PDA

View Full Version : Time Dilation - Modulated Force



Presocratics
2018-Dec-18, 11:31 AM
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

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-18, 02:09 PM
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 ofIt'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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-18, 03:04 PM
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

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-18, 03:21 PM
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.


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.


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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-18, 03:53 PM
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?

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-18, 04:29 PM
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.


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.


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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-18, 05:10 PM
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
"That doesn't follow at all."

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

mkline55
2018-Dec-18, 05:12 PM
Are you aware that the formula for force has a time component?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-18, 05:36 PM
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

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-18, 06:01 PM
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.


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.


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.


quoting you
"That doesn't follow at all."

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 yoursForgive 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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 05:09 AM
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.

Van Rijn
2018-Dec-19, 06:35 AM
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%E2%80%93Keating_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.

Shaula
2018-Dec-19, 06:44 AM
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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment) showed the twin paradox in action - and the difference there was nanoseconds.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 06:58 AM
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.

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.


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.


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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 07:35 AM
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."


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.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 08:04 AM
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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_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

Van Rijn
2018-Dec-19, 08:16 AM
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.

Van Rijn
2018-Dec-19, 08:20 AM
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).

Van Rijn
2018-Dec-19, 08:31 AM
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.

Shaula
2018-Dec-19, 08:33 AM
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.


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/threads/a-new-angle-on-the-right-angle-lever-paradox.207419/#post-1566323


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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 08:44 AM
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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 08:49 AM
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

Strange
2018-Dec-19, 08:51 AM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 09:11 AM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 09:20 AM
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.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 09:36 AM
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

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 09:38 AM
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

profloater
2018-Dec-19, 10:23 AM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 12:17 PM
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.

Your last comment concerning energy? Will you elaborate this please?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 12:41 PM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 12:44 PM
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?

Grant Hutchison

Why you ask? dictated by causality, would be the short answer

profloater
2018-Dec-19, 12:57 PM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-19, 02:33 PM
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?

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 03:20 PM
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".



And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?
Why you ask? dictated by causality, would be the short answerThat 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

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 04:15 PM
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

PetersCreek
2018-Dec-19, 06:12 PM
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.

profloater
2018-Dec-19, 06:35 PM
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.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 06:47 PM
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

Strange
2018-Dec-19, 09:57 PM
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.

Strange
2018-Dec-19, 09:59 PM
And why, in your opinion, is perception synchronized with clock rate?

I don't even know what that means!

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-19, 10:09 PM
I don't even know what that means!As in:

... 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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 02:39 AM
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.

Shaula
2018-Dec-20, 03:05 AM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 05:01 AM
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.

Shaula
2018-Dec-20, 06:39 AM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 06:39 AM
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?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 07:08 AM
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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 07:19 AM
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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 07:59 AM
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.

Shaula
2018-Dec-20, 09:05 AM
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.

profloater
2018-Dec-20, 11:14 AM
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.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-20, 12:44 PM
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):

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 (https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?170705-Time-Dilation-Modulated-Force&p=2470340#post2470340) 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

Strange
2018-Dec-20, 01:40 PM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 03:32 PM
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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 03:35 PM
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.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-20, 03:36 PM
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.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 03:38 PM
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.

This deserves a good reply. I'll return to you soon

profloater
2018-Dec-20, 03:39 PM
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.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-20, 03:48 PM
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

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 04:44 PM
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 :)

Presocratics
2018-Dec-20, 05:00 PM
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

Oh, ok. I might have some content I can share. A continuation of this OP, accounts based on empirical observations. New perspectives, but non theoretical

Strange
2018-Dec-20, 06:22 PM
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.

That is only true if there was some asymmetry in the paths through spacetime of the two clocks. Without that, both clocks will see the other running slow (and they will both show the same elapsed time if brought together again).

Hornblower
2018-Dec-20, 11:42 PM
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 :)
No, let's not just let that go. Let's pull back from the more complex case of a balance wheel and consider profloater's ideal clock, which appears to be simply a frictionless flywheel, along with an observer to count the revolutions. Let's consider clock A which stays put and clock B which is taken on a high speed journey and then returned to the origin. We observe that clock B has shown fewer cycles. My inclination, from reading various sources, is to analyze the phenomenon as a result of clock B having "experienced" less elapsed time in its own frame of reference because of the relativistic attributes of the cosmos. This is the proper time that has been mentioned repeatedly. No physical alteration or perturbation of the clock during the journey. I don't know why it works this way, and for all I know it may be unknowable.

Once again, I am not an expert on this topic, so don't blindly take what I say as gospel. My inclination is to trust the mainstream experts who have exhaustively tested GR over the past century, and found no doable experiment that could contradict it.

I don't think of time dilation as any sort of causative action that physically acts on a moving clock. To me it is merely a description of a phenomenon we have observed in various experiments.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-21, 01:31 AM
Yes. We've grown up understanding intuitively that the space trajectory we follow between two points determines our "proper distance" - that is, we can minimize distance travelled by taking a straight line path, and any other path increases the distance we travel as we go from A and B.
What we need to get used (and which isn't intuitive) is that our proper time depends on the spacetime trajectory we follow between two spacetime events - that is, we can maximize the time we experience if we follow a geodesic between the two events, and any other worldline connecting those two events will experience less proper time.

Fundamentally, it's geometry - just not the sort of geometry we're used to.

Grant Hutchison

Presocratics
2018-Dec-21, 07:17 AM
No, let's not just let that go. Let's pull back from the more complex case of a balance wheel and consider profloater's ideal clock, which appears to be simply a frictionless flywheel, along with an observer to count the revolutions. Let's consider clock A which stays put and clock B which is taken on a high speed journey and then returned to the origin. We observe that clock B has shown fewer cycles. My inclination, from reading various sources, is to analyze the phenomenon as a result of clock B having "experienced" less elapsed time in its own frame of reference because of the relativistic attributes of the cosmos. This is the proper time that has been mentioned repeatedly. No physical alteration or perturbation of the clock during the journey. I don't know why it works this way, and for all I know it may be unknowable.

Once again, I am not an expert on this topic, so don't blindly take what I say as gospel. My inclination is to trust the mainstream experts who have exhaustively tested GR over the past century, and found no doable experiment that could contradict it.

I don't think of time dilation as any sort of causative action that physically acts on a moving clock. To me it is merely a description of a phenomenon we have observed in various experiments.

Ok, this sounds like a good plan. I think this is the natural progression for this topic. I have some force considerations which might build context for this task. I'll return after some thought

Presocratics
2018-Dec-21, 07:24 AM
Yes. We've grown up understanding intuitively that the space trajectory we follow between two points determines our "proper distance" - that is, we can minimize distance travelled by taking a straight line path, and any other path increases the distance we travel as we go from A and B.
What we need to get used (and which isn't intuitive) is that our proper time depends on the spacetime trajectory we follow between two spacetime events - that is, we can maximize the time we experience if we follow a geodesic between the two events, and any other worldline connecting those two events will experience less proper time.

Fundamentally, it's geometry - just not the sort of geometry we're used to.

Grant Hutchison

Sounds like we have refined a test of the OP. Yes, lets see how these force considerations look while compared to the traditional view, as you have laid them out here

Presocratics
2018-Dec-21, 07:39 AM
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.

I know the tests for relativity are good. I'm still working on my conceptualizations however. I attempt for intuitive understandings, and if the reality stands contrasted to intuitive, then I have the measure against the attempt for intuitive. Perhaps I can understand something about the weirdness having developed this contrast. Yes, the endeavor is its own reward. I'm kind of hooked on this stuff

Yes ok, the ATM section. I'll heed your advice

We have refined a test for my OP. I like it

profloater
2018-Dec-21, 11:13 AM
Ok so a simple clock is a solid sphere spinning in vacuum and shielded from radiation and fields except for the gravity field. We can observe it. The bearings are ideal and gimballed. In detail it is perfectly elastic so experiencing hoop stresses due to spin and its shape is therefore distorted. It has mass and angular momentum. In a gravity field gradient it experiences tidal forces which will change its second moment and thus rate. However the question here is not gradient nor acceleration but moving into a higher gravity field where time is dilated. Should i say spacetime is dilated? The forces on the ideal beraings change. Now, i think, the second moment is constant, there is no time dimension in the second moment, it keeps proper time and a remote observer sees it run slow. Now what about the elasticity forces? I think they remain constant. I am ignoring gradient as explained although the supposed black hole definitely has gradient but i can say this sphere is tiny. It is a “spring” but the stored energy is irrelevant to the gravity question. I think!:)

Hornblower
2018-Dec-21, 01:35 PM
Ok so a simple clock is a solid sphere spinning in vacuum and shielded from radiation and fields except for the gravity field. We can observe it. The bearings are ideal and gimballed. In detail it is perfectly elastic so experiencing hoop stresses due to spin and its shape is therefore distorted. It has mass and angular momentum. In a gravity field gradient it experiences tidal forces which will change its second moment and thus rate. However the question here is not gradient nor acceleration but moving into a higher gravity field where time is dilated. Should i say spacetime is dilated? The forces on the ideal beraings change. Now, i think, the second moment is constant, there is no time dimension in the second moment, it keeps proper time and a remote observer sees it run slow. Now what about the elasticity forces? I think they remain constant. I am ignoring gradient as explained although the supposed black hole definitely has gradient but i can say this sphere is tiny. It is a “spring” but the stored energy is irrelevant to the gravity question. I think!:)

In my opinion you are introducing complications by which your flywheel ceases to be an ideal thought-exercise timer. Let's make the flywheel absolutely rigid for the purposes of this exercise.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-21, 02:06 PM
I know the tests for relativity are good. I'm still working on my conceptualizations however. I attempt for intuitive understandings, and if the reality stands contrasted to intuitive, then I have the measure against the attempt for intuitive. Perhaps I can understand something about the weirdness having developed this contrast. Yes, the endeavor is its own reward. I'm kind of hooked on this stuff

Yes ok, the ATM section. I'll heed your advice

We have refined a test for my OP. I like it

This thread has gone through enough twists and turns that I had forgotten that your OP question was concerned only with journeys at different depths in a gravitational well, without dealing with relative high speed motion.


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

My bold. It does not seem that way to me. I cannot think of any reason that the tension of the spring should depend on anything other than the amount it has unwound, which in theory (as I think I understand it) depends only on the elapsed proper time since the clock was wound. Apparently the experts who understand relativity better than I do think the same way, and thus have no motive to do a thought exercise about possible differences in the behavior of different types of timers in the same spacetime journey.

As has been noted before, the best spring-driven chronometers ever built are neither sensitive nor stable enough for any practical test with today's technology.

profloater
2018-Dec-21, 05:52 PM
In my opinion you are introducing complications by which your flywheel ceases to be an ideal thought-exercise timer. Let's make the flywheel absolutely rigid for the purposes of this exercise.

I introduced elasticity because of the central role of Hookes law in the OP and without elasticity any role of a gravity change is hidden. I idealised the frictionless bearings and shielding. I separated the mainspring in the OP to a simple elasticity. I wait to see if better physicists than I can see how gravity might affect elasticity, which is the OP question. I felt balance wheels and mainsprings in clockwork would confuse the experiment.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-21, 06:05 PM
To be honest, the OP question is still not clear to me. Is it about gravity and elasticity? Is it about time dilation and elasticity? Is it about this concept of "modulating force" (a term I still don't understand)?
The fact that we're now seeing the mathematics of relativity described as "the traditional view (https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?170705-Time-Dilation-Modulated-Force&p=2470715#post2470715)" convinces me I haven't a clue what's going on here.

Grant Hutchison

profloater
2018-Dec-21, 06:19 PM
I do agree, I think I may have assumed my own version of the question which I now think of as a spinning inertia in time dilation. The spin introduces the time dimension but I still think the inertia remains the same assuming the mass and length dimensions have not changed. That last part is where elasticity might come in. The object in a higher g field must shrink and spin faster therefore changing its proper time keeping locally. Or do we say that G is still constant while g has changed?
Using Newton is probably wrong once we consider dilation effects. I have confused myself trying to understand the OP question.

PetersCreek
2018-Dec-21, 06:22 PM
Yes ok, the ATM section. I'll heed your advice

Before you do, please read our rules if you haven't already done so. In particular, rule 13 and 13A apply to the Against the Mainstream forum. I also recommend reading our advice about alternate theories. Both are linked in my signature line below. There are also a few other "sticky" threads worth reading at the top of the ATM forum.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-21, 08:25 PM
It is clear to me that Presocratics, in the OP, is describing a spring whose tension diminishes as the clock it is powering runs between windings. That clearly is a mainspring turning a mechanism at a rate that is regulated by a governor or oscillator of some sort. Beyond that, the presentation becomes imprecise and/or ambiguous, resulting in lack of clarity in describing his inquiry. A couple of cases in point:

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.
My bold. If you are just saying the position and tension in one clock simply diverge from the respective quantities in the other clock, that is just as trivial as the divergence of the dials. If you mean something else about position and tension, what is it?

Divergent force values dependent upon gravitational influence, time dilation. Does gravitational influence in this exercise mean a steep gravitational gradient that stresses the mechanism, or is it merely the effect of being in a deep gravitational well but not having a stressful gradient across the mechanism?

I am not sure what you mean by divergent force values.

AGN Fuel
2018-Dec-21, 09:41 PM
My bold. If you are just saying the position and tension in one clock simply diverge from the respective quantities in the other clock, that is just as trivial as the divergence of the dials. If you mean something else about position and tension, what is it.

This is certainly the sense I am getting out of this discussion. I can't shake the feeling that the OP is looking at the difference between the two clocks and perhaps referencing them against some independent and absolute time frame. This then allows the difference to be attributed to the way the different gravity fields act on the springs. I certainly stand to be corrected (I'm enjoying this thread - it re-opened my interest in spring-driven clock mechanisms!), but I simply think it's a matter that there's no more surprise in seeing a difference between the springs in the thought experiment than if they had just stayed together & measured different elapsed times.

profloater
2018-Dec-21, 10:45 PM
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

May i just correct that. A Newton is a force. The dimensions are mass.distance divided by time squared. Force times distance moved is work done (in joules) a lifted weight has potential energy like a wound spring . The rate of work done is called the power in Watts. A watt is a Joule per second. Thisconfusion of yours may help untangle the question.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 03:09 AM
Ok so a simple clock is a solid sphere spinning in vacuum and shielded from radiation and fields except for the gravity field. We can observe it. The bearings are ideal and gimballed. In detail it is perfectly elastic so experiencing hoop stresses due to spin and its shape is therefore distorted. It has mass and angular momentum. In a gravity field gradient it experiences tidal forces which will change its second moment and thus rate. However the question here is not gradient nor acceleration but moving into a higher gravity field where time is dilated. Should i say spacetime is dilated? The forces on the ideal beraings change. Now, i think, the second moment is constant, there is no time dimension in the second moment, it keeps proper time and a remote observer sees it run slow. Now what about the elasticity forces? I think they remain constant. I am ignoring gradient as explained although the supposed black hole definitely has gradient but i can say this sphere is tiny. It is a “spring” but the stored energy is irrelevant to the gravity question. I think!:)

You have a broader set of understandings than I do, factors that act on matter.. Do I need bearings? Hornblower and I were talking about adopting a one part clock, just a balance wheel spinning in gravitational void. But this doesn't get us around the tidal forces.

We could just pretend tidal forces dont exist for our ideal clock. Or, we could build our balance wheel so that tidal forces are minimal. Or we could pretend to have the tech to flatten spacetime just a little across the span of our device. :)

A balance wheel designed to minimize tidal force might be cup shaped, concave side facing towards the gravity source. So all parts are the same distance from the gravity source. But the disk has thickness. But we make it very thin to minimize this effect. You see where I'm going with this? If there is a minute affect remaining, we have a spacetime flatterner to iron out the wrinkles in space. Does this clock work for you?

Our device has no recorder, so we place a local observer to count revolutions, so we can later compare.

Let us keep working on our ideal clock, till we're all on the same page.

I will also share some perspectives I have been working on, which I am going to be asking of our ideal clock once its built and running. I'm going to need help with that too, because I want my statements and logic and defined measures to qualify as empirical or close too it. We just want to talk about the system that we observe before us, "all theory and assumptions put aside". We just want to describe in terms of what we see and what measured values we can literally place.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 03:55 AM
This thread has gone through enough twists and turns that I had forgotten that your OP question was concerned only with journeys at different depths in a gravitational well, without dealing with relative high speed motion.

Yes, the OP forms the consideration as gravitational time dilation. Motion is obviously equivalent, but we want to limit the number of considerations to simplify the thought experiment. And so we can stand a chance of arriving on the same page with minimal effort spent. We can always apply our conclusions to the wider scope of motion afterwards.


My bold. It does not seem that way to me. I cannot think of any reason that the tension of the spring should depend on anything other than the amount it has unwound, which in theory (as I think I understand it) depends only on the elapsed proper time since the clock was wound. Apparently the experts who understand relativity better than I do think the same way, and thus have no motive to do a thought exercise about possible differences in the behavior of different types of timers in the same spacetime journey.

Thats fine. We are all starting out with pre-formed ideas. Thats part of the test, to see how our current views compare from a different perspective. I'm going to try to prime a different perspective. A test perspective that takes the modulated force value "described in the OP" at face value. I'll try at least


As has been noted before, the best spring-driven chronometers ever built are neither sensitive nor stable enough for any practical test with today's technology.

Sensitivity isnt just an issue if we're envisioning an extreme gravitational influence, near and afar a black hole for example. Any time keeping instrument would serve this scenario.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 04:05 AM
I introduced elasticity because of the central role of Hookes law in the OP and without elasticity any role of a gravity change is hidden. I idealised the frictionless bearings and shielding. I separated the mainspring in the OP to a simple elasticity. I wait to see if better physicists than I can see how gravity might affect elasticity, which is the OP question. I felt balance wheels and mainsprings in clockwork would confuse the experiment.

Yes, however what I said before. Hornblower and I have attempted to form a simpler minimal ideal clock. What do you think of using the rotating disk in gravitating void?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 04:37 AM
To be honest, the OP question is still not clear to me. Is it about gravity and elasticity? Is it about time dilation and elasticity? Is it about this concept of "modulating force" (a term I still don't understand)?
The fact that we're now seeing the mathematics of relativity described as "the traditional view (https://forum.cosmoquest.org/showthread.php?170705-Time-Dilation-Modulated-Force&p=2470715#post2470715)" convinces me I haven't a clue what's going on here.

Grant Hutchison

I understand. I havent shared all my considerations, so my reasons for this inquiry arent made clear. So the fault isnt yours. This OP started out as an information gathering effort. But now its a conversation I'll try to develop it further.

I'm going to say a few things, and they're going to sound a little odd. But the test is not whether or not they sound odd, its about whether or not they are true. If they are true, then we move through and test consecutive statements, and build a perspective this way.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 04:39 AM
Before you do, please read our rules if you haven't already done so. In particular, rule 13 and 13A apply to the Against the Mainstream forum. I also recommend reading our advice about alternate theories. Both are linked in my signature line below. There are also a few other "sticky" threads worth reading at the top of the ATM forum.

Thank you. I will look over those details. I dont have any plans for an ATM though. perhaps another time

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 07:18 AM
It is clear to me that Presocratics, in the OP, is describing a spring whose tension diminishes as the clock it is powering runs between windings. That clearly is a mainspring turning a mechanism at a rate that is regulated by a governor or oscillator of some sort. Beyond that, the presentation becomes imprecise and/or ambiguous, resulting in lack of clarity in describing his inquiry. A couple of cases in point:

My bold. If you are just saying the position and tension in one clock simply diverge from the respective quantities in the other clock, that is just as trivial as the divergence of the dials. If you mean something else about position and tension, what is it?

The OP doesnt go into the reasons of interest. It just identifies a divergent value. The divergent values of clock systems due to gravitys time dilation effect, are not exclusive to its measure of time. The spring possesses a divergent value also, defined empirically by Hookes Law. Is it more than merely an observation though, is it nontrivial? well it needent be more than an observation to justify its scientific credentials. I suggest that even though I referred to a dials display of time dilation as being "trivial to say" that does not mean to say it is a trivial observation. That speaks towards it as a common observation. Whether Force modulation is a trivial phenomenon or not being yet answered, however it is certainly not a common observation. If google search is an indication.

Seams everybody I show this too can see it. But nobody is familiar with it. I dont take it for granted that it is uninteresting just because others havent focused on it much. Thats not really a useful measure in my book. In anycase, I'll try to open a door that makes this seam a little more interesting for you. Its just a matter of perspective. I've had time to turn this around within my head, so perhaps you can help me qualify some ideas


Does gravitational influence in this exercise mean a steep gravitational gradient that stresses the mechanism, or is it merely the effect of being in a deep gravitational well but not having a stressful gradient across the mechanism?

In essence, I'm interested in this as an extension of time dilation effect. Purely its association with GR spacetime. Not gradient, weight or stresses etc.


I am not sure what you mean by divergent force values.

Two springs of different tension states defined by Hookes Force Law. The divergent value is associated with or caused by time dilation effect, as per the OP, this association is my interest. I'll explain my thoughts further, but a question you might ask yourself is "how does a clock measure time, within context that force drives clocks?" and or "what is time, within context that force driven devices measure it"?

Can you check this logic for me please?
"If forces drive clocks, then do clocks measure force"? Sounds odd, I know. But give it some thought.
Dont think of this within terms of kitchen utility. We're seeking questions and prospective answers for the fundamental associations? although you certainly could take the springs from the clock and use them to build a set of kitchen scales that measure force. What does it mean that we use the same mechanical device "spring" to measure weight force, and drive clocks measure of time"? The same mechanism drives both devices, but put the spring behind a clock dial and we never think in terms of forces. And scales never lead us to think of time.

This helps put a twist on perspective.
It is easy to think of a train in terms of being a force driven machine. Engine driving gears, connected to a shaft that drives wheels, that pulls a heavy load. In a sense a train can be used to measure force, or more commonly force is a means to describe a train.
But consider the similarities between a clock and a train? The clock has an engine which drives gears and shaft, that drives the dial which stands analogous to a wheel.
Clocks and trains are more or less the same type of system as each other “while forgiving the balance wheel to stead the rate”. Trains are like massive clocks, and clocks are like miniature trains. We are not accustom to thinking of their system similarities, day to day untility doesn’t demand that of us, but the conceptual divide is largely arbitrary, the divide doesn’t exist. Drive a train at a steady rate, and place a dial on the wheels. Its a clock. And in turn, a clocks function is entirely a consideration of forces, and so in an abstract but very literal sense, must be a measure of forces.

What use does this general concept have? For this inquiry it is useful to think within terms of how we measure time, and what we use measures of time for within our everyday lives and sciences. Boiled down to a most fundamental statement, "we are using force driven systems, to measure force driven systems". I believe this is a universal truth, but I would like to have this notion tests on the basis that all universal systems are force driven.

If I haven’t made my point clear within this message, then please allow me another attempt?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 07:31 AM
This is certainly the sense I am getting out of this discussion. I can't shake the feeling that the OP is looking at the difference between the two clocks and perhaps referencing them against some independent and absolute time frame. This then allows the difference to be attributed to the way the different gravity fields act on the springs. I certainly stand to be corrected (I'm enjoying this thread - it re-opened my interest in spring-driven clock mechanisms!), but I simply think it's a matter that there's no more surprise in seeing a difference between the springs in the thought experiment than if they had just stayed together & measured different elapsed times.

Welcome to the conversation

However, the divergence of the dials due to time dilation effect is very non-trivial. And by extension, why would any further associations or implications of it be considered trivial? I think the discipline here is to ensure we are not taking anything for granted. Taking times process for granted, while its process is shrouded within mystery?

How does time command matters forces, that modulate a clocks rate? or is this even the right way to frame the question? Trying to answer the question becomes an informative exercise, because it forces us to think within terms of cause and effect. Forces drive the dial which measures time. So does time have to command the forces, that enable clock mechanisms to serve as a measure of time?

I hope the questions themselves sound sane, even if you doubt the prospect they will serve as a useful inquiry. We judge their utility having tried, and not before.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 07:36 AM
May i just correct that. A Newton is a force. The dimensions are mass.distance divided by time squared. Force times distance moved is work done (in joules) a lifted weight has potential energy like a wound spring . The rate of work done is called the power in Watts. A watt is a Joule per second. Thisconfusion of yours may help untangle the question.

Thank you for this. I'll think on how time squared is incorporated within this formula.

The dimensions are mass.distance divided by time squared.

profloater
2018-Dec-22, 08:15 AM
Thank you for this. I'll think on how time squared is incorporated within this formula.

The dimensions are mass.distance divided by time squared.
From force equals mass times acceleration.
In a spring we store energy as stress, elastic in this case. Stress is the same as pressure, force per unit area. Dimensions: mass divided by length and time squared.
Of course most springs are designed with bending stress involving tension, compression and shear stresses.
The forces stored involve the distortion of crystals where atoms are held together by interatomic forces and these are where your thought experiment leads.

Strange
2018-Dec-22, 10:45 AM
The OP doesnt go into the reasons of interest. It just identifies a divergent value. The divergent values of clock systems due to gravitys time dilation effect, are not exclusive to its measure of time. The spring possesses a divergent value also, defined empirically by Hookes Law. Is it more than merely an observation though, is it nontrivial?

You seem to think that the divergence between the springs of the two clocks is somehow different from the divergence in the positions of the hands. I can't see why you would think that.

The divergence in the springs is a trivial observation, if you know that the the clocks display different times.


Whether Force modulation is a trivial phenomenon or not being yet answered, however it is certainly not a common observation. If google search is an indication.

It is not a common observation because, as already explained, it is not a possible observation.


Two springs of different tension states defined by Hookes Force Law. The divergent value is associated with or caused by time dilation effect, as per the OP, this association is my interest. I'll explain my thoughts further, but a question you might ask yourself is "how does a clock measure time, within context that force drives clocks?" and or "what is time, within context that force driven devices measure it"?

A clock of the sort you are describing measures time by converting the change in tension of the spring into the positions of the hands. The two things are just different aspects of the same thing. So they are obviously affected equally by time dilation.


"If forces drive clocks, then do clocks measure force"? Sounds odd, I know. But give it some thought.

I suppose you could consider the position of the hands of this clock being a representation of the amount the force in the spring has been reduced. Not really odd, and not particularly useful.


And scales never lead us to think of time.

You could hang a clepsydra from a spring balance and watch the weight change as the clock ran down.


What use does this general concept have? For this inquiry it is useful to think within terms of how we measure time, and what we use measures of time for within our everyday lives and sciences. Boiled down to a most fundamental statement, "we are using force driven systems, to measure force driven systems". I believe this is a universal truth, but I would like to have this notion tests on the basis that all universal systems are force driven.

You might be able to make that argument for a specific type of clock. But certainly not all. And the clocks that are used in practice to measure time dilation in experiments do not involve any forces at all.



If I haven’t made my point clear within this message, then please allow me another attempt?

I still have no idea what the point is.

Strange
2018-Dec-22, 10:52 AM
However, the divergence of the dials due to time dilation effect is very non-trivial.

What do you mean by "non-trivial"? Do you mean not intuitive? It is extremely trivial once one knows about special relativity.


How does time command matters forces, that modulate a clocks rate? or is this even the right way to frame the question? Trying to answer the question becomes an informative exercise, because it forces us to think within terms of cause and effect. Forces drive the dial which measures time. So does time have to command the forces, that enable clock mechanisms to serve as a measure of time?

These questions seem fairly meaningless to me. What does it mean for "time to command forces"? Many things change through time, but does that mean that time "commands" them to do it? More than just confusing cause and effect, this just seems like a bizarre anthropomorphisation of time. Does time "command" planets to orbit the sun or "command" entropy to increase? Could they rebel and refuse to accept the commands? Is time taking its orders from something else?

profloater
2018-Dec-22, 11:04 AM
As in my first post the clock part of the question is a red herring, the force is to overcome friction. If you forget clocks and think about stored force, then does dilation have any effect? This becomes a quantum effect question about the force transmitting particles of the standard model. IMO.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-22, 01:38 PM
I understand. I havent shared all my considerations, so my reasons for this inquiry arent made clear. So the fault isnt yours. This OP started out as an information gathering effort. But now its a conversation I'll try to develop it further.

I'm going to say a few things, and they're going to sound a little odd. But the test is not whether or not they sound odd, its about whether or not they are true. If they are true, then we move through and test consecutive statements, and build a perspective this way.Why not just spit the whole thing out? The Socratic method may work face to face, but it's a disaster on asynchronous media like this forum.
I guarantee you that "saying a few things that sound a little odd" will get you stuck in endless discussion before you ever get to your "Big Reveal", and will most likely end with an involuntary move to ATM, at which point things will really hot up.

Grant Hutchison

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 01:45 PM
As in my first post the clock part of the question is a red herring, the force is to overcome friction. If you forget clocks and think about stored force, then does dilation have any effect? This becomes a quantum effect question about the force transmitting particles of the standard model. IMO.

We have discussed the role of the balance wheel and hair spring being the time keeping device. And the intimate relationship the clocks drive springs shares with the balance wheel. I introduced the subject via the drive spring because it provides a simple observation, measurement. I'm not very familiar with the term redherring. Can you be more specific please?

The clocks balance wheel and hair spring are not for the purposes of overcoming friction. It is a force driven device, and an increased or decreased frequency has the same implication as laid out in the OP. This was discussed early within the thread. The drive spring operates in lock step proportionality with the balance wheel in terms of motion, position and force, and records a meaningful legacy of ticks. Accumulates data for our two clock comparative measure.

In a nut shell, Pendulum action is dependent upon kinetic energy, and a springs restoration force. The comparative of our two clocks indicating a different number of ticks has occurred, each tick corresponding to a value of force expressed, we arrive at divergent values of force of our two clocks. Taken at face value this is modulated force associated with time dilation.

It has been said that this would obviously be the case, and trivial to note, because time causes it. But that speaks as though we know what times process is, when we dont. That is taking a lot for granted.

You say "a quantum effect". Yes, of course.
Springs are understood in terms of quantum behavior. But springs also drive clocks that measure time, a parameter of GR. Clock activity is modulated by GR, time dilation. That modulation caused by GR corresponds to the principle of this OP, a springs modulated expression of force. We can talk about the possibility this modulation of force isnt real, but it sure does appear to be an empirically derived measurement, an observation. So we're not even theorizing anything here. This is merely a description of the device and its observed behaviors within terms of QM and GR, within context that clocks are a single device that corresponds to both these fundamental theories. Clocks are made of QM parts, atoms, and so can be thought of as a study "in" QM. While clocks also measure the parameter of time, and so can be thought of as providing a study "of" GR. One device, a split personality.

If two things correspond to a third, then does that third thing instruct something of how those two things correspond to each other? Do clocks serve in this respect, as part of an association triangle?

This is not an effort in theory. The idea is to avoid theory, but still progress an inquiry based upon observables and empirical measurement. It might seam childishly simple, but I like the logics and believe them useful to some degree. Fun to think about at least.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 01:59 PM
Why not just spit the whole thing out? The Socratic method may work face to face, but it's a disaster on asynchronous media like this forum.
I guarantee you that "saying a few things that sound a little odd" will get you stuck in endless discussion before you ever get to your "Big Reveal", and will most likely end with an involuntary move to ATM, at which point things will really hot up.

Grant Hutchison

haha lol, yes. I mean things like this.

"Force drives clocks, therefore clocks measure force"

The justification is that clock function is entirely a consideration of forces. Or forces entirely define a clocks function. either way.

This statement is for conceptual purposes, and not practical utility. Just a realization thats usefully pointed out for my OP

I dont believe anything of what I said is theory, so I dont see why its content would be objectionable. I'm just describing regular stuff in a different way. I mean, even the main point of my OP, modulated force. People are saying it is obvious, but at the same time almost nobody has spoken about it. Google the concept and you will see. Or maybe its like Columbus egg, obvious once you've heard it, but not before.

I believe it is merely a new perspective on conventional thoery. Recognizing a correspondence between force and time "within conventional theory" yields insights like.........

Clocks are made of QM parts, atoms, and so can be thought of as a study "in" QM. While clocks also measure the parameter of time, and so can be thought of as providing a study "of" GR. A single device that corresponds to both these fundamental theories

Again it is an obvious statement. But I havent come across this line of reasoning elsewhere. Maybe it does exist, then I would like to find it

Presocratics
2018-Dec-22, 02:22 PM
You seem to think that the divergence between the springs of the two clocks is somehow different from the divergence in the positions of the hands. I can't see why you would think that..

Well, clock springs are usefully defined by parameters of force, and dials measure parameter of time. So they are different properties and defined by different units. However, they do strictly correspond to each other. How would you suggest they are the same, within scientific terms please?

Strange
2018-Dec-22, 02:27 PM
haha lol, yes. I mean things like this.

"Force drives clocks, therefore clocks measure force"

I don't think that is true, even for the sort of mechanical clocks you are describing. You could say that the clock measures how the tension (or energy) in the spring as changed. And the change in force exerted by the spring changes in the same way. So both the indication of elapsed time and the change in the spring are consequences of the release of energy by the clock mechanism.


People are saying it is obvious, but at the same time almost nobody has spoken about it.

Many things are obvious but not worth talking about.


Recognizing a correspondence between force and time "within conventional theory" yields insights like.........

Insights like what?

And there is no general correspondence between force and time, even if you can contrive one for some particular case.


Clocks are made of QM parts, atoms, and so can be thought of as a study "in" QM.

So is everything else. But QM has no significant effect on mechanical clocks, other than the rather obvious fact that one can describe properties of the materials based on the interactions of the atoms in the material. But trying to discuss a clockwork mechanism in terms of electron energy levels and Fermi-Dirac statistics, is about as useful as trying to explain the execution of a complex computer program in terms of transistors turning on and off.

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-22, 02:49 PM
I believe it is merely a new perspective on conventional thoery. Recognizing a correspondence between force and time "within conventional theory" yields insights like.........So what insight are you claiming to have had? You seem to be going round and round the houses with vague connections between "modulated force" (which you've yet to define), time and gravity, which seem at best trite and at worst misleading.
Just tell us the insight you want to share. Please.

Grant Hutchison

Hornblower
2018-Dec-22, 06:34 PM
Presocratics, if you do not wish to get into theory, you can forget about discussing the behavior of a conventional spring-powered clock in a relativistic journey through spacetime for the time being. As has been pointed out, the best spring-powered mechanical clocks ever made are neither sensitive nor stable enough for any test we are capable of doing with today's technology. The best we can do is a thought experiment in which we apply general relativity. That is Theory with a capital T.

The more this thread goes on, the more your presentations cloud rather than clarify whatever issues were raised in the OP. In recent posts you have addressed the possibility that steep gravitational gradients could distort parts of the clock and perhaps degrade its accuracy as a timekeeper if ignored. This is something that can be analyzed by Newtonian means, and it does not address the effects of placing the clock at different levels in a deep gravitational well. After all, a position near the event horizon of a billion-solar-mass black hole is very deep in such a well, but the gradient across a small object such as a typical clock is vanishingly slight.

In your OP you appeared to be envisioning the possibility that the clock is giving more information than just the elapsed time that it ran. Please tell us what sort of information you are envisioning, and how it might apply to the experiment.

While you are at it, please scroll back to post 75 where I asked two explicit questions. Can you give me short answers rather than long walls of text?

Once again, this is theory, whether you like it or not.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-23, 04:17 AM
Back to the OP. I am going to keep on seeking clarification of what you are thinking here, and not let myself be diverted by complicated digressions.

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.......Since you mentioned Hooke's Law, let's complete this statement by saying that we observe that the second spring is wound up twice as far from its fully relaxed state.


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.It is trivial to note that the dials display different amounts of movement. It may or may not be trivial to conclude that different amounts of time elapsed.
However the springs position and its respective force/tension values are also divergent, as your earlier assessment attests.Once again, you did not mention position at that point. I completed it for you.

If the observation that the dials have turned different amounts is trivial, then the observation that springs have unwound by different amounts is also trivial, because the dials and springs are mechanically linked the same way in both clocks. In accordance with Hooke's Law, the springs have different amounts of tension. No mystery here.
Divergent force values dependent upon gravitational influence, time dilation. This is sparse and vague, but it appears to indicate that you know something about general relativity and see it as a reason for the differences.


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?Since I still have no idea what sort of "more information" you are envisioning here, I cannot help you search for appropriate information.
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 ofMy bold. If by "this observation" you mean the observation of the aforementioned differences between the two clocks, I attribute those differences to the lesser amount of elapsed proper time for the one that was deep in a gravitational well for a while, in accordance with General Relativity. There is plenty of literature out there on this topic.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-23, 05:21 AM
Presocratics, if you do not wish to get into theory, you can forget about discussing the behavior of a conventional spring-powered clock in a relativistic journey through spacetime for the time being. As has been pointed out, the best spring-powered mechanical clocks ever made are neither sensitive nor stable enough for any test we are capable of doing with today's technology. The best we can do is a thought experiment in which we apply general relativity. That is Theory with a capital T.

The more this thread goes on, the more your presentations cloud rather than clarify whatever issues were raised in the OP. In recent posts you have addressed the possibility that steep gravitational gradients could distort parts of the clock and perhaps degrade its accuracy as a timekeeper if ignored. This is something that can be analyzed by Newtonian means, and it does not address the effects of placing the clock at different levels in a deep gravitational well. After all, a position near the event horizon of a billion-solar-mass black hole is very deep in such a well, but the gradient across a small object such as a typical clock is vanishingly slight.

In your OP you appeared to be envisioning the possibility that the clock is giving more information than just the elapsed time that it ran. Please tell us what sort of information you are envisioning, and how it might apply to the experiment.

While you are at it, please scroll back to post 75 where I asked two explicit questions. Can you give me short answers rather than long walls of text?

Once again, this is theory, whether you like it or not.

I mean, I'm not injecting "alternate theory". When I point to the spring comparative and derive a divergent force value. Or when I say clocks are a single device which correspond to both fundamental theories QM and GR. Or that clocks are dynamic systems which give us more information than merely a measure of time, by looking to the back end function. These are observations, not theory. Im not saying we cant continue our discussion, thought experiments.

I didnt raise the subject for gravitational gradients. I was responding to profloater. You and I had spoken about a good concept for a simple ideal clock. We should continue along those lines.

The information clocks give in addition to a measure of time, are the forces that drive the clocks function and enable it to measure the parameter of time. You simply take a note of the system forces, and note how they correspond to the measure of time. Time dilation, the forces modulate. As per the OP.

My clouded presentation simply points out that the use force driven systems to measure other force driven systems. "All" clocks are force driven, and all natural systems are force driven. The modulated force noted in the OP, does transpose to all natural systems. No natural system if beyond the scope of time dilation effect, so far as I am aware, and time dilation effect always enables a divergent measurement of distance that forces have acted over. Newtons, force divided by distance.

If you think this is silly then lets not worry about continuing. I dont really feel an urge to prove anything. Im just curious about it. It looks like an empirical measure to me, so Im not ready to dismiss it as "obvious and uninteresting" because time causes it. I think that poor reasoning

Presocratics
2018-Dec-23, 05:50 AM
I don't think that is true, even for the sort of mechanical clocks you are describing. You could say that the clock measures how the tension (or energy) in the spring as changed. And the change in force exerted by the spring changes in the same way. So both the indication of elapsed time and the change in the spring are consequences of the release of energy by the clock mechanism.



Many things are obvious but not worth talking about.



Insights like what?

And there is no general correspondence between force and time, even if you can contrive one for some particular case.



So is everything else. But QM has no significant effect on mechanical clocks, other than the rather obvious fact that one can describe properties of the materials based on the interactions of the atoms in the material. But trying to discuss a clockwork mechanism in terms of electron energy levels and Fermi-Dirac statistics, is about as useful as trying to explain the execution of a complex computer program in terms of transistors turning on and off.

Im sorry, I'm not ignoring you. I need to sit down and make a proper response. Just a bit crazy this time of year. Have a great Xmass and I'll answer soon

profloater
2018-Dec-23, 11:59 AM
We have discussed the role of the balance wheel and hair spring being the time keeping device. And the intimate relationship the clocks drive springs shares with the balance wheel. I introduced the subject via the drive spring because it provides a simple observation, measurement. I'm not very familiar with the term redherring. Can you be more specific please?

The clocks balance wheel and hair spring are not for the purposes of overcoming friction. It is a force driven device, and an increased or decreased frequency has the same implication as laid out in the OP. This was discussed early within the thread. The drive spring operates in lock step proportionality with the balance wheel in terms of motion, position and force, and records a meaningful legacy of ticks. Accumulates data for our two clock comparative measure.

In a nut shell, Pendulum action is dependent upon kinetic energy, and a springs restoration force. The comparative of our two clocks indicating a different number of ticks has occurred, each tick corresponding to a value of force expressed, we arrive at divergent values of force of our two clocks. Taken at face value this is modulated force associated with time dilation.

It has been said that this would obviously be the case, and trivial to note, because time causes it. But that speaks as though we know what times process is, when we dont. That is taking a lot for granted.

You say "a quantum effect". Yes, of course.
Springs are understood in terms of quantum behavior. But springs also drive clocks that measure time, a parameter of GR. Clock activity is modulated by GR, time dilation. That modulation caused by GR corresponds to the principle of this OP, a springs modulated expression of force. We can talk about the possibility this modulation of force isnt real, but it sure does appear to be an empirically derived measurement, an observation. So we're not even theorizing anything here. This is merely a description of the device and its observed behaviors within terms of QM and GR, within context that clocks are a single device that corresponds to both these fundamental theories. Clocks are made of QM parts, atoms, and so can be thought of as a study "in" QM. While clocks also measure the parameter of time, and so can be thought of as providing a study "of" GR. One device, a split personality.

If two things correspond to a third, then does that third thing instruct something of how those two things correspond to each other? Do clocks serve in this respect, as part of an association triangle?

This is not an effort in theory. The idea is to avoid theory, but still progress an inquiry based upon observables and empirical measurement. It might seam childishly simple, but I like the logics and believe them useful to some degree. Fun to think about at least.
I think you miss my point. A gear wheel clock has a mainspring only to overcome friction, more friction, bigger spring. The reality of friction requires an escapement mechanism with complexities to maintain time accurately. Now, a red herring is a metaphor for an argument that goes nowhere. (Herrings are fish that are not usually red) . As i pointed out, a simple clock with no friction could be set into motion and it would then keep time for ever. Hence the flywheel example, the spin is a perpetual motion like a planet in orbit.
That is why the clock part of your thought experiment is irrelevant. (Red herring) your question about a spring in a different gravity is the heart of the question, does the spring change in higher gravity? I am saying that is a reasonable physics question, and more straight forward than the time dilation of an ideal clock.

Strange
2018-Dec-23, 02:54 PM
"All" clocks are force driven, and all natural systems are force driven.

Not true. Unless you are stretching the word "force" to breaking point.


It looks like an empirical measure to me, so Im not ready to dismiss it as "obvious and uninteresting" because time causes it.

That is not the reason for saying it is obvious. As Hornblower noted, the mechanics of the clock directly relate the state of the spring to the measured time. So if one clock has measured less time, as indicated by the movement of the hands, then it will also have unwound the spring less. That is why the observation is trivial, and not particularly interesting. You could, almost as easily, discuss the amount of wear on the gears of the mechanism and not that the one that has measured less time has also experienced less wear.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-23, 03:29 PM
I mean, I'm not injecting "alternate theory". When I point to the spring comparative and derive a divergent force value. Or when I say clocks are a single device which correspond to both fundamental theories QM and GR. Or that clocks are dynamic systems which give us more information than merely a measure of time, by looking to the back end function. These are observations, not theory. Im not saying we cant continue our discussion, thought experiments.

I didnt raise the subject for gravitational gradients. I was responding to profloater. You and I had spoken about a good concept for a simple ideal clock. We should continue along those lines.

The information clocks give in addition to a measure of time, are the forces that drive the clocks function and enable it to measure the parameter of time. You simply take a note of the system forces, and note how they correspond to the measure of time. Time dilation, the forces modulate. As per the OP.

My clouded presentation simply points out that the use force driven systems to measure other force driven systems. "All" clocks are force driven, and all natural systems are force driven. The modulated force noted in the OP, does transpose to all natural systems. No natural system if beyond the scope of time dilation effect, so far as I am aware, and time dilation effect always enables a divergent measurement of distance that forces have acted over. Newtons, force divided by distance.

If you think this is silly then lets not worry about continuing. I dont really feel an urge to prove anything. Im just curious about it. It looks like an empirical measure to me, so Im not ready to dismiss it as "obvious and uninteresting" because time causes it. I think that poor reasoning

My bold. The information we get from observation is the amount the mechanism has turned and the tension of the mainspring. That is all. The relation between those two quantities is addressed in entry level physics. From our understanding of the dynamics we trust it as a timekeeper, and thus infer the amount of elapsed time during which the clock was running. This is also addressed in entry level physics. We observe that the mechanisms of the two clocks have turned by different amounts, which gives the appearance of different amounts of elapsed time. A possible reason is addressed by general relativity, a very advanced topic of physics but extensively covered in the literature.

I still cannot see what it is that you are curious about that is not addressed in literature you have been able to find. For all I know it may be a cerebral itch that defies articulation in words.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-25, 02:51 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh_8BFDcEkg

video of a watch internal mechanisms

profloater
2018-Dec-25, 07:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh_8BFDcEkg

video of a watch internal mechanisms
I fear that adds nothing. You are mistaken about force driven clocks, there is no direct relation, only the amount of friction to overcome. It’s a nice video though, that anchor escapement goes back to about 1657 and appropriately might have been invented by Hooke himself. It enabled smaller falling weights and smaller springs in later years.

Hornblower
2018-Dec-25, 09:16 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh_8BFDcEkg

video of a watch internal mechanisms

Is there something in that video for which you cannot find explanations in the aforementioned literature?

Presocratics
2018-Dec-29, 02:25 AM
Is there something in that video for which you cannot find explanations in the aforementioned literature?

Nice visualizations

Presocratics
2018-Dec-29, 05:50 AM
I fear that adds nothing. You are mistaken about force driven clocks, there is no direct relation, only the amount of friction to overcome. It’s a nice video though, that anchor escapement goes back to about 1657 and appropriately might have been invented by Hooke himself. It enabled smaller falling weights and smaller springs in later years.

Force driven clocks measure time. Yet you say there is no relation between force and time.

A clocks rate of function is modulated by time dilation effect. A clocks function is force driven, so force is modulated corresponding to time dilation. The clocks mechanisms empirically demonstrate this modulation of force, in terms of Hookes Law, as per the OP. Yet you say there is no relation between forces and time.

You cite a reason, that the spring is merely to overcome friction. But we have spoken about this. We discussed the role of the balance wheel and hair spring in keeping a clocks rate of time, that its "function is a consideration of forces". Kinetic energy/force intrinsic of the balance wheels mass, interacting with restoration force/tension of the hair spring. The modulated rate of this function gives the same empirical result, modulated force. Each tick, oscillation corresponds to a value of force. If two clocks are counting different rate of ticks, they are expressing divergent values of force, as per the OP. We covered this point earlier, and moved past it, I had thought?

You cannot modulate a clocks function without implication for expressions of force. A clocks entire system acts uniformly, springs, gears, shafts, clock hands, all move as one, in proportional lock step.

We look to the clock hands as a measure of time. It is as though you imagine the clock hands exist free, and function entirely of their own merit. But clock hands take instruction from clock drive mechanisms. If the clock drive mechanism were the puppeteer, then the dial and its measure of time is but a puppet. You look to the puppet "clock dial" and dont see the strings, but the system "cause" originates from behind the dial/stage.

Think of clock function within terms of a puppeteer and puppet. Puppeteer is origin/cause, and the puppets motion is but effect. Within these terms, a clock mechanical function causes changes within the system, and the dial provides a measure of those changes. Force drives changes, and time being a measure of changes. This is an empirically correct description of a clocks function. If we observe a body being pushed and moving a set distance. Then we watch the body pushed again but now it moves a greater distance. We automatically know the forces have modulated, and caused the body to move a different distance. Look at the clock hands as being the body that is moving a different distance due to time dilation effect. (the force is definitely modulated "shown empirically" but can we look at modulated forces as being cause within the same respect? A turn of perspective

Let us summarize Spacetime as a coordinate system that accounts for point coincidences, "when and where particles point coincide in space". GR accounts for observed interactions "not" coinciding where and when we would expect. We measure this anomaly of point interactions with clocks and refer to it as time dilation. But modulated forces can be a reason why bodies arrive early and or later than one would expect at a point in space. Conceptualized simply as having been pushed harder or softer, modulated force. "that expressions of force correspond to times measure is empirically shown". So conceptually, modulated force can fit as being the cause.

There is an equality between Spacetime coordinates and expressions of force, which is empirically demonstrated by clock function. As per the OP. Force modulation and time dilation correspond, but which is cause of the other? forces look good as an origin/cause for very basic and straightforward reasoning's as set out before.

I only say that this interpretation is possible, given the correspondence shown between time and forces. Modulated forces can be a cause for why bodies dont arrive where and when you would expect them too within relative space.

Thats a bit of a rushed explination. I'm helping a friend build a deck, so have to go hold the ladder steady

Shaula
2018-Dec-29, 09:42 AM
I only say that this interpretation is possible, given the correspondence shown between time and forces. Modulated forces can be a cause for why bodies dont arrive where and when you would expect them too within relative space.
However they can't explain things like the fact that we see cosmic ray derived muons at the surface of the Earth. This is impossible unless you account for time dilation. So unless you have a model of how particles decay via a mechanical force (rather than the weak interaction) time dilation is a much better fit.

Edit to add: I'm not trying to discourage you from thought experiments about an equivalence, but it sounds like you are starting to get a little bought into it. Just want to make the point that you might be able to construct an equivalence in one very tightly constrained example but that more generally it is absolutely not that simple to equate time and force.

profloater
2018-Dec-29, 10:05 AM
Force driven clocks measure time. Yet you say there is no relation between force and time.

y
I will try to explain again.
Yes a spring driven clock winds down at the rate of the clock.
But the force of that main spring can be any value because its job is to overcome friction. Because all mechanical clocks have friction they all needsprings and then escapements to regulate the spring. But an ideal frictionless clock would not need a spring.
So maybe the friction value changes with gravity field but that is not your question.
That is why i say the clock part is irrelevant to what changes in a spring in gravity. Not much is a first order answer but in atomic theory or quantum consideeration maybe there is an effect on the metal crystals.
Time dilation is a whole different area and is thought about using ideal clocks or as near ideal as we can achieve, not clockwork!
As far as i know and others seem to agree, time dilation does not affect springs or forces.
In saying that i am making an assumption which is that force is more fundamental than acceleration due to force.
There are fundamental forces, the strong, the weak, the EM, and I am not answering the question of whether those change with gravity changes.
But your spring in the clock is there to overcome friction, not to force time. The spring in the balance wheel is part of an oscillation but i think you are looking for some effect on the main spring as a fundamental question. So i say again, it is there because real clocks have variable friction, not to force time.

Strange
2018-Dec-29, 11:32 AM
You cannot modulate a clocks function without implication for expressions of force. A clocks entire system acts uniformly, springs, gears, shafts, clock hands, all move as one, in proportional lock step.

But in relativity, it is not the clocks function that is being changed. The clock continues to operate completely normally (in its own frame of reference). So it is not the case that relative velocity or a change in gravitational potential causes the clock to behave differently and thus show a different time. (After all, different observers will observe the clock running at different speeds, so it can't be some mechanical effect. Similarly, completely different types of clock, which involve no forces, will show the same time dilation.)

Another example involving forces, that often comes up is the case of a spaceship with the rocket providing a constant force to accelerate it. So the people on the spaceship will experience a constant acceleration of 1g (for example) and measure their speed as increasing at 9.8 m/s per second.

However, someone back on Earth observing the spaceship will see the rate at which it accelerates gradually decrease as its speed increases. Is this because the force from the rocket is decreasing? No. It is because of time dilation and length contraction.

headrush
2018-Dec-29, 12:42 PM
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

Hi, please forgive the possible obviousness of my post.
It appears to me that the OP is concerned with an apparent modulating force which is somehow affecting the respective clock springs differently. As if relativity has had some effect on the materials of the springs, which contributes to their difference in stored force.

My impression is that the only difference between the springs is elapsed time, as others have noted. Perhaps the OP is forgetting that time is a component of force, and so a spring that has experienced less time will naturally hold more stored force. Hooke's law must be used with the correct parameters and in this case that means using each springs own time component. The law still holds but it must be relative to each springs experience and cannot be seen as universal across both.
Maybe I'm not explaining it very well, I'm not well versed in physics. But that appears to be the source of the inconsistency or search for extra forces in the OP.

ETA - I guess what I am trying to point out is better explained by "frames of reference". Calculations for one frame that use inputs from a different frame will turn out wrong.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-29, 03:44 PM
Hi, please forgive the possible obviousness of my post.
It appears to me that the OP is concerned with an apparent modulating force which is somehow affecting the respective clock springs differently. As if relativity has had some effect on the materials of the springs, which contributes to their difference in stored force.

My impression is that the only difference between the springs is elapsed time, as others have noted. Perhaps the OP is forgetting that time is a component of force, and so a spring that has experienced less time will naturally hold more stored force. Hooke's law must be used with the correct parameters and in this case that means using each springs own time component. The law still holds but it must be relative to each springs experience and cannot be seen as universal across both.
Maybe I'm not explaining it very well, I'm not well versed in physics. But that appears to be the source of the inconsistency or search for extra forces in the OP.

ETA - I guess what I am trying to point out is better explained by "frames of reference". Calculations for one frame that use inputs from a different frame will turn out wrong.

No forgiveness necessary. Your input is good and welcome.

Your summery serves a traditional view point very well. For this reason I think everybody can appreciate what you have said, including me. What I am attempting to do is a little more tricky. And that is to seek non traditional perspective, and then communicate perspectives which are foreign to people. I just want to point out these challenges I have before me. I hope you appreciate that accounting the traditional viewpoint does not automatically discount an alternate explanation.

You said "the only difference between the springs is elapsed time". You say this as if it explains everything, but what does it really explain? It implies that you know what times process is, and how it imposes its effects on matter. Because if we didn't know how time operates, then how can we invoke such an unknown quantity as an "obvious" solution? You cant use unknowns to explain for unknowns. I know its really easy to assume what the nature of time is. But what I am doing now is to not take its assumed nature for granted. We have to ask ourselves questions like "how do we know time exists?" because it reveals answers like "we only every register time as motion states of bodies". Then we build our concept of time based on these reasoned assessments, and we restrain our concepts of time within these same assessments. For risk of assuming to much. The inventors of the concept of time, as you and I are familiar, wasn't physicists. It was invented by ancient farmers, and refined by train-drivers and ship captains. The concept was tailored to utility rather than for an attempt at a fundamental understanding of the world. Yet we still work within the traditional concept. The concept of time can be refined, and one very sensible avenue to explore is defining time in terms of how we measure it. The concept of time should not be indifferent to the instrument and or method of its measure. That it is considered so, might be a sign of misconception.

What does the concept of time look like defined strictly by its method of measure? Forces are implicated. This is true whether referring to windup clocks, atomic clocks, or celestial motion clocks.

The divergent values of force are empirical measures. Even if you say "time causes it". That doesn't make it un-noteworthy. Times process is not obvious or uninteresting, and any effects credited to times process is by extension, not dismissed as obvious or uninteresting. Empirical measures are empirical measures. And I point to one. If a preferred traditional conceptualization makes it seam boring, then maybe its the fault of the concept. A different point of view might reveal an intrigue.

Your last comment about frames of reference. You think they would turn out wrong. I assume you mean "the force considerations I provide would be contradicted by world observations". You are right in respect that this would be the test.

I'll end it here, although it feels much remains unsaid. but I must sleep

Thanks for joining the convo




Time does not have to be a component of force. Newtons are force divided by distance.

Presocratics
2018-Dec-29, 04:09 PM
However they can't explain things like the fact that we see cosmic ray derived muons at the surface of the Earth. This is impossible unless you account for time dilation. So unless you have a model of how particles decay via a mechanical force (rather than the weak interaction) time dilation is a much better fit.

Edit to add: I'm not trying to discourage you from thought experiments about an equivalence, but it sounds like you are starting to get a little bought into it. Just want to make the point that you might be able to construct an equivalence in one very tightly constrained example but that more generally it is absolutely not that simple to equate time and force.

I have to sleep now, so will return to this soon. Your conceptual tests are very good. I like where you are leading the conversation, and I dont get to say that as often as I'd like.

Yes, I have a pretty simple concept to share regarding cosmic rays. Not a complex discussion by any measure.

Whether my concept is relevant to a general context of the world, is the test. Force modulation values would have to conform to all spacetime coordinates. The question is, how can we know if this is the case of not?

headrush
2018-Dec-29, 04:55 PM
Time does not have to be a component of force. Newtons are force divided by distance.

And yet the Newton is defined as F = ma where a is acceleration.
Acceleration has definitely got a time component (m/s2)

grant hutchison
2018-Dec-29, 05:19 PM
Newtons are force divided by distance.You keep writing that, but it isn't so. Newtons are the units of force, not force divided by anything. Force has dimensions of Mass.Length.Time-2. Force divided by distance gives you dimensions of Mass.Time-2, which looks like an accelerating mass flow rate. I don't think it's what you want.

When considering spring tension, your tension force can be thought of as energy stored per length of spring. As your watch spring winds down, it delivers power, representing the rate at which the tension force (energy per metre of spring) reduces with elapsed time.

Your spring force is a function of time, therefore - not the other way around.

Grant Hutchison

profloater
2018-Dec-29, 08:41 PM
I have to sleep now, so will return to this soon. Your conceptual tests are very good. I like where you are leading the conversation, and I dont get to say that as often as I'd like.

Yes, I have a pretty simple concept to share regarding cosmic rays. Not a complex discussion by any measure.

Whether my concept is relevant to a general context of the world, is the test. Force modulation values would have to conform to all spacetime coordinates. The question is, how can we know if this is the case of not?
Given that you still have not accepted Newtons as a force unit, do you suggest that time dilation would be different for an atomic clock from a wonderful clockwork clock? Is that your question, that having a spring changes time dilation?

tusenfem
2018-Dec-30, 11:57 AM
I have to sleep now, so will return to this soon. Your conceptual tests are very good. I like where you are leading the conversation, and I dont get to say that as often as I'd like.


And when you wake up you can take this thread to ATM, as clearly you are not interested in mainstream explanations and are try to redefine what "Newtons" are and trying to put in your concepts about force into what you think relativity is.
This thread is closed, plus infraction for pushing ATM outside of ATM.
Thread closed.