- #1
Redneck-65
- 12
- 0
A question about time dilation..
I find myself in an argument / discussion about the theory of time dilation,
and it seems to me, that the terminology is really the problem.
Would it not be more accurate to say that the effects of time slow, as speed
increases ? To say that our test of clocks at speed only prove that the clock
lost time as it went faster, is a bit too simplistic. I tend to think it is true, but
on a much higher level.
Could we not say, that the cesium, or any particle’s decay rate / frequency is
slower as it increases speed through space ? Would that same atomic clock
run faster, if it were on a body moving through space slower than the Earth ?
Or, If we could ((throw that clock out the window )) and have it land, dead in
space, would it’s cesium’s frequency / decay rate virtually burn itself out ??
Would that not be the inverse of light speed ?
If all activity / decay stops at the speed of light, for example, could this explain
how a photon can cross millions of light years of space, only to release it’s energy
when it is slowed by observation / impact ?
Then it comes down to the definition of time. If we assume that time is the measure
of motion, or decay, then yes, as speed increases, time slows. But, if we define time
as a constant in the universe, one NOW followed by another NOW from the beginning,
then we have to say... Yep. the clock just got slower !
I have only a high school education, and some electronics, so the big question here is,,
Does any of this make sense to any of you ? Thanks, I just had to ask...
Red;
I find myself in an argument / discussion about the theory of time dilation,
and it seems to me, that the terminology is really the problem.
Would it not be more accurate to say that the effects of time slow, as speed
increases ? To say that our test of clocks at speed only prove that the clock
lost time as it went faster, is a bit too simplistic. I tend to think it is true, but
on a much higher level.
Could we not say, that the cesium, or any particle’s decay rate / frequency is
slower as it increases speed through space ? Would that same atomic clock
run faster, if it were on a body moving through space slower than the Earth ?
Or, If we could ((throw that clock out the window )) and have it land, dead in
space, would it’s cesium’s frequency / decay rate virtually burn itself out ??
Would that not be the inverse of light speed ?
If all activity / decay stops at the speed of light, for example, could this explain
how a photon can cross millions of light years of space, only to release it’s energy
when it is slowed by observation / impact ?
Then it comes down to the definition of time. If we assume that time is the measure
of motion, or decay, then yes, as speed increases, time slows. But, if we define time
as a constant in the universe, one NOW followed by another NOW from the beginning,
then we have to say... Yep. the clock just got slower !
I have only a high school education, and some electronics, so the big question here is,,
Does any of this make sense to any of you ? Thanks, I just had to ask...
Red;