Is the gravitational time dilatation a real effect?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the concept of gravitational time dilation, exploring its validity as a real effect and its implications in various contexts, including theoretical scenarios involving black holes and gravitational potential. Participants examine both observational evidence and theoretical considerations related to time dilation and gravitational redshift.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that gravitational time dilation may be explained by the redshift of photons escaping a gravitational field, while others assert that it is a distinct effect observed in experiments.
  • Observations of time dilation effects in GPS satellites are cited as evidence of both special and general relativistic time dilation being significant in practical applications.
  • The Pound-Rebka experiment is mentioned as a demonstration of gravitational redshift, with a distinction made between redshift and time dilation.
  • One participant posits that gravitational time dilation affects all clocks regardless of their operating principles, questioning the necessity of redshifting photons in this context.
  • There is a discussion about the relationship between gravitational potential and the pace of time, with some participants affirming that greater differences in gravitational potential lead to greater differences in time pace.
  • Questions are raised about the nature of regions near black holes, specifically regarding the concept of a "point of no return" and the implications for objects approaching the event horizon.
  • Clarifications are sought regarding the terminology used, such as "mld" for billion light-years, and the implications of distances and time scales in relation to gravitational effects.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about how objects can traverse regions of low gravitational potential within the age of the universe, leading to further inquiries about the nature of black holes and their growth.
  • There are references to the event horizon and the limitations of observational knowledge regarding objects that may have crossed it.
  • One participant suggests that if nothing has crossed the event horizon, then black holes have not gained mass, leading to a philosophical debate about the nature of black holes and their interactions.
  • Another participant introduces the idea that the event horizon is a coordinate singularity, which can complicate the understanding of time and space in these contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of gravitational time dilation and its implications, with some agreeing on certain points while others contest the interpretations and implications of gravitational effects, particularly in relation to black holes and event horizons. The discussion remains unresolved on several key questions.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made regarding gravitational potential and time dilation, as well as the definitions of terms used in the discussion. The relationship between coordinate time and proper time near event horizons is also a complex topic that remains under debate.

  • #91
starthaus said:
Try keeping it professional, ok? No point in getting personal.

I remember that other thread you and kev fought for a few hundred posts. I think there is clearly something here. Maybe you two could PM a bit and come to an understanding? From the outside looking in, I'm just here, and I assume you two have a longstanding grudge.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #92
starthaus said:
Try keeping it professional, ok? No point in getting personal.
:smile::smile::smile:
starthaus said:
I don't have anything against kev, I don't like his hacky methods that involve putting in results by hand followed by shaky proofs.
Then why not just say that you disapprove of his method and why, show your own if you like, and move on instead of hijacking threads for hundreds of posts?

That would preserve the usefulness of the thread to others.
 
  • #93
Al68 said:
:smile::smile::smile:Then why not just say that you disapprove of his method and why, show your own if you like,

This is precisely what I did.
 
  • #94
starthaus said:
Al68 said:
:smile::smile::smile:Then why not just say that you disapprove of his method and why, show your own if you like,
This is precisely what I did.
LOL. The key word in my post is just.
 
  • #95
Al68 said:
LOL. The key word in my post is just.

If you trolled less and you read more , you'd be so much better off.
 
  • #96
It would be trolling if it were not completely accurate, and a sentiment echoed by others.
 
  • #97
Kamil Szot said:
What I wanted to say is that universe might end before you receive last signal no matter how long finite time of existence universe has ahead of itself. Maybe not if universe final fate is big crunch.
In principle one can only have a fully developed event horizon if spacetime is not closed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 103 ·
4
Replies
103
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 54 ·
2
Replies
54
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K