Jump to content


Photo

The One Way Speed Of Light

astronomy time distance light

  • Please log in to reply
342 replies to this topic

#341 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 12 November 2015 - 10:24 AM

According to General Relativity, Time will move slower the the closer and you are to Earth or a Body due to Gravity. Ok, Lets use GRAVITATIONAL CLOCKS... Two Sand Filled Hour Glasses, which function by GRAVITY; apples to apples, as it were. We'll keep one and set it on the ground @ the base of Mount Everest then take the other to the top. We then turn them over @ the same "Time"....which one drains faster?
Lets try it again....we move the "Clock" from the top of Mount Everest and take it into Space between the Moon and the Earth...then turn each over again. Which drains faster? For the person who is turning that "Clock" over in Space....time has stopped! Because there's no Sand entering the bulb. Which "Clock" is moving slower?

Enoch has played this game too many times before too.....

 

The problem is that in his second example, the gravity clock in space is in "free fall."   Gravity clocks will not work in free fall.  You might as well use a water clock in the Antarctic winter.

 

Let's take Enoch's second example and modify it slightly.   Rather than take the clock into space between the Moon and the Earth, I suggest Enoch should take it for a ride on NASA's "vomit comet."  Enoch should turn the gravity clock over when the aircraft begins its "zero-g" portion of the flight and the aircraft should not pull out of the dive until Enoch's gravity clock indicates it's time to do so.   Not a problem because "time has stopped."   Right?


  • Goku likes this

#342 Dr. Derek P. Blake

Dr. Derek P. Blake

    Junior Member

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 34 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redruth, Cornwall, UK
  • Interests:Love science, have a Ph.D and degrees in cosmology and astronomy. Fanatical about photography, an avid landscape painter, love to do crafts, spend most of my time writing which I love to do. I play guitar and drums.
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Redruth, Cornwall, UK.

Posted 25 March 2016 - 11:51 AM

Enoch has played this game too many times before too.....

 

The problem is that in his second example, the gravity clock in space is in "free fall."   Gravity clocks will not work in free fall.  You might as well use a water clock in the Antarctic winter.

 

Let's take Enoch's second example and modify it slightly.   Rather than take the clock into space between the Moon and the Earth, I suggest Enoch should take it for a ride on NASA's "vomit comet."  Enoch should turn the gravity clock over when the aircraft begins its "zero-g" portion of the flight and the aircraft should not pull out of the dive until Enoch's gravity clock indicates it's time to do so.   Not a problem because "time has stopped."   Right?

This is actually a mute discussion, There is nowhere in this universe where you can actually be stationary, this is why we no not actually know whether it is speed or distance from a body that causes time dilation.  If we take an atomic clock to the top of Everest, it is moving faster than the one at the bottom because, due to the rotation of the Earth, the top of Everest scribes a larger circle than the one at the foot of the Mountain.  Even if you assume a position in space, one that is stationary relative to the Earth, you are still orbiting the Sun and at the same time you are also orbiting the galactic centre.

 

When we speak of the Speed of Light ('C') as a constant, it does not mean that 'C' is the same through all mediums, the figure of 186,282 m/s is the speed of a photon through a vacuum,  light travels through water at around 140,000 m/s and in air, at sea level, light is slowed by about 0.03%.  In actual fact research recently at the University of Darmstadt in Germany has managed to stop light for one whole minute, something once thought impossible.  The reason that it is a constant is that in any given medium light travels at a constant speed.  Meaning a space ship traveling at 50% C, shing a light ahead cannot add their speed to the speed of the ship.

I hope this clarifies things about light.


  • mike the wiz likes this

#343 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,717 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 26 March 2016 - 06:37 PM

To spare you wading thru 17 pages, I'll summarize quickly....

 

The topic was initiated to deal with one of Enoch's favorite questions.... "What is the one-way speed of light?"  He claims, the one-way speed of light cannot be measured.  Therefore, it could be direction dependent.  (Something similar to Dr. Lisle's "Anisotropic Synchrony Convention" I guess.)

 

My position, supported by some 70+ years of radio navigation, is that we know the one way speed of light to be (about) 300,000,000 meters per second in all directions.  Simply stated, GPS (which almost all of us now own in a cell phone, car, or portable unit) wouldn't work if the speed of light were direction dependent.

 

When we start talking about time, the "gravity clock" thing is also one of Enoch's favorite examples.  In response, I simply point out that he is deliberately placing the clock in an environment where it simply won't work.  No more than that water clock in the Antarctic winter.  More recently, I've been suggesting he attempt an experiment much closer to Earth than his "between the Earth and the Moon" test.  Of course, in the "zero-g" portion of the NASA's "Vomit Comet" that gravity clock won't work either.  In fact, if one waits until that gravity clock works to pull out of the dive, the clock will restart on impact with the ground.   It's a way of pointing out the absurdity of Enoch's argument.

 

I guess I could just point out that if time had actually stopped, the person in space wouldn't be able to turn the clock over in the first place.

 

We are in total agreement with regard to everything you've said about the speed of light.

 

With regard to the passage of time, IIRC, the clock on Everest would run slightly slower than one at sea level because of it's slightly higher velocity due to Earth's rotation.  It would also run slightly faster due to being farther from the center of the Earth.  I've linked a couple times to a discussion of GPS and relativity that explains why the clocks on the satellites must be adjusted for relativistic effects of speed and gravity in order to maintain synchronization with ground receivers.

 

Synchronization of clocks is something else Enoch/Lisle claims is impossible, but GPS can't work without it.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: astronomy, time, distance, light

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users