after I finish some business.

yeah no problem.
Ed Wood
Okay so approximately broadly speaking 14,327 years less have gone by on the surface of the sun than the surface of the earth over 4.5 billion years

Seemingly small almost insignificant.

The question then becomes what about the difference between the the event horizon of a black hole formed around the same time as the earth and the surface of the earth?

Would it be 4.5 billion years?

What about a primordial black hole?

Have a nice day.

Ed Wood
Ed Wood
Would it be presumptuous to say the following.

Assuming mass = 1 g,kg,lb could be any unit

if space = 0 then time = ∞
and likewise
if time = 0 then space = ∞

Also if either time or space = ∞ then mass becomes ∞ relatively to itself.

Just popped in my head if you think the notion is stupid please let me know.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.