DimaMazin Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 T=T0/(1-2GM/Rc2)(c+v)/2c then we don't need gravitational length contraction. v - speed of object in gravitation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 How do you arrive at the equation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elfmotat Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 What is v? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted December 13, 2012 Author Share Posted December 13, 2012 How do you arrive at the equation? Slowed time slows motion.My assumption isn't checked.I can't send fast spaceship with atomic clock to Sun.Do you think experiments deny the equation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACG52 Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 How do you arrive at the equation? You take a bunch of letters, numbers and symbols, throw them into a blender, and post the result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted December 13, 2012 Share Posted December 13, 2012 Slowed time slows motion.My assumption isn't checked.I can't send fast spaceship with atomic clock to Sun.Do you think experiments deny the equation? Yes, I do. Compare them with GPS and other space-based clocks. Relativity predicts that a clock in orbit will slow from kinematic effects and speed up from gravitational ones. There's a zero-crossing point; clocks on the ISS run slow, while GPS clocks run fast, relative to a clock on earth. It's not apparent to me that your equation predicts that. But if the equation is ad-hoc then it doesn't matter. Time dilation from SR and GR stems from some basic principles — you don't get to get your equation via rectal retrieval. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted December 14, 2012 Author Share Posted December 14, 2012 My gravitational slowing of time isn't kinematic slowing of time and doesn't deny it. Speed of object in gravitation increases gravitational slowing of time also.Your salad and Alex's salad have no attitude(relation) to my equation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACG52 Posted December 15, 2012 Share Posted December 15, 2012 My gravitational slowing of time isn't kinematic slowing of time and doesn't deny it. Speed of object in gravitation increases gravitational slowing of time also.Your salad and Alex's salad have no attitude(relation) to my equation. Your equation is a bag of garbage, shaken and then dumped on a table. You would be more accurate making predictions based on reading sheep's entrails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted December 15, 2012 Author Share Posted December 15, 2012 (edited) Your equation is a bag of garbage, shaken and then dumped on a table. You would be more accurate making predictions based on reading sheep's entrails. Thank you for the check.I have incorrectly made mathematic. This should be T=T0/(1-2GM/Rc2)(1+v^2/c^2)/2 Edited December 15, 2012 by DimaMazin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted January 5, 2013 Author Share Posted January 5, 2013 What is v? relatively summarized speed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted January 6, 2013 Author Share Posted January 6, 2013 Einstein wasn't accurate with units of measurement.Slowed time cannot proportionally increase energy. Only square of slowed time can proportionally increase energy. I think my equation correctly works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przemyslaw.Gruchala Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Slowed time slows motion.My assumption isn't checked.I can't send fast spaceship with atomic clock to Sun.Do you think experiments deny the equation? You can do whatever you want in computer memory using math formulas to describe Universe, and when everything is taken into account (unified ultimate theory) then simulation will run exactly like real world universe (which also can be simulation).. But you have to be computer programmer, or hire computer programmers. There is no workaround that. And it's pretty cheap in comparison to f.e. building hadrons collider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 Einstein wasn't accurate with units of measurement.Slowed time cannot proportionally increase energy. Only square of slowed time can proportionally increase energy. I think my equation correctly works. Einstein derived his equations. He didn't just write them down because he liked the way they looked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted January 12, 2013 Author Share Posted January 12, 2013 Gravitational-kinematic slowing of time T=T0[(Rc2-2GMv2)/Rc2]1/2 T - slowed time T0 - usual time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Przemyslaw.Gruchala Posted January 19, 2013 Share Posted January 19, 2013 Do you mean- instead of bending space, just slow-down time? What with gravitational lens galaxies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted January 21, 2013 Author Share Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) Do you mean- instead of bending space, just slow-down time? What with gravitational lens galaxies? Slowed time slows speed.Distinction of speeds of left and right parts changes a direction of movement. Still my formulae are wrong,but the idea is right. I think that in a strong gravitational field an approximation to the light speed slows down time more than the same approximation to the light speed in a weak gravitational field. Edited January 21, 2013 by DimaMazin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted February 11, 2013 Author Share Posted February 11, 2013 There law of speeds measurement exists: v = v' * (t/t')(c^2+v^2)/c^2 v - speed measured by slowed time v' - speed measured by usual time t - usual time t' - slowed time therefore we can see slowed "c" as "c" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamBridge Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Why would you need length contraction if all you are trying to do is find the flow rate of time from gravitational time dilation in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted February 12, 2013 Author Share Posted February 12, 2013 Why would you need length contraction if all you are trying to do is find the flow rate of time from gravitational time dilation in the first place? I don't need length contraction.Law of speeds measurement is bridge between measurements of time and of speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now