# Thread: Time Dilation - Modulated Force

1. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67

## Time Dilation - Modulated Force

What can be made of the following observation please? I cant find any literature detailing this, if you can point me in the right direction please?

Observation
Imagine I hand you two identical springs, each wound up to different tensions. I ask you to define their internal tension/force states in terms of Hookes Law. You determine that the first spring possesses 1 newton of force/tension. and the second spring contains 2 newtons of force/tension. So thats all pretty straight forward, but now I tell you the history of the springs.......

I inform you that the springs are clock drive mechanisms, and that they were taken from identical clocks that were once synchronized, before being transported to different gravitational environments, near and afar large masses. Time Dilation was allowed duration to accumulate some effect, then the clocks were retrieved for comparative.

It is trivial to note that the clock dials display divergent values of time. However the springs position and its respective force/tension values are also divergent, as your earlier assessment attests. Divergent force values dependent upon gravitational influence, time dilation.

It seams to me that clocks are dynamic instruments, and their system exhibits more information than merely a measure of time. But I cant find any information about this please? Clocks being force driven devices, and so their modulated function must be implicated with modulated force?

My question is, what do you make of this observation? and does somebody know where I might find literature accounting for this please? I havent been able to find anything relevant, or that I can make sense of

2. Originally Posted by Presocratics
What can be made of the following observation please? I cant find any literature detailing this, if you can point me in the right direction please?

Observation
Imagine I hand you two identical springs, each wound up to different tensions. I ask you to define their internal tension/force states in terms of Hookes Law. You determine that the first spring possesses 1 newton of force/tension. and the second spring contains 2 newtons of force/tension. So thats all pretty straight forward, but now I tell you the history of the springs.......

I inform you that the springs are clock drive mechanisms, and that they were taken from identical clocks that were once synchronized, before being transported to different gravitational environments, near and afar large masses. Time Dilation was allowed duration to accumulate some effect, then the clocks were retrieved for comparative.

It is trivial to note that the clock dials display divergent values of time. However the springs position and its respective force/tension values are also divergent, as your earlier assessment attests. Divergent force values dependent upon gravitational influence, time dilation.

It seams to me that clocks are dynamic instruments, and their system exhibits more information than merely a measure of time. But I cant find any information about this please? Clocks being force driven devices, and so their modulated function must be implicated with modulated force?

My question is, what do you make of this observation? and does somebody know where I might find literature accounting for this please? I havent been able to find anything relevant, or that I can make sense of
It's no more or less surprising than finding that a stay-at-home twin has grey hair while a relativistic travelling twin doesn't, or that a clock that has been running for a day has a less tightly wound spring than one that's been running for two days.

Grant Hutchison

3. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
It's no more or less surprising than finding that a stay-at-home twin has grey hair while a relativistic travelling twin doesn't, or that a clock that has been running for a day has a less tightly wound spring than one that's been running for two days.

Grant Hutchison
Yes, but I do find it pretty surprising that twins can become different ages.

It sounds like you require for an observation to be surprising? I would have thought it only need be a description of the world to be valid. Im pretty sure this is empirically valid, but keen to hear alternative views? I did find some literature that might have been valid to this observation, but it was heavy science. I really couldn't decipher it. Has anybody come across this before?

A springs parameter of force in terms of Hookes Law is minutely definable. And gives a divergent value associated with gravitational effects. The twins dont offer such an insight into the world, so perhaps the springs are more useful a scientific instrument
Last edited by Presocratics; 2018-Dec-18 at 03:20 PM.

4. Originally Posted by Presocratics
Yes, but I do find it pretty surprising that twins can become different ages.
So that's fine. But it's the same mechanism (the relativity of simultaneity) that makes the twins age at different rates, and the springs wind down at different rates.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
It sounds like you require for an observation to be surprising?
I don't know why you would think I required that. I said your scenario was "no more or less surprising" than other scenarios in which time dilation occurs. Your observation on the springs is simply a consequence of the relativity of simultaneity. It has no additional significance beyond that.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
I would have thought it only need be a description of the world to be valid. Im pretty sure this is empirically valid, but keen to hear alternative views?
I'm sure it's valid (though not empirically, which implies an experiment has been done). But it seems to me you're assigning it a significance (this thing about "modulated force") which it doesn't actually have.

Grant Hutchison

5. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
So that's fine. But it's the same mechanism (the relativity of simultaneity) that makes the twins age at different rates, and the springs wind down at different rates.

I don't know why you would think I required that. I said your scenario was "no more or less surprising" than other scenarios in which time dilation occurs. Your observation on the springs is simply a consequence of the relativity of simultaneity. It has no additional significance beyond that.

I'm sure it's valid (though not empirically, which implies an experiment has been done). But it seems to me you're assigning it a significance (this thing about "modulated force") which it doesn't actually have.

Grant Hutchison
But what is the mechanism that causes (the relativity of simultaneity)? If you cant answer that, then you can only assume "it has no additional significance beyond that". What do you know about spacetimes process that the rest of us dont know?

Cause and effect put aside for the moment, it at the very least demonstrates a correlation between expressed force values, and expression of time dilation effect. I suggest thats a form of significance.

Hookes Law is empirically valid isnt it? The experiments to verify it have been done. So defining a springs force/tension state is empirical, is it not?

Where have I placed unjustified significant? I have only described an observable.

I think you are quick to judge, but I did ask for your opinion. So thank you for that. If you come across anything in the literature then I would be grateful for a link please?
Last edited by Presocratics; 2018-Dec-18 at 03:58 PM.

6. Originally Posted by Presocratics
But what is the mechanism that causes (the relativity of simultaneity)? If you cant answer that, then you can only assume "it has no additional significance beyond that".
That doesn't follow at all. Relativity of simultaneity is a tested feature of the universe, in particular with regard to the elapsed time measured by clocks. The fact that two mechanical clocks that have run for different lengths of time will have different spring tensions is also a tested feature of the universe. Since relativity of simultaneity will make two clocks with different spacetime trajectories experience different proper times, we can safely say that two mechanical clocks that experience different proper time because of relativity of simultaneity will have different spring tensions as a result. We don't need to know anything about what "causes" relativity of simultaneity to make those statements.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
Cause and effect put aside for the moment, it at the very least demonstrates a correlation between expressed force values, and expression of time dilation effect. I suggest thats a form of significance.

Hookes Law is empirically valid isnt it? The experiments to verify it have been done. So defining a springs force/tension state is empirical, is it not?
We haven't done the experiment you described in the OP, so we have no empirical results for that.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
Where have I placed unjustified significant?
You're apparently treating an inevitable consequence of different elapsed proper time as if it had some additional significance, although I'm not clear what that is. What do you mean by "their modulated function must be implicated with modulated force"?

Grant Hutchison

7. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
I'll have to respond more fully tomorrow sorry

Quoting you
"The fact that two mechanical clocks that have run for different lengths of time will have different spring tensions is also a tested feature of the universe. "

I'm glad. This is the detail I am requesting please? Where has time dilation's effect been described in relation to a clocks mechanisms, in terms of Hookes Law, please to you or anybody else that can help?

Quoting you
"What do you mean by "their modulated function must be implicated with modulated force"?

Clocks are force driven. Every aspect of a clocks operation is a consideration of forces. You cant modulate a clocks function without implication for its operational forces. Time dilation modulates a clocks function. It is empirically definable as per the OP.

Quoting you
"We haven't done the experiment you described in the OP, so we have no empirical results for that."

Yes, the experiments have been done for both Hookes Law and time dilation. Both parameters are equally valid to a clocks function. I'm just pointing out the correlation, and asking where I might find more information?

quoting you

I dont mind if you hang a non-significance sign on this. I'm just looking for information what has been documented on the subject, and for peoples opinions. Thank you for yours

8. Are you aware that the formula for force has a time component?

9. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by mkline55
Are you aware that the formula for force has a time component?
Impulse does. Force divided by time

Newtons however are force divided by distance. lift 100grams 1m in the earths gravitational field equates to 1 newton, if I recall correctly. No time component. Doesnt matter how long you take to lift it the 1m, it still amounts to 1 newton of force

10. Originally Posted by Presocratics
Quoting you
"The fact that two mechanical clocks that have run for different lengths of time will have different spring tensions is also a tested feature of the universe. "

I'm glad. This is the detail I am requesting please? Where has time dilation's effect been described in relation to a clocks mechanisms, in terms of Hookes Law, please to you or anybody else that can help?
Perhaps I wasn't clear. We know that identical clocks that have run for different lengths of time (starting from fully wound) will have different spring tensions. Doesn't matter if the cause is different proper time experienced along different spacetime trajectories, or just because we wound and started one clock at a different time from the other. In either case, the tension in the spring will decline as a function of proper time for that clock. More time, less tension.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
Quoting you
"What do you mean by "their modulated function must be implicated with modulated force"?

Clocks are force driven. Every aspect of a clocks operation is a consideration of forces. You cant modulate a clocks function without implication for its operational forces. Time dilation modulates a clocks function. It is empirically definable as per the OP.
Time dilation modulates time. Since time-dilated clocks experience different time spans, their end conditions will be different. The clocks function perfectly normally.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
Quoting you
"We haven't done the experiment you described in the OP, so we have no empirical results for that."

Yes, the experiments have been done for both Hookes Law and time dilation.
But not both at the same time. No-one has ever measured time dilation using a clockwork clock. We have no reason to assume the results would be other than we expect, but we have no empirical evidence to support that. It's a minor point.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
quoting you

I dont mind if you hang a non-significance sign on this. I'm just looking for information what has been documented on the subject, and for peoples opinions. Thank you for yours
Forgive me, but it's still not clear what information you require. It seems (but I may have misunderstood) that you are asking for information about how time dilation affects the mechanism of a clock, in particular the spring tension. But time dilation does nothing to the mechanism of a clock, so you will not find any information about that.

Grant Hutchison

11. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Perhaps I wasn't clear. We know that identical clocks that have run for different lengths of time (starting from fully wound) will have different spring tensions. Doesn't matter if the cause is different proper time experienced along different spacetime trajectories, or just because we wound and started one clock at a different time from the other. In either case, the tension in the spring will decline as a function of proper time for that clock. More time, less tension.

Time dilation modulates time. Since time-dilated clocks experience different time spans, their end conditions will be different. The clocks function perfectly normally.

But not both at the same time. No-one has ever measured time dilation using a clockwork clock. We have no reason to assume the results would be other than we expect, but we have no empirical evidence to support that. It's a minor point.

Forgive me, but it's still not clear what information you require. It seems (but I may have misunderstood) that you are asking for information about how time dilation affects the mechanism of a clock, in particular the spring tension. But time dilation does nothing to the mechanism of a clock, so you will not find any information about that.

Grant Hutchison
I understand your reasonings. It is a perspective that will make sense to anybody with a traditional concept of times flow, and or Relativity theory. You are saying that the property of springs I term “modulated force”, is obvious and not of any scientific significants beyond what is already known about time dilation and clock function. But I don’t see that as a reason not to log the data. You justify this perspective in part, as time dilation being a cause, and modulated force as an effect, and therefore is obvious and isn’t of much scientific interest. But I don’t think science operates by those methods. If you can log a data set, then it should be logged, regardless of what is cause and effect, interesting or not interesting, obvious or not so obvious. In any respect, clock springs provide an empirical value which can be logged, and I would like to follow up on it.

You are inquiring what further significance I might personally assign to the observation in question? This is all fair and good. But my OP doesn’t extend into the realm of theory or speculation. I’m only enquiring where literature might be found relevant to the observation. What conclusions have others arrived at?

But this is worth mentioning. The clock spring provides an empirical account of divergent force values. But the spring isn’t the mechanism which the clock uses to keep time. The balance wheel does that, and it is a pendulum action, dependant upon properties of inertial mass. So the real intrigue lays here, and is a little harder to get ones head around than a modulation of a simple spring mechanism.

This explanation is a bit rushed Im sorry. I’m studying and working. Im going to have to leave it here for now, but I will respond to your other questions soon.

12. Originally Posted by Presocratics
I understand your reasonings. It is a perspective that will make sense to anybody with a traditional concept of times flow, and or Relativity theory. You are saying that the property of springs I term “modulated force”, is obvious and not of any scientific significants beyond what is already known about time dilation and clock function.
I don't think that's what Grant is saying. The issue is that you're mixing different subjects together. If you ask a question about time dilation, we're going to, here, discuss what can be supported with evidence and theory. On the other hand, if you're asking about the details of how a particular type of clock works, that is a different subject from a discussion of time dilation.

In any respect, clock springs provide an empirical value which can be logged, and I would like to follow up on it.

You are inquiring what further significance I might personally assign to the observation in question? This is all fair and good. But my OP doesn’t extend into the realm of theory or speculation. I’m only enquiring where literature might be found relevant to the observation. What conclusions have others arrived at?
If you're trying to measure time dilation using a mechanical clock, the practical problem is that mechanical clocks have limited precision, so I doubt there could be any tests today using mechanical clocks. It has been tested with atomic clocks, however. See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele...ing_experiment

If and when relativistic rockets are built, someone then conceivably could put a mechanical clock on board and do a time dilation experiment to compare with a mechanical clock that stays home on Earth. But there's no reason to assume there would be any fundamental disagreement with any other method for measuring time.

13. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
United Kingdom
Posts
7,022
Originally Posted by Presocratics
But this is worth mentioning. The clock spring provides an empirical account of divergent force values. But the spring isn’t the mechanism which the clock uses to keep time. The balance wheel does that, and it is a pendulum action, dependant upon properties of inertial mass. So the real intrigue lays here, and is a little harder to get ones head around than a modulation of a simple spring mechanism.
The spring isn't modified though. If you were to do a static test of the spring you'd get the same spring constant. You touch on the answer here - the measurement of time is dependent on the movement of the balance wheel. An observer in a different frame will disagree as to the rate at which the balance wheel accelerates unless they take into account that the system they are observing will appear time dilated to them.

The reason you won't find observations on this is because time dilation effects are small compared to the accuracy of mechanical clocks. The Hafele-Keating experiment showed the twin paradox in action - and the difference there was nanoseconds.

14. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Perhaps I wasn't clear. We know that identical clocks that have run for different lengths of time (starting from fully wound) will have different spring tensions. Doesn't matter if the cause is different proper time experienced along different spacetime trajectories, or just because we wound and started one clock at a different time from the other. In either case, the tension in the spring will decline as a function of proper time for that clock. More time, less tension.
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Time dilation modulates time. Since time-dilated clocks experience different time spans, their end conditions will be different. The clocks function perfectly normally.
Yes, a modulation in a clock mechanisms expression of force, dependent upon time dilation effect, is perfectly normal clock function. But that highlights a perspective I find novel and interesting.

Originally Posted by grant hutchison
But not both at the same time. No-one has ever measured time dilation using a clockwork clock. We have no reason to assume the results would be other than we expect, but we have no empirical evidence to support that. It's a minor point.
Yes, you would require access to an extreme gravitational field for a windup clock to serve as a useful measuring device for time dilation. But we have to assume it can be done.

Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Forgive me, but it's still not clear what information you require. It seems (but I may have misunderstood) that you are asking for information about how time dilation affects the mechanism of a clock, in particular the spring tension. But time dilation does nothing to the mechanism of a clock, so you will not find any information about that.
Grant Hutchison
Yes, I seek conventional information relevant to the subject.

Quoting you
“But time dilation does nothing to the mechanism of a clock”.

Well, that is evidently not true, because clock mechanisms demonstrate an empirical and divergent value of force, associated with effect of time dilation. Simply compare time divergent clocks. How do you go from, “time dilation effects the rate of a clock” to “time dilation does nothing to the mechanisms of a clock? Both cant logically be true. A divergent value is a divergent value. How does one take a divergent measure, then say there is no effect? What does the scientific argument sound like, that explains this observation away? Im pretty sure its going to do your head in to try.

If the way youre thinking about things turns up some contradictory logic, then perhaps try on a different point of view, just for size. Sure the universe has no prerogative to make sense to us, but what other hope is there for investigation other than logical deduction? Got to try for logic at least.

15. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Van Rijn
I don't think that's what Grant is saying. The issue is that you're mixing different subjects together. If you ask a question about time dilation, we're going to, here, discuss what can be supported with evidence and theory. On the other hand, if you're asking about the details of how a particular type of clock works, that is a different subject from a discussion of time dilation.
How am I mixing subjects up, that shouldnt be? I am simply comparing the position states of two clocks using Hookes Law, which demonstrate divergence due to time dilation effect. Thats pretty straight forward.

I'll quote Grant to answer to this.He stated
"Your observation on the springs is simply a consequence of the relativity of simultaneity. It has no additional significance beyond that."

Originally Posted by Van Rijn
If you're trying to measure time dilation using a mechanical clock, the practical problem is that mechanical clocks have limited precision, so I doubt there could be any tests today using mechanical clocks. It has been tested with atomic clocks, however. See here:
Yes, but a mechanical clock would work fine for measuring time dilation effect within extreme environments, like near and afar a black hole. Not so good for registering time dilation effect near and afar Earth, I grant you.

Originally Posted by Van Rijn

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele...ing_experiment

If and when relativistic rockets are built, someone then conceivably could put a mechanical clock on board and do a time dilation experiment to compare with a mechanical clock that stays home on Earth. But there's no reason to assume there would be any fundamental disagreement with any other method for measuring time.
Yes, absolutely

16. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Shaula
The spring isn't modified though. If you were to do a static test of the spring you'd get the same spring constant. You touch on the answer here - the measurement of time is dependent on the movement of the balance wheel. An observer in a different frame will disagree as to the rate at which the balance wheel accelerates unless they take into account that the system they are observing will appear time dilated to them.

The reason you won't find observations on this is because time dilation effects are small compared to the accuracy of mechanical clocks. The Hafele-Keating experiment showed the twin paradox in action - and the difference there was nanoseconds.
Yes, you are getting to the heart of the issue.

"The measurement of time is dependent on the movement of the balance wheel. An observer in a different frame will disagree as to the rate at which the balance wheel accelerates."

Its when we start talking about constants, when the system in question is seen to be expressing divergent values, that things start to get a bit confusing. Do we have to say "constant, but unique to relative environments of space"? What is a constant, that is also divergent?"

You say
"The spring isn't modified though."
But Hookes Law demonstrates a divergent value. When is an observable change to be considered, not a change"?

In any case. I'm not looking for experimental data concerning mechanical clocks. I know that wont exist for the reasons you mention. But these implication transpose to all force driven systems in the world. Science may have approached this concept fro a different perspective, and so I dont know where to look. But I cant find it

17. Originally Posted by Presocratics
Simply compare time divergent clocks. How do you go from, “time dilation effects the rate of a clock” to “time dilation does nothing to the mechanisms of a clock?
Time measurements are observer dependent. Observers in different reference frames can look at the same distant clock and each disagree on the measurement when comparing to their local time measurement. If I'm on board a relativistic spaceship, I'm not going to see any effects on the mechanisms of on-board clocks. If I compare my clocks to that of Earth and other spaceships doing other things, my clocks can disagree with theirs. So who's clock mechanism do you think we should say is affected by time dilation? If I'm on Earth, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship A and B show. If I'm on Spaceship A, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship B and Earth show. If I'm on Spaceship B, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship A and Earth show.

18. We can also get into twin paradox (unsymmetrical time dilation) effects, but it still gets into the same thing - when clocks are compared, there is no right one (or way to pick absolute measurements).

19. Originally Posted by Presocratics
How am I mixing subjects up, that shouldnt be? I am simply comparing the position states of two clocks using Hookes Law, which demonstrate divergence due to time dilation effect. Thats pretty straight forward.
Sorry, but it isn't clear to me why you'd introduce Hookes law in a time dilation discussion. However you measure time, it's going to be observer dependent and will not require measurement using mechanical clocks.

20. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
United Kingdom
Posts
7,022
Originally Posted by Presocratics
Yes, you are getting to the heart of the issue.

"The measurement of time is dependent on the movement of the balance wheel. An observer in a different frame will disagree as to the rate at which the balance wheel accelerates."

Its when we start talking about constants, when the system in question is seen to be expressing divergent values, that things start to get a bit confusing. Do we have to say "constant, but unique to relative environments of space"? What is a constant, that is also divergent?"
In relativity there are invariants, things which all observers agree on the value of. Then there are quantities and vectors that transform under SR. The only reason things get confusing is because it is often hard to find the SR version of classical equations without a little searching - in this case you are using a classical Hooke's law when you should be using a SR version expressed in terms of invariants and vectors.

Originally Posted by Presocratics
You say
"The spring isn't modified though."
But Hookes Law demonstrates a divergent value. When is an observable change to be considered, not a change"?
As for Hooke's Law - there is a covariant version of it, one that works for general relativity (although may have issues in SR, not sure) and another more detailed approach that transforms the equations more fundamentally by considering what each of the components that make up the spring constant are. So, as I said, the spring remains unchanged - it is just that you are wrapping up a lot of phenomenology into one 'constant'. The reason you are seeing what you term a divergence is because you are using a non-relativistic version of the equation in a situation where you have to use a relativistic one. It is very similar to how the concept of relativistic mass comes about. If you want to continue using non-relativistic version of the Hooke's law in a relativistic case you could introduce a 'relativistic spring constant' which tries to capture the effects of time dilation in it. Or you could use the right equations in the first place and not have to introduce this concept.

For a relatively detailed discussion of this see posts like: https://www.physicsforums.com/thread.../#post-1566323

Originally Posted by Presocratics
In any case. I'm not looking for experimental data concerning mechanical clocks. I know that wont exist for the reasons you mention. But these implication transpose to all force driven systems in the world. Science may have approached this concept fro a different perspective, and so I dont know where to look. But I cant find it
You probably need to start by focusing on the key concepts and mathematical framework of special relativity. The equations you are talking about need to be formulated in 4D as vector equations that can be transformed. I'll point out here that I am not particularly good when it comes to relativity - there are other people and resources out there that can help you if you want to learn more.

I can't find a free version of what you are after but papers like this deal with Hooke's Law in SR:
Grøn, Covariant formulation of Hooke's law, Am. J. Phys. 49, 28-30
As does the thread I linked to before. Suffice to say ... relativity gets difficult and very mathematical fast.

21. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Van Rijn
Time measurements are observer dependent. Observers in different reference frames can look at the same distant clock and each disagree on the measurement when comparing to their local time measurement. If I'm on board a relativistic spaceship, I'm not going to see any effects on the mechanisms of on-board clocks. If I compare my clocks to that of Earth and other spaceships doing other things, my clocks can disagree with theirs. So who's clock mechanism do you think we should say is affected by time dilation? If I'm on Earth, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship A and B show. If I'm on Spaceship A, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship B and Earth show. If I'm on Spaceship B, I see nothing change in my clocks, just what clocks on Spaceship A and Earth show.
Yes. Proper time vs perceived time. A humans subjective experience vs objective reality. I anchor my considerations on the observation demonstrated by clocks, and detailed in my earlier example.

two clocks once synchronized, but then transported to different gravitational environments. Time dilation having accumulated some effect, then clocks retrieved for comparative with one another. This informs me how to apply my logic

22. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Van Rijn
Sorry, but it isn't clear to me why you'd introduce Hookes law in a time dilation discussion. However you measure time, it's going to be observer dependent and will not require measurement using mechanical clocks.
Imagine two clocks that were once synchronized, but are now divergent due to time dilation effect. Peal the face from the clock and you will see the springs are in different positions. Now define the tensions states of the individual springs with Hookes Law, and you will register different force values. Its an observation I invite you to interpret as you will. I have wondered down this rabbit hole, and am still underground finding my way around

23. Originally Posted by Presocratics
Yes. Proper time vs perceived time. A humans subjective experience vs objective reality. I anchor my considerations on the observation demonstrated by clocks, and detailed in my earlier example.

two clocks once synchronized, but then transported to different gravitational environments. Time dilation having accumulated some effect, then clocks retrieved for comparative with one another. This informs me how to apply my logic
It is not “human subjective experience” if two clocks show different elapsed times.

24. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Shaula

For a relatively detailed discussion of this see posts like: https://www.physicsforums.com/thread.../#post-1566323

.
Nice find. Thank you kindly
I'll make good use of this thread.

Yes, complexity abounds within these sciences. Thats why I appreciate a physical observation to calibrate my reasoning's. This subject I am questioning within this thread serves me in this regard. If contradiction must exist, I want to understand why. I just have an urge to quash obvious contradictions. If a double statement doesn't reconcile, I just cant take it at face value.

25. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Strange
It is not “human subjective experience” if two clocks show different elapsed times.
Yes. Human subjectivity would be the case whereby he/she could not perceive the altered rate of the clock, which he/she carried with to different speeds and environments of space. Perception might be thought of as synchronized with the clocks rate, making the divergence imperceptible.

26. Originally Posted by Presocratics
I understand your reasonings. It is a perspective that will make sense to anybody with a traditional concept of times flow, and or Relativity theory. You are saying that the property of springs I term “modulated force”, is obvious and not of any scientific significants beyond what is already known about time dilation and clock function. But I don’t see that as a reason not to log the data. You justify this perspective in part, as time dilation being a cause, and modulated force as an effect, and therefore is obvious and isn’t of much scientific interest. But I don’t think science operates by those methods. If you can log a data set, then it should be logged, regardless of what is cause and effect, interesting or not interesting, obvious or not so obvious. In any respect, clock springs provide an empirical value which can be logged, and I would like to follow up on it.
Where is this "dataset" you are "logging"? You keep speaking is if there were some anomalous experiment out there that offered a mystery.
But it seems that what you've done is work the following logic:
1) A clock experiencing gravitational time dilation will run slow relative to that of a distant observer. Therefore:
2) After a given period of observer time, the time-dilated clock will show less elapsed time. Therefore:
3) If the time dilated clock is mechanical, its spring will have wound down less, compared to the observer's clock, during that shorter period of proper time. Therefore:
4) When the springs of the two clocks are compared, the time-dilated clock's will have higher tension than that of the observer.

The answer to your problem is simply to track back along the logic that got you there in the first place. Of course you can try to render Hooke's Law into a relativistic counterpart. That will tell you what a distant observer will expect to see when looking at the behaviour of the time-dilated spring from a distance. But it's not what a local observer will see, and it doesn't seem to add any explanatory power - it's just going to be built on the underlying properties of the relevant metric. Tracking back to "time dilation occurs", in other words.

Grant Hutchison

27. Originally Posted by Presocratics
Yes. Human subjectivity would be the case whereby he/she could not perceive the altered rate of the clock, which he/she carried with to different speeds and environments of space. Perception might be thought of as synchronized with the clocks rate, making the divergence imperceptible.
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?

Grant Hutchison

28. If i may add a pennyworth? The Op not only mixes two concepts, the spring in the clock invokes another, in this analogy friction and therefore entropy. The mechanical clock has an escapement which ideally needs no energy. The main spring isthere to integrate the escapement by the moving of hands and in a real clock contributes to the losses in the escapement, thereby messing with its time keeping. So the tension remaining in any real clock spring is a measure more of friction losses. Thus the metaphor is weak when applied to gravity and time dilation, and , i submit, causes a confusion in the question. The energy in the thought experiment is a different although related (by time) factor from the time dilation.

29. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Hi profloater
Thankx for joining the discussion

You object to the "mixed concepts"? I'm merely assessing the spring positions of time divergent clocks, and defining them in terms of Hooke's force law for comparative. An observation. However I'll keep an open mind if you have any objections to share please?

You feel friction needs consideration? Obviously clocks experience friction, and that mechanical clocks are less than perfect time keeping devices. As a mind experiment, can we invoke ideal friction-less clocks?
Or if the gravitational time dilation was extreme enough then any clock inefficiencies would be negligible in comparison to the time dilation divergence. Let us suppose one of the clocks was close enough to a black hole that its rate was half that of its twin. one hour passes for its twin, while half an hour passes for it. The friction acting within the clocks parts within that time frame being negligible.

30. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Where is this "dataset" you are "logging"? You keep speaking is if there were some anomalous experiment out there that offered a mystery.
But it seems that what you've done is work the following logic:
1) A clock experiencing gravitational time dilation will run slow relative to that of a distant observer. Therefore:
2) After a given period of observer time, the time-dilated clock will show less elapsed time. Therefore:
3) If the time dilated clock is mechanical, its spring will have wound down less, compared to the observer's clock, during that shorter period of proper time. Therefore:
4) When the springs of the two clocks are compared, the time-dilated clock's will have higher tension than that of the observer.

The answer to your problem is simply to track back along the logic that got you there in the first place. Of course you can try to render Hooke's Law into a relativistic counterpart. That will tell you what a distant observer will expect to see when looking at the behaviour of the time-dilated spring from a distance. But it's not what a local observer will see, and it doesn't seem to add any explanatory power - it's just going to be built on the underlying properties of the relevant metric. Tracking back to "time dilation occurs", in other words.

Grant Hutchison
I'm sorry, I dont know why my point isnt clear. But it is possable that Shaula has found some good content, which might help us understand each other.

I'll try again

As I said to profloater
I'm merely assessing the spring positions of time divergent clocks, and defining them in terms of Hooke's force law for comparative. This gives the data in question. The value given by Hookes Law might be termed "modulated force" or something other.

I haven't referred to any anomalous experiments. Time dilation is experimentally confirmed. Hooke's Law is experimentally confirmed.

The mystery? Well pendulums are deeply mysterious. Like for example, that you can add extra weight to a spring driven pendulum, and its rate is not altered. But migrate the same system to a different gravitational environment, then its rate is altered. It might be said that time causes that, but then times process is equally mysterious. How does time impose its command, or is that the wrong way to approach the question? So the whole subject is shrouded in mystery and fascination. This excersize offers another perspective. I want to learn what others have considered on the subject.

Your steps 1 through 4 are ok. You get that much, but you dont understand my interest. I'm not sure how to convey it perhaps.
Last edited by Presocratics; 2018-Dec-19 at 01:06 PM.