swansont

Yup. If you chose imperial units you’d have the same situation. Numerically different constants. No, that’s not the case. You’d have a different value, but the invariance of c has not changed. The time just ticks faster by about 1.5 x 10^-8 Moving clocks are still clocks. Clocks in different gravitational potentials or different accelerations are still clocks. I don’t know why you think they aren’t.

I know there’s an effect called magnetostriction, which is the physical expansion/contraction of domains as you cycle the magnetic field; I think it’s responsible for the humming of transformers. My only exposure to magnetic refrigeration was in the context of discussion of cryogenic cooling, done by someone on my thesis committee, in contrast to the then-new concept of laser cooling that was used in my research. That was limited to small amounts of heat flow to get you fairly cold (tenths of a Kelvin?) but you still had to remove energy via other means, and had to start pretty cold (e.g. liquid nitrogen and then helium, IIRC)

But the US is not representative of developed countries. It’s one of the exceptions that doesn’t have universal health care.

How is this beyond your control? It’s your idea. If you don’t have a model, or can’t make predictions, then your idea has not reached the point where you should be making assertions that it’s valid/true. It doesn’t meet the minimum requirement for discussion here.

Mrs.Tilly likes moose and deer but not elk or caribou

You ignored the comma, which changes the meaning. “-g, directed downward” “directed downward” merely confirms what the - sign means, since an answer of “-g” could be misunderstood. Since you are free to choose any coordinate system, the - direction could mean up. It’s not the most popular convention, but it does get used.

Moderator NoteThere is no need to post your rough draft.

I can see this problem on my desktop but not the tablet

There are a number of different timescales out there. UTC, TAI, UT1, and more https://stjarnhimlen.se/comp/time.html GPS time is a different one as well, since it doesn’t include leap seconds, so it’s offset from UTC Clocks on earth tick at different rates, depending on their elevation (or possibly altitude) It simply isn’t a problem, since you can convert one into the other. Pendulums aren’t, and don’t have to be, a uniform length for a pendulum clock. You can use a variety of atoms in atomic clocks. Calibration/translation is mainly a matter of math. A regular and reproducible pattern can be made into a clock; but it’s not guaranteed to be straightforward engineering, and the quality of the clock (accuracy and stability) is not a guarantee. Most clocks don’t conform to SI standards, or don’t have to. Cs clocks are a small minority of clocks in this world, and an even smaller minority of all clocks when considered over history (probably most of which predate SI units)

I can’t recreate this (but it could be from my moderator powers)

Just some simple notions pop up - how does the time flow “know” to change when something changes from being nonliving to living or vice-versa? You kill food and eat it and it becomes part of a living thing again. Does the C-14 in it decay at a different rate when it changes state? Does K-40 decay at a different rate in a rock than in a potato or banana?

What evidence supports this, and/or what experiment would confirm it?

Why would it have to? There’s a whole lot of empty space out there. We can see stars and galaxies that are pretty far away, and if we can see them it means there’s nothing blocking the view.

I think one has to also consider that language changes over time, that the Old Testament was based on oral stories that were eventually written down, and errors are made in copying/retelling. What they meant when they told the story ~4000 years ago might not be what we interpret today.

How did you get this from a statement about calculation not being necessary? Not all analysis of evidence requires the inclusion of math. When Darwin noticed differences in finch beaks, and concluded that evolution happened, there was no formula that he wrote down.

I named two things in physics which are not real objects. I was asking which one you meant when you mentioned hypothetical object. Virtual particles are “found” in descriptions and calculations of particle interactions, such as Feynman diagrams. Electron holes are “found” in descriptions and calculations of semiconductor behavior. And it’s often useless to throw dictionary definitions around in science, since there are instances where those definitions differ from the definition used in physics (like coincidence, or acceleration, and perhaps more importantly, theoretical). In any event, neither virtual particles nor electron holes are hypothetical. They are real concepts. but not real objects.

Absolutely true, but youre the one who brought up physics and made dubious claims about it. Had you made dubious claims about chemistry, et al., other people might chime in. Not if you’re going to make baseless claims. I’m hoping you’ll stop that. What is this hypothetical object? The items I discussed don’t physically exist, and physics doesn’t claim they do.

Being ignorant of this is not the same as it being true. Not knowing the specific values is not the same thing as saying we don’t have evidence of it being nonzero. Doesn’t matter.

I don’t know why you think this.

cosmic neutrino background red-shift has indirect evidence to support it, but this is, once again, a distraction from the topic being discussed. Come up with actual evidence and there’s something to discuss. But you’re basing this on a what-if scenario that has no evidence and on a premise we know to be false (massless neutrino), so it’s based on yet another conjecture that some new neutrino exists. Has anyone built such a ruler?

It’s a pet peeve of mine, mainly from social media posts saying “look at this neat clock” and it’s a possibly neat display hooked up to a rather mundane physics package, which what does the measurement

Moderator Note A file called “Truth in Bible” isn’t about dark matter (it’s been removed)and discussing what ChatGPT told you isn’t acceptable here

And we were using colloquial language, so… I doesn’t, because I described a pendulum, as instructions for building a clock. I did not tell you how to operate the clock, but that wasn’t what was asked for. You can make fancier clocks, but the “physics package” is a mass suspended on something. Some of the rest of it is the readout, but a clock display is not a clock. The clocks I worked on don’t provide such output, and several of them still comprise the best continuously-running cold-atom microwave clocks in the world. I think clocks good enough to be incorporated into the BIPM timescale (and given maximum weighting in their algorithm) should count, and these are the ones that just output a 5 MHz signal. But I’m not the one claiming that a clock output defines time, and if you are suggesting that then we have lots of definitions, because no two clocks will ever agree, as long as the measurement is precise enough. And transformation behavior is just calibration, which is what timekeepers do as part of their job. The USNO Master Clock, for example, is a weighted average of close to a hundred clocks, all of which disagree to some small extent. It would likely be much less precise for a variety of reasons but it would not “differ” as such. A neutrino that oscillated every ~3 km would oscillate at ~100 kHz. Then you have poor signal/noise because of detection problems. If you could overcome the latter it would be about the same precision as a quartz clock but much bigger.

So? This doesn’t actually address anything. You said “it is a topic of geometry amongst others and mathematicians had quite some trouble to figure our (sic) a usable ways to do it.” and astronomy offers several options that were used and therefore usable. And I asked for a definition that’s not circular. Length and distance are synonyms. You’re jumping into the math without actually answering the question I asked, or the objection that started this tangent. Yes, that makes sense from a commerce perspective. In the US weights and measures standards are the province of NIST, which is in the Dept. of Commerce. Commercial measurements have to trace back to the government standard, and worldwide standard, so people can do business with each other It has nothing to do with issues with physics. And yet we’ve gone very long stretches where this was not the case. There are different version of an hour (one is 1/12 of the period of daylight, so it varies over the course if a year, or with location) but yet the concept of time still existed. What time is is not the same as how we define any particular unit of it* Standardizing was driven by commerce. *same thing applies to length, and you must tacitly agree with this, because you offered up a mathematical definition rather than cite the SI definition of the meter, or any other standard.

There’s a suggestion that the recently-fired Pentagon folk were ones that leaked this new story. And at least part of Trump’s backing is that he will never admit to a mistake. Trump needs a scapegoat, and for Hegseth to resign for some fabricated reason.