# Thread: Time Dilation - Modulated Force

1. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?

Grant Hutchison

2. My point is the unnecessary confusion in the analogy. The main spring could be replaced with falling weight and the balancewheel with a pendulum. In an ideal clock the time keeping element has to be integrated either locally or at a distance to record the passing of time. In time dilation the remote observer sees the clock going slowly. The spring or other energy store serves a different funtion even if frictionless and ideal. In order to observe the clock at a distance the clock must emit photons, this inconvenience cannot be ignored in the thought experiment. If gravity is a quantum phenomenum as suggested by loop quantum gravity, the communication from clock to observer is part of the quantisation of time and this is the core of a time dilation question. Einstein has been shown to be right about time dilation in experiments, but the design of the clock brings different considerations. What is your equivalent in an atomic clock to the mainspring? Apologies if i have missed the point of your question.

3. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by profloater
My point is the unnecessary confusion in the analogy. The main spring could be replaced with falling weight and the balancewheel with a pendulum. In an ideal clock the time keeping element has to be integrated either locally or at a distance to record the passing of time. In time dilation the remote observer sees the clock going slowly. The spring or other energy store serves a different funtion even if frictionless and ideal. In order to observe the clock at a distance the clock must emit photons, this inconvenience cannot be ignored in the thought experiment. If gravity is a quantum phenomenum as suggested by loop quantum gravity, the communication from clock to observer is part of the quantisation of time and this is the core of a time dilation question. Einstein has been shown to be right about time dilation in experiments, but the design of the clock brings different considerations. What is your equivalent in an atomic clock to the mainspring? Apologies if i have missed the point of your question.
Ive read this message but I'm to tired to form a reply right now sorry. But yes, I appreciate the point you make. just quickly though. I selected a spring driven balance wheel because a falling weight pendulum clock is subject to local gravity. The force applied by gravity at different altitudes not being constant, upsets my example.

Concerning remote observers. I deliberately focused on the direct comparative of the two clocks, them having been retrieved from remote locations and compared for time dilations divergence while side by side. The benefit of objectivity. We can all agree on the state of the two clocks and their comparative results. I just find it hard to find consensus with people, when so many have diverse views on details of remote observation. I want to be able to pin down this aspect of the conversation tightly. Place everybody on one page.

If you dont fully grasp my point, then that is more than likely my fault. I feel I'm getting better at describing things though. I'll have another look over your message tomorrow

I cant believe the responses I'm getting here. So much quality effort by so many people. Other forums arent like this are they?

4. Originally Posted by Presocratics
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.
You're interested in "how does time impose its command", it seems. My point is that your diversion into Hooke's Law doesn't look remotely fruitful, because the reason that the tensions are different is because the elapsed proper times are different (my stages 1 to 4). We're no closer to "time's command".

Originally Posted by Presocratics
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?
That doesn't do the job though, does it? Causality is preserved in the distant observer's worldline, and in the time-dilated clock's worldline, and yet they experience different proper times. So causality doesn't synchronize things. Something else is going on, isn't it, to synchronize the perception of a local observer with her own clock, and indeed to ensure any other clocks in the local reference frame remain synchronized with each other?
I think this is important because it suggests that by being concerned with the tension in the clock spring, you're ignoring something more fundamental.

Grant Hutchison

5. Here's a thought experiment that I think gets to the root of my concerns.

Alice and Bob are in a space station which orbits a black hole at a large distance. Bob plans to use a spacecraft to make an expedition close to the black hole and then return to the station. Bob, using his knowledge of relativity, predicts that he will return to the space station after a day of his proper time, but two days of space-station time. Just before he departs in his spacecraft, he fully winds a day/date pocket watch, to record his proper time during the journey. Alice stays on the space station and awaits his return.
Unknown to Bob, Alice has an identical pocket watch in her possession. Exactly a day before Bob is due to return, she fully winds this pocket watch, and sets it to the same date and time Bob had set on his watch before departure. Sure enough, when Bob returns, only a day has elapsed on his watch, but he is surprised to discover that Alice has a watch that shows exactly the same date and time as his own watch.
Alice asks Bob to turn his back, and she mixes the two identical watches so that even she doesn't know which is which.

Question: Is there any way in which Alice and Bob, by examining the watch springs, can tell which made the journey around the black hole, and which remained on the space station?
If the answer is no (and I believe it is), then this indicates that there is nothing special about the passage around the black hole - all that's important is the elapsed proper time since the watch was wound.
If the answer is yes, then what is the difference?

Grant Hutchison

6. Due to protracted discussion, thread moved to the Science and Technology subforum.

Presocratics,

Many of your responses to the answers given to you appear to be arguments against them based on against-the-mainstream views. This is not allowed in the Space/Astronomy Questions and Answers or the Science and Technology subforums. If you wish to claim that time dilation works in some way other than commonly understood in mainstream theory, you'll have to do so in the Against the Mainstream subforum.

7. Originally Posted by grant hutchison
Here's a thought experiment that I think gets to the root of my concerns.

Alice and Bob are in a space station which orbits a black hole at a large distance. Bob plans to use a spacecraft to make an expedition close to the black hole and then return to the station. Bob, using his knowledge of relativity, predicts that he will return to the space station after a day of his proper time, but two days of space-station time. Just before he departs in his spacecraft, he fully winds a day/date pocket watch, to record his proper time during the journey. Alice stays on the space station and awaits his return.
Unknown to Bob, Alice has an identical pocket watch in her possession. Exactly a day before Bob is due to return, she fully winds this pocket watch, and sets it to the same date and time Bob had set on his watch before departure. Sure enough, when Bob returns, only a day has elapsed on his watch, but he is surprised to discover that Alice has a watch that shows exactly the same date and time as his own watch.
Alice asks Bob to turn his back, and she mixes the two identical watches so that even she doesn't know which is which.

Question: Is there any way in which Alice and Bob, by examining the watch springs, can tell which made the journey around the black hole, and which remained on the space station?
If the answer is no (and I believe it is), then this indicates that there is nothing special about the passage around the black hole - all that's important is the elapsed proper time since the watch was wound.
If the answer is yes, then what is the difference?

Grant Hutchison
I like that thought experiment. The only third order ageing of a spring I can imagine is rusting or sublimation of the metal.

8. Originally Posted by profloater
I like that thought experiment. The only third order ageing of a spring I can imagine is rusting or sublimation of the metal.
Yeah. We could stipulate that Alice's watch was manufactured the day after Bob's. We could also match things like radiation exposure and local acceleration for the two watches, if we wanted to get obsessed with detail.
But, fundamentally, the question is whether the reduced spring tension caused by of a day spent winding down in the vicinity of a black hole can be expected to be detectably different from that of a day spent winding down far from a black hole.

Grant Hutchison

9. Originally Posted by Presocratics
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.
The changing tension in the spring is just another measure of elapsed time so, obviously, if the clocks have experienced different times, the springs will also have different tensions.

The mystery? Well pendulums are deeply mysterious.
Are they?

Like for example, that you can add extra weight to a spring driven pendulum, and its rate is not altered.
That is because the force is proportional to mass but the acceleration is inversely proportional to mass. This is exactly the same as Galileo's (notional) experiment of dropping different weights from the tower in Pisa.

If you derive the equation for a pendulum, you will see this for yourself.

But migrate the same system to a different gravitational environment, then its rate is altered.
Because you have changed the force.

So the mystery only exists because of your lack of understanding.

10. Originally Posted by grant hutchison
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?
I don't even know what that means!

11. Originally Posted by Strange
I don't even know what that means!
As in:
Originally Posted by Presocratics
... he/she could not perceive the altered rate of the clock, which he/she carried with to different speeds and environments of space ...
The implication in that post appears to be that some external agency is maintaining synchrony - separately driving the rate at which the clock ticks and consciousness proceeds. If that is what's implied, I'm interested in what Presocratics thinks that agency might be, because it might go some way to explaining why Presocratics is so interested in something that seems, to the rest of us, to be merely an epiphenomenon - the tension in the spring after some elapsed proper time. Or I might have completely misunderstood. Hence my question.

Grant Hutchison

12. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
As in:
The implication in that post appears to be that some external agency is maintaining synchrony - separately driving the rate at which the clock ticks and consciousness proceeds. If that is what's implied, I'm interested in what Presocratics thinks that agency might be, because it might go some way to explaining why Presocratics is so interested in something that seems, to the rest of us, to be merely an epiphenomenon - the tension in the spring after some elapsed proper time. Or I might have completely misunderstood. Hence my question.

Grant Hutchison
I dont know how you get this impression, external agency etc?. If I carry a clock with me to large speeds, and or different time dilated gravitational environments, do I perceive my clock speed up or slow down? No. But am I and my clock subject to time dilation's effect's? yes. So I cant perceive the changes in times rate. Both the clocks rate and my rate of perception are synchronized, in a manor of speaking

And the force component of my discussion. Force is a property of matter. Not an external agent.

13. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
United Kingdom
Posts
7,085
Originally Posted by Presocratics
I dont know how you get this impression, external agency etc?. If I carry a clock with me to large speeds, and or different time dilated gravitational environments, do I perceive my clock speed up or slow down? No. But am I and my clock subject to time dilation's effect's? yes.
You are not subject to time dilation's effects in any absolute sense. Remember that it is all relative. So in the case of high speeds or accelerations it is only someone in a different frame of reference that will disagree that a different amount of time is passing. And, critically, in many cases the situation is reversible.

Imagine firing two rockets off in opposite directions. Each rocket will say that the clocks on the other rocket are running slow. Both will be correct in their observations of this. And whichever rocket it is that changes speed to bring itself into the other frame of reference will be the one that is found to 'actually' have run slow.

14. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Shaula
You are not subject to time dilation's effects in any absolute sense. Remember that it is all relative. So in the case of high speeds or accelerations it is only someone in a different frame of reference that will disagree that a different amount of time is passing. And, critically, in many cases the situation is reversible.

Imagine firing two rockets off in opposite directions. Each rocket will say that the clocks on the other rocket are running slow. Both will be correct in their observations of this. And whichever rocket it is that changes speed to bring itself into the other frame of reference will be the one that is found to 'actually' have run slow.
That scenario results in the paradox "your clock is running slower than my clock, while my clock is running slower than yours". When the clocks are brought together for comparative, there is a real and a-symmetrical difference. One of the clocks was slower than the other.

15. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
United Kingdom
Posts
7,085
Originally Posted by Presocratics
That scenario results in the paradox "your clock is running slower than my clock, while my clock is running slower than yours". When the clocks are brought together for comparative, there is a real and a-symmetrical difference. One of the clocks was slower than the other.
Its no paradox, it is a core piece of why the theory is called relativity and not absolutivity - and it highlights that you simply can't say that one clock was always running slower than the other. Time dilation is a relative effect and how much you see and how it manifests is more a property of the paths things take than just the speed.

Say I fired two rockets from the north pole (call them A and B) and two from the south pole (C and D). A and B agree that they are fine but C and D are running slow, C and D agree that they are fine but A and B are running slow. Then rocket A turns around to meet up with rocket C, while rocket D turns around to meet rocket B. A and D are then found, in the frames of their partners, to have 'really' run slow despite the symmetries of their initial trajectories and previous agreements about who was 'really' running slow.

16. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by grant hutchison
As in:
I'm interested in what Presocratics thinks that agency might be, because it might go some way to explaining why Presocratics is so interested in something that seems, to the rest of us, to be merely an epiphenomenon - the tension in the spring after some elapsed proper time. Or I might have completely misunderstood. Hence my question.

Grant Hutchison
You want to know what my further thinking is? I opened this thread in the Questions section, for the benefit of tracking down information. Theory and speculations best avoided for this benefit, and stick to unadulterated observation. I do have further thoughts on this subject, but it must be beyond the scope of the question section. We're in the science and tech section now though. Which section is suited to philosophical inquiry? Questioning matters properties and nature of spacetime etc?

17. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Shaula
Its no paradox, it is a core piece of why the theory is called relativity and not absolutivity - and it highlights that you simply can't say that one clock was always running slower than the other. Time dilation is a relative effect and how much you see and how it manifests is more a property of the paths things take than just the speed.

Say I fired two rockets from the north pole (call them A and B) and two from the south pole (C and D). A and B agree that they are fine but C and D are running slow, C and D agree that they are fine but A and B are running slow. Then rocket A turns around to meet up with rocket C, while rocket D turns around to meet rocket B. A and D are then found, in the frames of their partners, to have 'really' run slow despite the symmetries of their initial trajectories and previous agreements about who was 'really' running slow.
Well, relativity and absolutivity are not opposites. Relativity just means, "relative too something else". There were relativity theories before Einstein's day.

I think that to reconcile your rocket scenario, that proper time and perceived time both play a role. When perceived time, or subjectivity are not accounted for, then the observations seam impossible.

The clock spring senario I'm investigating. One way to put it is, clocks are dynamic systems that display more parameters than merely a measure of time. For example, force drives clocks, so clocks give information about expression of force. So I'm looking at relativity from the perspective that clocks provide information about force to see if it reveals a unique perspective. One of these perspectives is that modulation of clock dials corresponds to a proportional modulation of clock force drive mechanisms. Thats given me pause to think

One of the things that grabs me about this, is that the modulated force is empirically derived, an observable, measurable property. As per the OP. The underlying meanings might be subjective to interpretation, but the observation is quite literal
Last edited by Presocratics; 2018-Dec-20 at 07:14 AM.

18. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
I'm having trouble keeping up with the volume of conversations due to study and work. Just so you guys know. A lot of content for consideration going on. I really have to stop and think about some of this stuff

19. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Strange
The changing tension in the spring is just another measure of elapsed time so, obviously, if the clocks have experienced different times, the springs will also have different tensions.

.
Well, theres plenty I dont understand. The standard issue info you provided has already been discussed and isnt the mystery all on its own. And matters behaviors and times properties cannot be obvious to you. You must be exaggerating.

20. Order of Kilopi
Join Date
Mar 2010
Location
United Kingdom
Posts
7,085
Originally Posted by Presocratics
I'm having trouble keeping up with the volume of conversations due to study and work. Just so you guys know. A lot of content for consideration going on. I really have to stop and think about some of this stuff
Take your time - no one is going to badger you for responses or get upset if you just drop the conversation for a bit. It's a forum, not a chore or job.

I think that to reconcile your rocket scenario, that proper time and perceived time both play a role. When perceived time, or subjectivity are not accounted for, then the observations seam impossible.
I'll be honest - I see no need to reconcile the rocket scenario. It doesn't seem impossible, that's how relativity works. It's been tested in all kinds of ways and not failed so far. While logic and intuition are useful tools, at the end of the day science is about making models and testing them until they break. All kinds of counter-intuitive things have been found and tested and so far theory has won out over intuition most times! Except when it didn't and the theory was scrapped or changed. But keep digging into what interests you, this kind of endeavour is its own reward. Just be aware that when it becomes time to convince the scientific community of what you are saying evidence and testability are going to be key*.

* Edit to add: And just to reiterate new theories have their own forum here, as mods have said. And it is a challenging one. Have a look before you post there and think about whether what you want to discuss is ready for the robust challenges you'll get.

21. If you imagine a clockwork clock , idealised , it is in constant motion at a constant rate and needs no spring, it is like an orbiting planet, it needs a start if you like but the hands just go round and round. Real clocks have frictions so they need an energy source. When you idealise the clock and add a spring it is redundant and as far as i can see is not affected by gravity, so it does not record time dilation in any way. Or if you were testing Hooke’s law with a spring it would stay linear and if the force was not a hanging weight you would not need to consider gravity.

22. Originally Posted by Presocratics
I dont know how you get this impression, external agency etc?.
Because you talk about time dilation as if it were an external agency, or a proxy for an external agency. Like this (my bold):
Originally Posted by Presocratics
If I carry a clock with me to large speeds, and or different time dilated gravitational environments, do I perceive my clock speed up or slow down? No. But am I and my clock subject to time dilation's effect's? yes. So I cant perceive the changes in times rate. Both the clocks rate and my rate of perception are synchronized, in a manor of speaking
I'm trying to tease out how you think this works. Because if only elapsed proper time is involved (which would be the standard view), then the tension in the spring is just another consquence of that, as my little thought experiment seeks to demonstrate.

In essence, we can't point you to relevant research and discussion until we understand what it is you want from this time-dilated spring.

Grant Hutchison
Last edited by grant hutchison; 2018-Dec-20 at 12:48 PM.

23. Originally Posted by Presocratics
That scenario results in the paradox "your clock is running slower than my clock, while my clock is running slower than yours".
That is not a paradox, it is how things are.

24. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by profloater
If you imagine a clockwork clock , idealised , it is in constant motion at a constant rate and needs no spring, it is like an orbiting planet, it needs a start if you like but the hands just go round and round. Real clocks have frictions so they need an energy source. When you idealise the clock and add a spring it is redundant and as far as i can see is not affected by gravity, so it does not record time dilation in any way. Or if you were testing Hooke’s law with a spring it would stay linear and if the force was not a hanging weight you would not need to consider gravity.
I like what you are doing here. However I dont think you have the argument cornered just yet but please do check the following reasoning for me? I could use your feedback.

An ideal clock will be nothing more than a balance wheel and a friction-less hair spring. Force of the wheels pendulum inertia, countered by the hair springs restoration force. So this scenario is still valid to my explanation. Altered rate of ticks within this system is still a force interaction, and definable within the terms I laid out. Newtons being force divided by distance, more ticks more distance covered, equating to more force. The pendulums acceleration being altered by time dilation effect.

So why refer to the clocks main drive at all? Because it is a data recorder. Its position and issuing of force stands in proportional lock step with the balance wheel and hair spring, but it also accumulates a record of each tick and gives us a means to measure an accumulation.

The balance wheel and hair spring issue the beat, which the escapement dances too. In turn the escapement commands the issuing of force from the main drive spring. In effect, all these parts act as one system, moving in "proportional lock step". The motion, position and the forces are "proportional" throughout. We can take advantage of this. On a side note, this also includes the dials motion and position, which provides the measure of time.

Because the motion, position and forces are proportional at each end of the clocks system, we can derive a useful measure from the clocks drive spring using Hookes Law. With the added benefit that it accumulates, records consecutive ticks, and historical expression values of force. I focused on this in the OP, because its the easiest way to visualize the divergent force value of time dilated clocks. And not many people are familiar with the operation of the balance wheel and escapement. It would make for a more difficult explanation.

I'll spend time improving this explanation, and checking it

I really like what you did in that refute. I would be grateful if you could check my reasoning's here for fault please? If there is one I know you will be able to uncover it
Last edited by Presocratics; 2018-Dec-20 at 04:00 PM.

25. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Strange
That is not a paradox, it is how things are.
When you bring two clocks together for comparative as per the OP, you dont see two clocks that were slower than each other. One was ahead of the other, expressing a-symmetry.

26. Originally Posted by profloater
If you imagine a clockwork clock , idealised , it is in constant motion at a constant rate and needs no spring, it is like an orbiting planet, it needs a start if you like but the hands just go round and round. Real clocks have frictions so they need an energy source. When you idealise the clock and add a spring it is redundant and as far as i can see is not affected by gravity, so it does not record time dilation in any way. Or if you were testing Hooke’s law with a spring it would stay linear and if the force was not a hanging weight you would not need to consider gravity.
My bold. I assume you are referring to the main spring, the one you wind when it runs down. In a balance wheel clock we still have the balance spring which supplies the restoring force that causes the wheel to oscillate at a characteristic frequency. Yes indeed, in a thought exercise we can make the mechanism frictionless, and make the gears and hands massless, so the oscillating balance wheel could keep the hands moving without the aid of a main spring.

27. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by Shaula
Take your time - no one is going to badger you for responses or get upset if you just drop the conversation for a bit. It's a forum, not a chore or job.

I'll be honest - I see no need to reconcile the rocket scenario. It doesn't seem impossible, that's how relativity works. It's been tested in all kinds of ways and not failed so far. While logic and intuition are useful tools, at the end of the day science is about making models and testing them until they break. All kinds of counter-intuitive things have been found and tested and so far theory has won out over intuition most times! Except when it didn't and the theory was scrapped or changed. But keep digging into what interests you, this kind of endeavour is its own reward. Just be aware that when it becomes time to convince the scientific community of what you are saying evidence and testability are going to be key*.

* Edit to add: And just to reiterate new theories have their own forum here, as mods have said. And it is a challenging one. Have a look before you post there and think about whether what you want to discuss is ready for the robust challenges you'll get.

28. An ideal clock needs no balance wheel, you justset it turning and it keeps time forever in any gravity field. Real clocks fight friction so we add a spring andthen we need a balance wheel andescapement which is the timed element and is as you say affected by the need to push it every cycle, it’s aforced oscilation. This was my first poine because it is not affected by gravity as a spring inertia oscilator and the main spring just overcomes friction. I supposefriction will change but that’ssecond order and you wanted an ideal clock.

29. Originally Posted by Presocratics
I do have further thoughts on this subject, but it must be beyond the scope of the question section. We're in the science and tech section now though. Which section is suited to philosophical inquiry? Questioning matters properties and nature of spacetime etc?
There is no section suited to philosophical enquiry. This forum has a slightly dysfunctional relationship with philosophy, but I'm persuaded that there are good (if regrettable) reasons for that.

Grant Hutchison

30. Member
Join Date
Dec 2018
Posts
67
Originally Posted by profloater
An ideal clock needs no balance wheel, you justset it turning and it keeps time forever in any gravity field. Real clocks fight friction so we add a spring andthen we need a balance wheel andescapement which is the timed element and is as you say affected by the need to push it every cycle, it’s aforced oscilation. This was my first poine because it is not affected by gravity as a spring inertia oscilator and the main spring just overcomes friction. I supposefriction will change but that’ssecond order and you wanted an ideal clock.
Yes, good points. If a free spinning wheel in space is effected by time dilation, its rate slowed and quickened. Superficially this "looks like" acceleration, and accelerating inertial mass is associated with kinetic force. Just let that go by please. I dont want to argue this point. I've got my hands full with the balance wheel