Janus Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 My point is that velocity is not the cause of the change in rate of the clock.At constant speed the rate of the clock doesn't change. At v=.86 the rate of the clock is .5 and will always be .5 as long as v=.86 You are speaking of rate' date=' I am speaking of change of rate. Can you reread my post and I think you will understand what I want to tell Thanks[/quote'] Actually, it isn't clear from your post. But that aside, it still isn't correct to attribute even the "rate of rate" of the clock to acceleration. To use your example of a clock in space compared to a clock on the Earth, then the difference in the clocks rates would be always changing. (the clock in space would not only run faster than the Earth clock but at an ever increasing rate. This is not the case, while the two clocks will run at a different rate, that rate diference wil remain constant. Another example uses a centrifuge. If you put a clock on the arm of a spinning centrifuge it will will both be traveling at a constant speed and constantly accelerating. If acceleration had the effect of changing the rate between clocks as you suggest, then the rate of the clock would be constantly changing. Again, this is not the case. This experiment has been actually done with radioactive isotopes. By changing the speed of the centifruge and the length of its arms, you can get all kinds of combinations of accelerations and velocities. All the experiments show that the difference in time experienced by the samples are related to the magnitude of the velocity of the sample and the that the acceleration had no effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now