| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Nick" |
| Date: |
23 Aug 2005 05:15:08 PM |
| Object: |
Proper Time |
Proper time isn't a timerate at all. It is the fact
that observing your own clock alone you can't tell
if it has slowed. Proper time is only the appearence
of your own "clock."
If you saw the stay at home clocks; the clocks
that are not moving *through space* rapidly
as you are; you could tell your time is slower
by comaprison.
If time ends there could be no proper time.
That is what's wrong with black holes.
The theory says time ends but there still proper time.
Of course this is rediculous. And it just shows
that time can't end not even in black holes.
.
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 05:47:35 PM |
|
|
"Nick" <macromitch@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1124835307.965158.30490@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Proper time isn't a timerate at all. It is the fact
that observing your own clock alone you can't tell
if it has slowed. Proper time is only the appearence
of your own "clock."
If you saw the stay at home clocks; the clocks
that are not moving *through space* rapidly
as you are; you could tell your time is slower
by comaprison.
If time ends there could be no proper time.
That is what's wrong with black holes.
The theory says time ends but there still proper time.
Of course this is rediculous. And it just shows
that time can't end not even in black holes.
Boring, repeated nonsense.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Black" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 06:42:52 PM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
Proper time isn't a timerate at all. It is the fact
that observing your own clock alone you can't tell
if it has slowed. Proper time is only the appearence
of your own "clock."
If you saw the stay at home clocks; the clocks
that are not moving *through space* rapidly
as you are; you could tell your time is slower
by comaprison.
Let's analyze this a bit.
Scenario A:
Alice stays at home, and Bob takes off at the high speed of .96c.
After 700 seconds, Bob looks at Alice's clock and his own. His own
clock reads 700 seconds * sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 196 seconds. Right
now, Alice's clock reads 700 seconds, but that's not what Bob sees.
Bob has traveled 672 light-seconds away from Alice, so it takes the
light 672 seconds to get to him. So Bob sees that Alice's clock reads
28 seconds.
Scenario B:
Bob stays at home, and Alice takes off at the high speed of .96c.
After 196 seconds, Bob looks at Alice's clock and his own. His own
clock reads 196 seconds. Right now, Alice's clock reads 196 seconds *
sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 54.88 seconds, but that's not what Bob sees.
Alice has traveled far away from Bob, so it takes the light time to get
to him. Let t represent the time when the light starts to head to Bob.
At this time, Alice is a distance .96ct away from Bob. The light
takes a time of .96t to get from Alice to Bob. The total time elapsed
between the time Alice leaves and the time Bob sees the light is equal
to both t + .96t and 196 seconds, which means that t = 100 seconds is
the time the light leaves Alice's clock. At this time, Alice's clock
reads 100 seconds * sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 28 seconds. This is what
Bob sees when he reads Alice's clock.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
24 Aug 2005 07:00:05 AM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Jim Black
<ghytrfvbnmju7654@mail.com>
wrote
on 23 Aug 2005 16:42:52 -0700
<1124840572.407277.178750@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>:
Nick wrote:
Proper time isn't a timerate at all. It is the fact
that observing your own clock alone you can't tell
if it has slowed. Proper time is only the appearence
of your own "clock."
If you saw the stay at home clocks; the clocks
that are not moving *through space* rapidly
as you are; you could tell your time is slower
by comaprison.
Let's analyze this a bit.
Scenario A:
Alice stays at home, and Bob takes off at the high speed of .96c.
After 700 seconds, Bob looks at Alice's clock and his own. His own
clock reads 700 seconds * sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 196 seconds.
The observation of the clock requires lightbeams in
this Universe; you can of course hypothesize instantaneous
information transmission but a more realistic answer is
700 seconds * sqrt(1 - .96) / sqrt(1 + .96)
for various reasons (this can be derived from the Lorentz without
too much difficulty). This works out to be 100 seconds.
On the flip side of the journey, the ratio is as one might expect:
700 seconds * sqrt(1 + .96) / sqrt(1 - .96)
Right
now, Alice's clock reads 700 seconds, but that's not what Bob sees.
Bob has traveled 672 light-seconds away from Alice, so it takes the
light 672 seconds to get to him. So Bob sees that Alice's clock reads
28 seconds.
Scenario B:
Bob stays at home, and Alice takes off at the high speed of .96c.
After 196 seconds, Bob looks at Alice's clock and his own. His own
clock reads 196 seconds. Right now, Alice's clock reads 196 seconds *
sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 54.88 seconds, but that's not what Bob sees.
Alice has traveled far away from Bob, so it takes the light time to get
to him. Let t represent the time when the light starts to head to Bob.
At this time, Alice is a distance .96ct away from Bob. The light
takes a time of .96t to get from Alice to Bob. The total time elapsed
between the time Alice leaves and the time Bob sees the light is equal
to both t + .96t and 196 seconds, which means that t = 100 seconds is
the time the light leaves Alice's clock. At this time, Alice's clock
reads 100 seconds * sqrt(1 - .96^2), which is 28 seconds. This is what
Bob sees when he reads Alice's clock.
--
#191,
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 08:23:01 PM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
Proper time isn't a timerate at all. It is the fact
that observing your own clock alone you can't tell
if it has slowed.
Nick is in my killfile so's I don't deal with his dribble on
a regular basis. In fact I won't eve see his response to this
posting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proper_time
Proper time is time as measured by the clock for an observer who
is traveling through spacetime. The concept of proper time is
necessary in Einstein's theories of relativity because of effects
such as time dilation, which result in observers traveling between
the same positions along different paths/world lines through
spacetime experiencing time differently.
.
|
|
|
| User: "T Wake" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
24 Aug 2005 01:45:48 PM |
|
|
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:VZPOe.273621$x96.128419@attbi_s72...
Nick is in my killfile so's I don't deal with his dribble on
a regular basis. In fact I won't eve see his response to this
posting.
That's a shame as you will miss out on some witty diatribe Nick will produce
along the lines of
"I can see it" or "the truth about you is negative."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 09:32:49 PM |
|
|
Einstein did not say time changes MORONS.
frequencey ( time ) changed but the rate energy reacts with energy is
TIME .
wounderdummies have been putting words in his mouth because they cant
comprehend jack *****.
Einstein told you what gravity is and you dont understand it.
Einsten said what dark energy is and you dont understand it.
Sam FLUNKED quantom physics
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 10:27:36 PM |
|
|
I have my own vision of time.
I say dimensions move tj.
Time moves at the speed of light.
Catch up to it tj and it goes slower.
Sound familiar?
It should. It's Relativity.
Dynamic dimensions explains it.
I found out Roger Penrose is a believer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
23 Aug 2005 11:04:01 PM |
|
|
the frequency is what your talking about.
Your not talking about the rate energy reacts with energy. Your talking
about effective force.
Not about time.
shure the clock runs slower because the same energy must effect more
mass But time dont change . c is still c .
demention is a distance .
outside the visible universe stars go away from us faster than c but
they see light at c .
that photon will pass us at c but with no wavelength.
if you went fast enouph you could see outside the universe. yet c is
still c .
photons from 100 bly away pass us at c with 0 wavelength . Thats dark
energy .
Einstein told us about dark energy and gravity.
very few ,,if anyone understands it.
Gravity is matter taking up more space in motion , a low energy
presure .
That effects the orbits of all the atoms parts ( eliptical orbit ) so
the center of gravity is not at the center of mass .
F is the distance from the center of mass to the center of gravity.
Atoms push them selves down the energy slope.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
24 Aug 2005 12:11:54 AM |
|
|
No. I said what I am talking about.
Time moves and you can catch up to it.
It's as simple as that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Puppet_Sock" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
24 Aug 2005 08:48:50 AM |
|
|
Nick wrote:
[relativity stuff]
Look, there's this other news group s.p.relativity.
That's where this relativity blather belongs. Can
you please get that?
Socks
.
|
|
|
| User: "tj Frazir" |
|
| Title: Re: Proper Time |
24 Aug 2005 09:52:18 AM |
|
|
Your talking distance not time at all.
You think because Hz changed time did.
If your calling the TOP of evry wave TIME then its not time your
talking about.
SO THEN what will you say about the wave ?????????????????????????????
Time dont change ,,the freqancy did.
Boath observe c is still c .
c is allways c and time dont change .
You dont understand one thing from another then.
ITS DUMB AS ***** TO explain anything to a fool in love with his stupid
idias.
TIME DONT CHANGE
The wavelength changed but the photon is still going to pass at c .
THE PHOTON WILL STILL PASS AT c SO TIME DID NOT CHANGE,,
NO photon is ever passing you at any speed but c.
TIME DONT CHANGE the energy exchange did.
YOU think you can run past a photon like passing a car and go back in
time.
Thats stupid.
.
|
|
|
|
|

|
Related Articles |
Satellite Proper Time vs. Orbit Radius Proper Time Ends with Gravitational Time Proper Time Cannot Go faster Than Gravitational Time Proper time and Gravitational time Eric Gisse doesn't know proper time thus nothing about spacetime Proper Morons Proper explanation for the MMX null result. #15 So if the Nobel had done a proper job, Serbs Tesla,Maric what two Jews instead of 26% Jew awards; new book: "What Religion is, and how science has started to replace it"
| Which Frame is Proper? in science we never understand it until we have the proper tools-- build a Pulsar Machine to understand pulsars and build a Mass Spectroscopy to understand 5 diseases Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Prion, Autism, Schizophrenia Magnetic fuel conditioners: Looking for proper trials to disprovethem! in science we never understand it until we have the proper tools-- build a Pulsar Machine to understand pulsars and build a Mass Spectroscopy to understand 5 diseases Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Prion, Autism, Schizophrenia Proper interpretation of data Really proper Dimwit.??!! Re: E/c^2 = PROPER mass of photon = h*fL/c^2.
|
|
|