According to relativity, there is no objective "right now" i.e. time is not a global parameter on the universe - there cannot be one universal clock measuring time. So time is a relative phenomenon based on one's inertial frame of reference. Is this correct?
Is this is the case, how does this play in to simulations of universes? Can we simulate local times everywhere? What I'm asking is, would you just have to calculate a sort of "time gradient" where each point in space has its own clock, whose time velocity is relative to the spacial velocity of the matter in that point? Is this how it would be done?
There are no simulations of universes, get over this solipcistic shit. But yeah, in general "right now" is a difficult concept, at least from the "inside"
Nathan Ortiz
Time is constant cross the entirety of existence, because time isn't a physical dimension that can be warped or displaced.
The universe it simply in motion, and time is a measurement of that motion against another motion (Earth's spin against Earth's orbit for example).
As soon as you have the idea that time can be warped or isn't constant across the universe you paradoxically ruin you base unit of measurement to even measure time.
Jason Cooper
You've got the Relativity part right. Everyone's clock is as good as everybody else's. What matters are "events", points in space-time where things happen. Two cars smashing into each other is an event since the cars are attempting to occupy the same point in space-time.
You pick a reference frame (which one doesn't matter, though unaccelerated ones simplify the math) and all events can be given a set of 4-coordinates. If you want to see what things look like from another perspective, you apply the Lorentz transforms. So long as you do it consistently for ALL events, it works.
The Universal Clock of an "outside observer" is what Newton called God's Time. I suppose you could call it Programmer's Time as well. (I initially feared you were advancing the idea that WE'RE simulated.) But your clock and what's happening inside the computer are unconnected. Simulation time doesn't advance smoothly and uniformly. You can shut it down for periodic maintenance or install a faster CPU and it has no effect on the simulation whatsoever.
Jason Hernandez
This is the correct view to hold on this subject. Relativity is a monumental scam and has no real world applications and never will.
Ethan Long
>Is this is the case, how does this play in to simulations of universes? The real problem with simulations is that simulation space and simulation time are discrete but our theories suppose they are continuous. I hope in my lifetime physicists finally make the revolution in thought that the discrete is not an approximation of the continuous, but instead the continuous is a degenerate case of the discrete. Probably not, the cult of continuity is very powerful.
Zachary Thomas
Kim Jong Un certainly believes in the "real world applications" of Relativity and is doing his utmost to deliver mass-to-energy converters to the US. That makes him smarter than you.
You haven't studied Calculus yet, have you?
James Gutierrez
>You haven't studied Calculus yet, have you? You just learned calculus, didn't you?
Brayden Powell
theorically, what energy would it take to manipulate time?
Hunter Gutierrez
You can't. Time isn't anything. Really think about what you're writing about. >Manipulate time
Ryan Carter
Gravity (and acceleration, which is the same thing) "slow" time. Hang out near a mass concentration (neutron star or black hole) or accelerate to near lightspeed and you're "manipulating time". Even weak gravity fields and low velocities suffice, but that normally passes un-noticed unless you're doing something sensitive like calibrating GPS satellites.
How much energy? Suppose you want tau to be 0.25 You age one day while the rest of us age four days. Or one year vs. four years. That means you have quadrupled your rest mass. If your scales read 150 lbs here on Earth, you need to pick up 450 lbs worth of kinetic energy. 6.75e12 horsepower-hours 1.81e19 joules 5.03e12 kilowatt-hours If electricity costs 0.10 USD per kilowatt-hour, that's five TRILLION dollars! Time dilation don't come cheap!
Robert Sullivan
This reads like some fucking YouTube pop science script.
You cannot manipulate time as a literal dimension, it's not possible. The Earth is always spinning at its own pace irrelevant of whatever else you're doing in the universe.
Gravity and acceleration aren't the same thing. One is a property of the other. And I don't know where this stupid lightspeed shit comes from.
Dylan James
>simulation theories are solipsistic >then answers by saying it's hard to understand fpwp
Carson Allen
Are you writing a textbook which explains how all modern physicists are assholes?
The "Earth spins at it's own pace". Our clocks are as relevant as anybody else's. But not MORE relevant. Time dilation is an experimental fact. Anyone with a "theory" which doesn't match experiments is wrong. Period. Nature isn't swayed by arguments.
You don't even have to move the clocks. They've gotten so accurate now that two clocks, perfectly in synch when sitting side by side, will "tick" at different rates if one is mounted a meter above the other.
Henry Brown
A clock can only measure motion. It's not independent of anything. None of the clock's have any relevance over each other, they're all arbitrary measurements of motion.
Time dilation ISN'T an experimental fact, it's simply the observation of, in the case of atomic clocks, electricity and light moving at different rates according to where they are in the Earth's field.
That's the equivalent of putting a mechanical clock in space, noticing the pendulum isn't moving as much and thus deducing that in that space the mechanical clock is experiencing less 'time' than that on Earth.
Jack Thomas
It just means that, rather than a simple variable, the universe is “time marched” over a characteristic curve which is the Minkowski metric. Our experience is mapped onto these characteristics by the way of the Lorentz transformations.
Henry Gutierrez
So you don't accept mass-increase and slowing of radioactive decay in fast-moving objects? Or the invariability of lightspeed for all observers? Or the behavior of particles at CERN (which are in roughly the same field as the cows grazing above them.)
If time isn't measured by clocks (mechanical, vibrating atoms, rate of beta decay) then what else is there? The "pendulum in space" is a strawman, as I'm sure you know. In a space station with 1 gee centrifugal "gravity", it'll tick just fine. That's a shortcoming of the mechanism, like the Mad Hatter's watch lubricated with butter.
Josiah Scott
No I don't, I don't buy any of that.
There are too many unknowns. Radioactive decay is a 'what' term. How do you measure that? How do you measure the idea that light is constant across all reference points? That very concept is paradoxical and invalidates relativistic ideas.
And who knows what CERN is doing? What are they measuring there? Are they measuring literal particles? Or are they measuring electromagnetic and electrostatic phenomena?
The clock wouldn't work fine in space, just like how the atomic clock works different at the top of a mountain.
The point is that you can't measure a rate when the entire universe isn't in sync. For example you could never measure the rate of the Earth spinning if you had nothing outside of it in constant reference to its spin (its orbit for example).
Jace Sullivan
This is where it gets complicated kid. first of all time as we measure it is the difference in energy between two systems or bodies. Time is only relative to the system of comparison. In saying that through the medium of space between all bodies and systems there is a closed circuit creating a vortex of oscillation in the medium of space much like waves in an ocean current. the use of high frequency high potential rotating electromagnetic fields can cause a localized spacial vortex giving a local point of reference outside of the one containing it.
>I hope in my lifetime physicists finally make the revolution in thought that the discrete is not an approximation of the continuous, but instead the continuous is a degenerate case of the discrete. I will never understand what the appeal to this Wildberger finitism meme is.
Jonathan Williams
>A whole bunch of experiments to see if the aether is stationary or the Earth is dragged through it
The Earth's field is the aether in torsion. It's constantly in motion, just like a magnet's field.
Cameron Diaz
Why isn't there any evidence aether exists?
Caleb Gomez
There's heaps of evidence. Why is it black inside the sun? Why is the interference pattern a thing? What about CRT and magnet experiments? Or just interactions with fields and light in general? What about electromagnetic waves? What about the patterns of galaxies?
That's the silliest shit, trying to prove or disprove the aether with aetheric phenomena (light, electricity, gravity).
I don't follow their stuff, I go off my own models for gravity. The center of the sun being a void isn't some sort of bullshit pseudo science, the experiment is directly linked to the center of a magnetic field and the perturbation of light through it.
Ethan Perez
I'm sorry, but the energy mass equivalency is not dependant on Einstein's theory of relativity to exist, unlike the other way round. In fact, similar equations exist in quantum physics and even classical physics.
Connor Turner
>I don't follow their stuff Right, it's just a coincidence you have a vendetta against relativity and are arguing for the revival of aether based theory when that's exactly what Electric Universe followers are constantly shitposting about.
Elijah Turner
many people have done been pro-aether/anti-relativity long before the Electric Universe guys showed up, e.g. Tesla
Christian Thompson
Time is relative but there still is a singular time. Something not moving takes ten minutes to do nothing. Something moving at some speed experiences 8 minutes withinthose ten minutes. "Moments in time" are still evenly distributed. But if you move too fast you'll end up a thousand years from now pretty quick n that'd be waaaay nuuuuuts
Jason King
the alien computer doing our simulation doesn't have a clock speed
Luis Johnson
>long before Yes, long before as in long before the 21st century. Today when someone makes these arguments it's because they fell for the Electric Universe meme. Of course you know this because despite what you're claiming you definitely did get these ideas from EU / Thunderbolts forums and associated videos. It's really obvious. I guess maybe you just managed to convince yourself other non-EU subscribers believe the same things and that even though you got all these ideas from mainstream-insulated EU media you thought to yourself that you theoretically could have gotten these ideas from other sources and that therefore it's OK to lie and say that's how it happened so you don't have to deal with people calling you a cultist.
Aaron Anderson
I've looked into their stuff, but the thing is it's probably too based on Relativity shenanigans. People rip on relativity because it's fucking retarded. Warped space? What even is that?
Blake Ortiz
The only idea I subscribe to from their stuff is their idea on redshift. The rest of relativity is just garbage, and that other user is right, people were calling it out 100 years back all the way up until now.
You're only argument is some sort of CNN tier bullshit where you're ascribing people to some crackpot thing and covering your ass with Wikipedia articles.
