Time is energy (split from What is Space made of?)

[Romeo22]

Do you know what guesswork is? Time is a form of energy when gravitational time dilation is treated in flat space. I can easily prove that. Possibly even you if you apply the correct mathematical framework.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Romeo22

[Strange]

12 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

Do you know what guesswork is? Time is a form of energy when gravitational time dilation is treated in flat space. I can easily prove that.

If you have such a model, why don't you present it in the Speculations forum. Or, better still, publish it in a peer reviewed journal.

[swansont]

!

Moderator Note

This has been split. Now it is time to back up your claim: Time is energy. 

 

 

 

So, how does that work? Energy keeps increasing as time progresses?

[Romeo22]

26 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This has been split. Now it is time to back up your claim: Time is energy. 

 

 

 

So, how does that work? Energy keeps increasing as time progresses?

Consider an inertial observer A on the surface of the earth, he sees observer B on the moon as if he is in "slow motion". This is due to the fact that the energy E=mcc of the moon is different from that of the earth (different energy causes different times) this is the essence of how gravity affects time. Extreme cases such as the vicinity of a black hole (extreme energy).

A particle in volume V, subjected to temperature T moves faster due to the added kinetic energy but an alternate view is that the increase in energy or temperature causes "slow or fast motion" on the particle a variable time.

To answer your question an absence of Energy is an absence of time. And there exists a linear relationship between time and energy. A classical analogue of Heisenberg's time energy uncertainty.

 

 

1 hour ago, Strange said:

If you have such a model, why don't you present it in the Speculations forum. Or, better still, publish it in a peer reviewed journal.

Working progress. Not yet fully developed.

33 minutes ago, swansont said:

!

Moderator Note

This has been split. Now it is time to back up your claim: Time is energy. 

 

 

 

So, how does that work? Energy keeps increasing as time progresses?

The major difference between Einstein's view of gravity besides speed of gravity is that gravity affects time, the precession of mercury and the deflection of light are due to this.

So the lesson of GR is that the origins of time are gravitational. Even in Special Relativity we can view the time dilation (which is caused by the speed v) t'=gamma t. From a gravitational point of view. By saying the speed of an object as it approaches c, causes a self induced increase in gravity, which then affects time. So gravitational time dilation is the same thing as velocity time dilation.

Time is caused by gravity. Gravity is caused by energy.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Romeo22 said:

Consider an inertial observer A on the surface of the earth, he sees observer B on the moon as if he is in "slow motion". This is due to the fact that the energy E=mcc of the moon is different from that of the earth (different energy causes different times) this is the essence of how gravity affects time. Extreme cases such as the vicinity of a black hole (extreme energy).

A particle in volume V, subjected to temperature T moves faster due to the added kinetic energy but an alternate view is that the increase in energy or temperature causes "slow or fast motion" on the particle a variable time.

To answer your question an absence of Energy is an absence of time. And there exists a linear relationship between time and energy. A classical analogue of Heisenberg's time energy uncertainty.

But time slows down as objects have more kinetic energy. And they slow down equally for objects that have the same speed, but different kinetic energy (i.e. a different mass)

The latter effect is the same for gravitational time dilation — the dilation is related to the gravitational potential, not the energy, as it does not depend on the mass. 

 

 

 

[Strange]

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

Consider an inertial observer A on the surface of the earth, he sees observer B on the moon as if he is in "slow motion".

I think that is the wrong way round. I make the time dilation on the Earth's surface about 22 ms per year (for a distant observer) but less than 1 ms per year for the Moon. So the observer on the Earth would see clocks on the Moon running faster.

Edit:

If anyone wants to check, this is based on the time dilation, relative to a distant observer) at the surface of the Moon being 0.9999999999686 and at the surface of the Earth being 0.9999999993047.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sqrt(1+-+(2+G+(mass+of+moon))+%2F+((radius+of+moon)+(speed+of+light)^2))

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sqrt(1+-+(2+G+(mass+of+earth))+%2F+((radius+of+earth)+(c^2)))

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

Extreme cases such as the vicinity of a black hole (extreme energy).

The time dilation at the event horizon is independent of the mass (energy) of the black hole.

 

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

To answer your question an absence of Energy is an absence of time. And there exists a linear relationship between time and energy.

Citation needed. Or is this another guess?

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

So the lesson of GR is that the origins of time are gravitational.

Wrong way round. In GR, gravity is the curvature of spacetime (mainly the time dimension). 

 

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

From a gravitational point of view. By saying the speed of an object as it approaches c, causes a self induced increase in gravity, which then affects time. So gravitational time dilation is the same thing as velocity time dilation.

I would like to see you derive that. I haven't tried yet, but it looks wrong.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Strange

[studiot]

5 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

Wow.

Energy= kT.  E= mc.c

 

You are misusing both these formulae.

The first one is incomplete at best.
 

The second one contradicts what you said about the Moon.

2 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

This is due to the fact that the energy E=mcc of the moon is different from that of the earth (different energy causes different times)

Since m is constant and c is constant mc² is constant. If it is constant it is not different from place to place.

[beecee]

10 hours ago, Romeo22 said:

energy causes gravity causes and gravity causes time (all this is conversion of one form of energy to another). The only reasonable contradiction is the one posed by @strange which I already answered.

Mass/energy warp/curve spacetime, that we recognise as gravity.

Gravity does not cause time. 

[swansont]

Or, to put it another way, if you think gravity causes time, how would one go about demonstrating this in an unambiguous fashion? i.e. what experiment could we do? 

 

[Romeo22]

20 hours ago, studiot said:

 

You are misusing both these formulae.

The first one is incomplete at best.
 

The second one contradicts what you said about the Moon.

Since m is constant and c is constant mc² is constant. If it is constant it is not different from place to place.

You are right I am misusing these formulae I guess you have no idea how E=nhf came about from blackbody radiation or you are not aware of statistical mechanics. Anyway as for your moon apperent contradiction we are talking about the gravitational potential which is NOT constant.

 

15 hours ago, beecee said:

Mass/energy warp/curve spacetime, that we recognise as gravity.

Gravity does not cause time. 

What causes time then?

Since the only two things that can affect time are kinetic energy (SR) and gravity(GR)

21 hours ago, Strange said:

I think that is the wrong way round. I make the time dilation on the Earth's surface about 22 ms per year (for a distant observer) but less than 1 ms per year for the Moon. So the observer on the Earth would see clocks on the Moon running faster.

Edit:

If anyone wants to check, this is based on the time dilation, relative to a distant observer) at the surface of the Moon being 0.9999999999686 and at the surface of the Earth being 0.9999999993047.

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sqrt(1+-+(2+G+(mass+of+moon))+%2F+((radius+of+moon)+(speed+of+light)^2))

https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=sqrt(1+-+(2+G+(mass+of+earth))+%2F+((radius+of+earth)+(c^2)))

The time dilation at the event horizon is independent of the mass (energy) of the black hole.

 

Citation needed. Or is this another guess?

Wrong way round. In GR, gravity is the curvature of spacetime (mainly the time dimension). 

 

I would like to see you derive that. I haven't tried yet, but it looks wrong.

Already have Strange. Watch the space.

 

41 minutes ago, swansont said:

Or, to put it another way, if you think gravity causes time, how would one go about demonstrating this in an unambiguous fashion? i.e. what experiment could we do? 

 

Not only does gravity/energy cause time but time cannot be measured at random but only in discrete values. 

I have 3 experiments in my paper.

[Strange]

2 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

Already have Strange. Watch the space.

So no comment about the fact your claim about time dilation on the moon appears to be incorrect? Not even to show that I have made a mistake?

[Romeo22]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

So no comment about the fact your claim about time dilation on the moon appears to be incorrect? Not even to show that I have made a mistake?

I said "slow motion" strange remember the Niel Armstrong videos? Simply that time is different on the moon then on Earth. I was not being technical. But I do appreciate the technical clarity.

Wherever the value of g is different the value of time will be different

Extreme cases g=0 and g=infinity.

[Strange]

22 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

I said "slow motion" strange remember the Niel Armstrong videos?

What on Earth are you talking about? (excuse the pun) That has nothing to do with time dilation.

22 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

I was not being technical. But I do appreciate the technical clarity.

By "technical" you mean correct, then.

22 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

Wherever the value of g is different the value of time will be different

Nope. It is the potential not the "strength" of gravity.

If you had a planet with twice the mass of Earth and twice the radius, then the time dilation at the surface would be the same as on Earth but g would be half the value.

On 02/01/2019 at 1:09 PM, Romeo22 said:

Even in Special Relativity we can view the time dilation (which is caused by the speed v) t'=gamma t. From a gravitational point of view. By saying the speed of an object as it approaches c, causes a self induced increase in gravity, which then affects time. So gravitational time dilation is the same thing as velocity time dilation.

This can't possibly be correct because gravitational time dilation depends on the distance from the centre of mass (you know, potential) while time dilation due to relative velocity is independent of position (within that frame of reference).

[koti]

47 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

I said "slow motion" strange remember the Niel Armstrong videos? Simply that time is different on the moon then on Earth.

Romeo, you're either a troll or you have serious issues with understanding basic Newtonian physics. Which is it ?

[swansont]

57 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

 Not only does gravity/energy cause time but time cannot be measured at random but only in discrete values. 

I have 3 experiments in my paper.

Describe them here, as the rules require.

[Romeo22]

1 hour ago, koti said:

Romeo, you're either a troll or you have serious issues with understanding basic Newtonian physics. Which is it ?

Let me leave it there then.

[Strange]

9 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

Let me leave it there then.

So you have no support for any of your claims.

You are not willing to retract or apologise for any of your fundamental errors.

You have no proof that time dilation due to relative velocity is the same as gravitational time dilation.

In other words, it is all guesswork. And wrong.

Sounds like a reasonable place to wind it up.

[Romeo22]

Yes. All guesswork and im wrong.

[dimreepr]

9 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

Yes. All guesswork and im wrong.

welcome to the club.

[Strange]

28 minutes ago, Romeo22 said:

and im wrong.

Yep, nothing wrong with that. I am often wrong. Being wrong is an opportunity to learn.

[koti]

1 hour ago, Romeo22 said:

...im wrong.

Welcome to the club brother