Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 18:42:28 UTC No. 16283872

any questions technical or otherwise?

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 18:46:28 UTC No. 16283880

>>16283826
Post pdf here I’m not signing up for shit.
Fix your definitions. Point A, then switches to particle B and C??? Try point A, gravity well A&B. Use less words trying to make your sound smart.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 18:49:46 UTC No. 16283883

>>16283880
its the whole pdf, this picture.
Excuse me i'm fleshing it out but this is a starting framework.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 19:46:07 UTC No. 16283961

>>16283826
That is not how time dilation works

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 19:55:39 UTC No. 16283983

>>16283961
Care to elaborate

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 20:26:41 UTC No. 16284031

>>16283983
Time dilation is a relativistic effect

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 20:44:56 UTC No. 16284058

>>16284031
yes i know
"Time dilation is the difference in elapsed time as measured by two clocks, either because of a relative velocity between them (special relativity), or a difference in gravitational potential between their locations (general relativity). When unspecified, "time dilation" usually refers to the effect due to velocity."


its addressed for in the paper

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:05:51 UTC No. 16284084

>>16284058
>its addressed for in the paper
No, it isn't, as the second sentence is already wrong in it's assumption.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:09:35 UTC No. 16284087

>>16284084
this checks out for every definition of time dilation
"Clocks that are far from massive bodies (or at higher gravitational potentials) run more quickly, and clocks close to massive bodies (or at lower gravitational potentials) run more slowly."

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:20:46 UTC No. 16284100

>>16284087
*relative to eachother
you can observe the same event occuring at two different points in time, but the time at which the event occurs is still the same for all observers

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:21:59 UTC No. 16284102

>>16284100
about the semantics you're right. the paper takes that into consideration aswell.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:26:45 UTC No. 16284109

>>16284102
Then what is the point, you don't need any gravitational influence to observe something at different points in time, just shake your hand really fast and you'll see multiple images

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:31:08 UTC No. 16284119

>>16284109
that is actually like what you suggested the calculations are just a wee bit more precise i believe. just a bit

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:50:41 UTC No. 16284212

>>16284119
Whatever you wrote is irrelevant, as your premise is already faulty.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 22:55:19 UTC No. 16284216

>>16284212
i'm more interested in whether it will work than whether i chose the wrong wording. i see no fault with the method.

Your likely response is "it will not" as a passionate critic however you likely havent done that experiment.

Anonymous at Tue, 16 Jul 2024 23:04:17 UTC No. 16284224

>>16284212
i'm not sure youre right about that
https://www.space.com/33411-astronaut-scott-kelly-relativity-twin-brother-ages.html

Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 00:52:32 UTC No. 16284325

>>16284224
You have no idea what is being said there

Anonymous at Wed, 17 Jul 2024 03:22:21 UTC No. 16284475

>>16284325
ok einstein