Bjarne on: Dark Energy, only an illusion.

[Farsight]

...It is not just time that ticks “different”, but one second is never the same in different space time. One second is either contracting or stretching...

It isn't quite like that, Bjarne. It's just that the components of a clock don't always move at the same rate.

...This is the second point, and for those that now understand relativity, - it always means ; there is no certain reality "out there"...

I have to disagree with this I'm afraid. There is a certain reality out there, but your motional and gravitational situation affect the way you see it.

If you had a clock running at one second per second on the surface of the Earth and and an identical one on the ISS then they tick at the same rate.

No they don't. See the Fraundorf drawing at http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/98/Orbit_times.png

One second is something that is defined throughout the universe.

"the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom".

Note the radiation above. That's electromagnetic radiation. Light. When it's going slower the second is bigger. And then we use the second to define the metre, and use them both to measure the speed of light. So we always measure the local speed of light to be 299,792,458 m/s. Come on, think about those optical clocks. Both the light beams below are moving at 299,792,458 m/s but the seconds aren't the same so the speeds aren't the same. If they were, the clocks would stay synchronised. They don't.

|-------------- |
|-------------- |

 

[Reality Check]

It's about reading the original material and examining the evidence, and challenging misrepresentation. It's about thinking for yourself.

It is about someone obsessing with old understanding of science that has been superseded with modern understanding of science.
It is about someone obsessing with scientists and committing the argument from authority fallacy.
It is about someone displaying ignorance of physics.

The "reading original material" bit s especially inane.
Have you read Newton's original material (in Latin!), Einstein's original material (in German!), etc.? And why do you think that understanding physics stopped with Newton/Einstein/etc.?

 

[Reality Check]

No they don't.

Yes they do:

If you had a clock running at one second per second on the surface of the Earth and and an identical one on the ISS then they tick at the same rate according to someone sitting next to them (missed that out in my post).
SR causes different rates of ticking for an observer traveling at a different speed than the clock (your 5 MPS).
GR causes different rates of ticking for an observer in a different gravitational field, e.g. one on the surface looking at the ISS clock.

Note the radiation above.

Note that you did not understand the defintion of a second

Since 1967, the second has been defined to be

the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium 133 atom.[1]
​

It is the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation. This remains the same according to an observer sitting at the clock.

P.S. You are still commiting the basic mistake of not specifying your observer (which I have also done a couple of times!).
According to an observer at those optical clocks looking at their own clock, their clock always tick away at one second per second.
If that observer looks at the other clock then they will measure a different rate even through the clocks are identical.

 

[Bjarne]

Bjarne
A cow onboard at the ISS and a cow on Earth would both be able to calculate their orbit speed.
Farsight
Yep, and they'd get different results, but both solar-orbit speeds are nevertheless the same because the ISS doesn't get ahead of the Earth.

I am not sure your got the point.
Let's say the ISS is orbiting in the exact same orbit as the Earth.
Because gravity on board of the ISS is weaker, - times ticks faster.
We both agree that the orbit speed must be the same.
I am sure that both you,me and mother cow also agree that ; -

• Times ticks different these 2 places.
• Speed multiplied with time = distance
• All law of gravity must be the same both places.

So here is the mother cow logic.
Let us say that orbit-speed is 30 km/s
Let’s say that the clock on the Earth relative to the clock on the ISS is “losing” 1 second per per 1000 second.

So if one second is the same “length” both places and the ISS every 1000 second will gain (let’s say) 1 second, it will also gain 30 km/s.

Here comes the super cow intelligent mathematical dilemma.
This will break the law of gravity, since both object cannot be moving with the same speed, - or, - the same distances simple because time*speed = distance - and distance divided with time = speed.

The cow-logical conclusion must therefore be,- that one second CANNOT be the same length.

If you believe you have the right answer, - to the dilemma - try to explain it.

It is not enough just to claim “Clocks are contraptions with things moving in them” – because when the clocks too contract or stretch (as I am sure they do) – then 1 second is also of this reason contracting or stretching.

The solution is simple
EVERTHING ON BOARD on the ISS is different, - both time, and distances, and even the Universe.

 

[Daylightstar]

...
If you believe you have the right answer, - to the dilemma - try to explain it.
...

Lack of the absolute reference frame to which you irrationally cling, as evidenced by your post.

 

[DazzaD]

grr you are still making the same mistakes. they orbit in the exact same orbit yet gravity is weaker for one of them? you don't state what frame of reference you are using hence your confusion with the clocks. how would the clocks and timings appear to someone on the sun? or at a Lagrange point? do you know what a frame of reference is? can you do the maths that shows how one rod or clock appears to an observer
in another frame of reference?

 

[DazzaD]

Also are you seriously sticking with the speed is distance divided by time thing? I asked earlier if you knew what an integral was and as usual you ignored my mathematical question. This could be really important for you here potentially because maybe distance is NOT speed times time.

 

[Daylightstar]

Bjarne's choice reference frame is:

Bjarne = Absolute Reference Frame.

All other RF's are an inferior subset of the whole, according to Bjarne.
It applies to his belief as well.

 

[Paulhoff]

If you had a clock running at one second per second on the surface of the Earth and and an identical one on the ISS then they tick at the same rate according to someone sitting next to them (missed that out in my post).
SR causes different rates of ticking for an observer traveling at a different speed than the clock (your 5 MPS).
GR causes different rates of ticking for an observer in a different gravitational field, e.g. one on the surface looking at the ISS clock.

And don't forget that the ground clock is already going slower than one in deep space because of the earth gravity, that that slow down is the same as if one were traveling at 7 mps. And I haven't even got the sun's gravity into this, which would be another 25 mps.

Paul

 

[Bjarne]

grr you are still making the same mistakes. they orbit in the exact same orbit yet gravity is weaker for one of them?

Acceleration Due to Gravity is the same for both objects.

you don't state what frame of reference you are using hence your confusion with the clocks. how would the clocks and timings appear to someone on the sun? or at a Lagrange point? do you know what a frame of reference is? can you do the math’s that shows how one rod or clock appears to an observer
in another frame of reference?

Irrelevant (right now), it is the time-speed-distance relation relative to the 2 object in the same orbit we are discussing.

 

[Bjarne]

Also are you seriously sticking with the speed is distance divided by time thing? I asked earlier if you knew what an integral was and as usual you ignored my mathematical question. This could be really important for you here potentially because maybe distance is NOT speed times time.

We are discussion orbit speed, orbit distance and orbit time, due to 2 different mass/objects are orbiting the Sun at exact same radius.
It has nothing with integral to do, but simple kindergarten cow math/logic.

 

[Bjarne]

And don't forget that the ground clock is already going slower than one in deep space because of the earth gravity,

This is (part of) the point,..

 

[Paulhoff]

This is (part of) the point,..

Well, show the math...............

That is the point............

Paul

 

[Paul]

As it's apparently kindergarten maths, you are allowed to ask a small child for help.

 

[Bjarne]

As it's apparently kindergarten maths, you are allowed to ask a small child for help.

Excactly

 

[Paul]

Excactly

Now that we are all agreed, I expect you will be providing the information without too much delay.

 

[Bjarne]

Now that we are all agreed, I expect you will be providing the information without too much delay.

Do you now understand that time ticks different at earth compared to the ISS (when it was orbiting the same orbit) ?
I seem you don’t
You even don’t understand this
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8011664&postcount=5564
do you ?

 

[Daylightstar]

Do you now understand that time ticks different at earth compared to the ISS (when it was orbiting the same orbit) ?
I seem you don’t
You even don’t understand this
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8011664&postcount=5564
do you ?

Yes Bjarne, that was the post in which you demonstrated to cling to your absolute reference frame and not understand the problem with that.

...
If you believe you have the right answer, - to the dilemma - try to explain it.
...

Lack of the absolute reference frame to which you irrationally cling, as evidenced by your post.

and:

Bjarne's choice reference frame is:

Bjarne = Absolute Reference Frame.

All other RF's are an inferior subset of the whole, according to Bjarne.
It applies to his belief as well.

 

[Paul]

Do you now understand that time ticks different...

I take this to mean that you cannot answer the question and are trying to avoid it as usual.

 

[DazzaD]

Acceleration Due to Gravity is the same for both objects.

YOU were the one that claimed it was not the same!

We are discussion orbit speed, orbit distance and orbit time, due to 2 different mass/objects are orbiting the Sun at exact same radius.
It has nothing with integral to do, but simple kindergarten cow math/logic.

It may well have a LOT to do with integrals actually.. .quite possibly... is one "position" accelerating relative to the other "position"?

Is the speed constant?

Is it a "circular motion" at "constant" speed?

Do you know what an integral is? Do you know why it may be needed? Do you know the difference between speed and velocity?