Thanks for the replies.
If any process is "powered by time" you could not stop that process.
Or maybe - you could stop the part powered by the usual stuff, then the "time powered part" would remain?
"But atomic clocks are not powered by time, they are just influenced by time!" say the scientists.
Influenced meaning - to go faster or slower. What part of the atomic clock is influenced? All the parts? I do not know the makings of an atomic clock, but one part inside the clock going faster may not necesarilly mean the indicated time goes faster.
Same thing for all cyclical processes that we can call "clocks". Or does time influence only the final reading of the clock, because that's what time does - it powers clocks....
What part of the speed of a clock is because of "time power" and what part of it is electric power from a battery?
jackokie - I do not know about any such experiments, except Hafele-Keating. And that one is not trustworthy. Still, the same as the "space-time waves" experiment, it is considered valid and done, no need to repeat it, unless you are a heretic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2 ... experiment
https://www.anti-relativity.com/hafelekeatingdebunk.htm
allynh - interesting topic there. I never heard about that PBS nova tv experiment. It seems it's an easy to do experiment if they did it for a tv show. They should just let the clocks run longer to be sure. Maybe turn the clocks into a tourist attraction...
Can they say that it's not the force we feel and call gravity that influences atomic clocks? They say "no, its the bend in space time that influences them". Well, this "bend in space time" will make an hourglass go slower with altitude. They will say "hourglass is influenced by the force we feel because of the bend in space time". And atomic clocks are not? Did anyone test this?
They want to say that atomic clocks are only influenced by the theoretical mathematical bend in space time and not by the felt force - that makes an hourglass an invalid clock for such an experiment... How exactly dos this theoretical bend influence atomic clocks, in a valid way that disgards the force present - else atomic clocks would be the same as hourglasses - influenced by physical force, so invalid to use...
Thanks for the replies.
If any process is "powered by time" you could not stop that process.
Or maybe - you could stop the part powered by the usual stuff, then the "time powered part" would remain?
"But atomic clocks are not powered by time, they are just influenced by time!" say the scientists.
Influenced meaning - to go faster or slower. What part of the atomic clock is influenced? All the parts? I do not know the makings of an atomic clock, but one part inside the clock going faster may not necesarilly mean the indicated time goes faster.
Same thing for all cyclical processes that we can call "clocks". Or does time influence only the final reading of the clock, because that's what time does - it powers clocks....
What part of the speed of a clock is because of "time power" and what part of it is electric power from a battery?
jackokie - I do not know about any such experiments, except Hafele-Keating. And that one is not trustworthy. Still, the same as the "space-time waves" experiment, it is considered valid and done, no need to repeat it, unless you are a heretic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment
https://www.anti-relativity.com/hafelekeatingdebunk.htm
allynh - interesting topic there. I never heard about that PBS nova tv experiment. It seems it's an easy to do experiment if they did it for a tv show. They should just let the clocks run longer to be sure. Maybe turn the clocks into a tourist attraction...
Can they say that it's not the force we feel and call gravity that influences atomic clocks? They say "no, its the bend in space time that influences them". Well, this "bend in space time" will make an hourglass go slower with altitude. They will say "hourglass is influenced by the force we feel because of the bend in space time". And atomic clocks are not? Did anyone test this?
They want to say that atomic clocks are only influenced by the theoretical mathematical bend in space time and not by the felt force - that makes an hourglass an invalid clock for such an experiment... How exactly dos this theoretical bend influence atomic clocks, in a valid way that disgards the force present - else atomic clocks would be the same as hourglasses - influenced by physical force, so invalid to use...