Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Cecil Moore wrote: Actually, there is an unexplained time drift between atomic decay and Bristle Cone Pine rings that can be explained if seconds are getting shorter. Assuming the time it takes for the Earth to orbit around the Sun is an absolute, of course. ;-) 73 de jk |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Actually, there is an unexplained time drift between atomic decay and Bristle Cone Pine rings that can be explained if seconds are getting shorter. Assuming the time it takes for the Earth to orbit around the Sun is an absolute, of course. ;-) 73 de jk The only thing in Physics that is absolute is: "Nothing is absolute!" |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dave wrote: Jim Kelley wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Actually, there is an unexplained time drift between atomic decay and Bristle Cone Pine rings that can be explained if seconds are getting shorter. Assuming the time it takes for the Earth to orbit around the Sun is an absolute, of course. ;-) 73 de jk The only thing in Physics that is absolute is: "Nothing is absolute!" True, but we shouldn't go so far as to infer that 1 Hz might sometimes have more or less than one cycle in a second - no matter how much different each second might be from the next. 73, ac6xg |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
True, but we shouldn't go so far as to infer that 1 Hz might sometimes have more or less than one cycle in a second - no matter how much different each second might be from the next. We often infer that a frequency has lessened due to the red shift which could certainly be a shortening of a second from the time the light was generated until now. -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Moore wrote:
We often infer that a frequency has lessened due to the red shift which could certainly be a shortening of a second from the time the light was generated until now. The phenomenon of red shift is readily observable - that's how it was discovered. Line spectra from known elements is observed to be shifted in wavelength down from where it appears in the rest frame. The cause could be doppler shifting due to relative motion, or some other reason. If the length of the second were different, then so would be the speed of light as well as the constant of proportionality between frequency and wavelength at the source. In fact all kinds of physics would have to be different. There is certainly a probability for either case. Whether the probabilities are of the same magnitude is debatable. 73 de ac6xg |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
If the length of the second were different, then so would be the speed of light ... To see why that is false, refer to Lorentz's transformation for time at a velocity near the speed of light. Time can vary all over the universe while the speed of light remains constant (at least by definition :-). Since time is one dimension for the speed of light, the problem is self-correcting. If tomorrow's second were 1/2 half of today's second, nobody would even notice. If someone used a cesium clock near a black hole to come up with a "standard" second, it would be nowhere near the same length of time as a cesium clock on Earth. Time passes very slowly near the event horizon of a black hole but light keeps on trucking at the speed of light. -- 73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Cecil Moore wrote: Jim Kelley wrote: If the length of the second were different, then so would be the speed of light ... To see why that is false, refer to Lorentz's transformation for time at a velocity near the speed of light. Time can vary all over the universe while the speed of light remains constant (at least by definition :-). Since time is one dimension for the speed of light, the problem is self-correcting. If the second were "smaller", then light could obviously no longer travel 3x10^8 of our meters in one of them. Try not to lose track of the reference frame, Cecil. (Remember, it's the one in which the red shift is being measured). 73, jk |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Cecil Moore wrote:
If someone used a cesium clock near a black hole to come up with a "standard" second, it would be nowhere near the same length of time as a cesium clock on Earth. Time passes very slowly near the event horizon of a black hole but light keeps on trucking at the speed of light. Jim Don't bother. Cecil has his own, very special, form of Relativity. tom K0TAR |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
If the length of the second were different, then so would be the speed of light ... Cesium clocks at sea level, on a mountain top, and in an airplane all measure different lengths of the second. Are you saying the speed of light is different at those three locations? -- 73, Cecil, http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Kelley wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: Actually, there is an unexplained time drift between atomic decay and Bristle Cone Pine rings that can be explained if seconds are getting shorter. Assuming the time it takes for the Earth to orbit around the Sun is an absolute, of course. ;-) Which of course, it isn't. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|