- #1

Buckethead

Gold Member

- 560

- 38

- TL;DR Summary
- Are we really looking into the past/future in both SR and GR?

With regard to relativity of simultaneity and the "block" universe and reflecting on the notion of skewed time slices associated with frames moving relative to each other, one observer sees one event a distance away (parallel to the direction of motion) occurring before another event a distance away in the opposite direction while another observer see them occurring simultaneously. In other words, one observer is witnessing an event before it occurs for the other observer and also after it occurs. If we are accepting a block universe, then we can say one observer is literally seeing into the past and into the future relative to the other observer.

I think from this one can say the two events actually occur at the same time for both observers, it's just that one observer is observing a past event and one a future event, therefore the events appear to take place at different times even if though they are not. Certainly the popular notion of skewed time slices indicate this. However, this is not the accepted conclusion. Instead it is accepted that the two events "actually" occur at different times. Why is this? Just convention?

My thoughts moved on to looking at this in a gravitational field. Looking at a clock at the base of a tall building from where we stand at the top floor, one sees a clock moving slowly relative to us. If GR is derived from SR,

This being the case (if indeed it is), then there will

I think from this one can say the two events actually occur at the same time for both observers, it's just that one observer is observing a past event and one a future event, therefore the events appear to take place at different times even if though they are not. Certainly the popular notion of skewed time slices indicate this. However, this is not the accepted conclusion. Instead it is accepted that the two events "actually" occur at different times. Why is this? Just convention?

My thoughts moved on to looking at this in a gravitational field. Looking at a clock at the base of a tall building from where we stand at the top floor, one sees a clock moving slowly relative to us. If GR is derived from SR,

*and adjusting for the time it takes for light to reach us*, then is it correct to say the clock is being viewed (literally) as it was in the past, and is ever receding further and further into the past as time goes on due to the fact that it is simply moving through the block universe at a slower rate than we are? After all, the hands are moving slower, it must be moving through the "time slices" more slowly. Isn't this logical?This being the case (if indeed it is), then there will

*never*be a time in which the clock is in our present. The bizarre part then comes when we take the elevator down to the clock. When we get there, we are no longer seeing into the past as we are at the same gravitational potential as the clock, but the clock is*still in the past!*Afterall, the clock hands prove this. This means we should not even be able to see the clock. It should simply vanish into thin air. Clearly, it does not. Where am I going wrong? Thanks.