Quote:
Originally Posted by arkain101
Hello Janus,
The problem I am bringing forth (not having) is, if a clock S (mechanical clock) moves slower and operates slower, then so will person S and the actions he performs relative to person E.
|
No, you
have a problem. Essentially, you are bringing your own preconceived notion of the nature of time into the discussion, and this preconceived notion is incompatible with the nature of time under Relativity.
Quote:
After a year the ever growing delay between person S and E reaches 5 minutes. This means one of two things.
1)
-There is an actual time delay and difference in world lines between the two reference frames; S and E.
-Person E is observing Person S with 5 minutes of delay. For example, If person S stops orbiting earth and flies down to earth and lands next to person E and shakes his hand, during this, person E must observe the events of person S in such a way as to make up the 5 minutes of delay, which would be fast forward, in order for their world lines to merge so that they may shake hands.
|
Wrong. They meet up and disagree as to what the time duration is since they last met. You are again trying to treat time as a universal background against which events occur rather than something measured separately and uniquely by E and S.
Quote:
or
2)
-There is no time delay, and the mechanical clocks do not change.
-Person E does not observe person S to move more slowly and vice versa.
-There is however a dilation at the atomic scale.
|
There can't be dilation at the atomic scale without there being time dilation at the macroscopic scale.
Quote:
More simply put.
a)It must be clarified which type of "clock" (mechanical or atomic ie: light clock) we are talking about in a Real or Hypothetical Special Relativity experiment.
b)Information can not be lost. Thus, if any reference frame is observed to have actions occur at a slower than "normal" rate (slow motion scientist walking around as an example) then when and if the slower time reference frame returns to the observer information must speed up in order for the total of the events to be observed.
How else would the two reference frames ever meet unless the world lines merged and they each accepted they met at the same 'time'.
|
Once again, you are using time as a universal background,
And it isn't.
Quote:
I believe this is a paradox, and I have learned very little ACTUAL experiments that do not use atomic clocks to measure any kind of dilation that is predicted by special relativity.
Many thought experiments I have read explain examples such as slow moving scientists, bouncing balls, clocks, etc. If this were true, it would mean the world lines between the (most often) two reference frames were seperating and that leaves the option of a)information being lost or b)some macroscopic observable dilations are illusionary and not literal.
|
Until you come to terms with the true nature of time you are going to continue to struggle with Relativity and continue to see paradoxes where none exist.
