|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 23, 2011 8:18:26 GMT 1
Consider pendulums on a flat horizontal plane in a unidirectional accelerating field and in a gravitational (non-uni-directional accelerating field)
We will have 3 pendulum clocks. one at the centre of our space-craft, and the other two at either side of the central clock, but separated by 1 metre and 2 metres from th central clock
Now in a uni-directional accelerating field, all three clock will have a uniform field acting upon them, and because they were made by Harrison, will all show the same time during the acceleration phase, (say 1 hour). (We know that these clocks will be running slower than their fourth stationary clock because of relativistic effects, but will ignore that)
Now our spaceship will be stationary, but in an accelerating gravitational field
The question is this:
Will each clock show the same time as their other identical clocks after 1 hour (ignoring relativistic effects)?
If they are not the same, which of each clocks will be faster than others in order of time-gain?
Which clock is showing the correct time?
|
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Mar 23, 2011 13:57:07 GMT 1
The problem is that pendulum clocks show not just the time, but are effected by a combination of the time, AND the local weight of their bobs. Hence in addition to the usual relativity effects time because of speed, height in gravitational field etc, we also have additional effects which means that pendulum clocks don't keep time with a local atomic clock, say, because exactly how fast they tick also depends explicitly on the strength of gravity.
As such, given the confusion on here in the past as regards gravitational time dilation, I don't see the point of this example which is just going to confuse matters further.
In short, pendulum clocks are bad clocks, too much effected by things other than the actual rate of time...........................
|
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Mar 23, 2011 14:02:25 GMT 1
Flat and horizontal is also problematic if you insist upon a non-uniform gravitational field (whcih I presume is what you meant by non-uni-directional accelerating field, although accelerating field is also not a great name, since acceleration ISN'T a field in the sense that it aplies to objects, not the space in bwteen per se -- hence isn't a FIELD in the usual sense.............), because if flat, isn't all horizontal, in that the edges of a flat plat in a central gravitational field will actually be higher than the centre, aligned as I think you meant it to be. Hence objects will tend to roll from the edges of your 'flat' plate towards the middle. Also means the pedulum clocks at the edges will in fact be working at an angle is aligned wrt the floor, which may cause unexpected effects as regards their tick-rate, or even asymmeteric ticks.......
|
|
|
|
Post by abacus9900 on Mar 23, 2011 16:53:40 GMT 1
Once again, STA has managed to mystify all and sundry by providing the most cryptic of 'explanations.'
What in hell are you talking about woman? Why can't you be more like the admirable Brian Cox? We are beginners here and therefore only require a beginner's level of understanding. If only you were not so narcissistic STA we would really enjoy reading through your posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 23, 2011 19:42:44 GMT 1
Once again, STA has managed to mystify all and sundry by providing the most cryptic of 'explanations.' What in hell are you talking about woman? Why can't you be more like the admirable Brian Cox? We are beginners here and therefore only require a beginner's level of understanding. If only you were not so narcissistic STA we would really enjoy reading through your posts. ;D Usual response. Don't know the answer, resort to gobbledegook e.g. The problem is that pendulum clocks show not just the time, but are effected by a combination of the time, AND the local weight of their bobs ;D So now you know if you have a pendulum clock; it is not just displaying the time, it is also displaying something to do with the weight of the bobs! Mind you, it fools some! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Mar 23, 2011 20:00:46 GMT 1
Perfectly obvious, a pendulum clock won't work in weightlessness, hence is a pretty useless clock to emply in situations (such as the rather confusing one you described), where weight is going to vary.
Hence we have the totally obvious (but seemingly not that obvious to the person that made the original post) result that pendulum ticks are a combined measurement of actual passage of time and weight.
So, in that case, WHAT was the point of the original post? I don't think it had one, other than the totally obvious, let's see if we can pole STA yet again.
Why don't I save you both a lot of time and typing and just change my username to 'I'm a total idiot', then maybe you'd stop all this nonsense (although I doubt it.............)
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 24, 2011 8:35:15 GMT 1
Flat and horizontal is also problematic if you insist upon a non-uniform gravitational field (whcih I presume is what you meant by non-uni-directional accelerating field, although accelerating field is also not a great name, since acceleration ISN'T a field in the sense that it aplies to objects, not the space in bwteen per se -- hence isn't a FIELD in the usual sense.............), because if flat, isn't all horizontal, in that the edges of a flat plat in a central gravitational field will actually be higher than the centre, aligned as I think you meant it to be. Hence objects will tend to roll from the edges of your 'flat' plate towards the middle. Also means the pedulum clocks at the edges will in fact be working at an angle is aligned wrt the floor, which may cause unexpected effects as regards their tick-rate, or even asymmeteric ticks....... OMG. I missed this classic piece of gobbledegook. A piece designed fo the 'Idiot Science' thread, but that is now so full of gobbledegook that that is probably enough! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Mar 24, 2011 13:28:26 GMT 1
And yet you think that your orginal post was clear? Obviously you do.
you've still to explain what the point of your original post was, unless it was just yet another attempt at a wind-up.
So far, I see no interesting physics to be discussed here, unless you'd care to explain further as to what the point was?
|
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Mar 25, 2011 9:24:21 GMT 1
What a pity my OP, which raised very interesting problems of real physics and time is assailed by such a barrage of gobbledegook. There are som e real subtelties in those questions.
|
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Mar 26, 2011 13:25:32 GMT 1
How? We have the link between a pendulum clock and actual time (since pendulum clocks respond to gravity). Then we have gravitational time dilation, which we have discussed before at length. Hence what is to be gained from this discussion, by taking two separate effects and a case which mixes them up? It adds nothing new to the individual effects, and al that remains to be discussed, in effect, is a derivation of the equation for the swings of a pendulum. Which is just old-fashioned mechanics.
|
|
