Thank you. I will have to chew on this for more than a moment. Very interesting.
Steve Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 8, 2013, at 11:10, "Roarty, Francis X" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Steve, > Yes, but I’ve wrapped myself around this axle before assuming > 0,0,0,0 as the absolute ground state when in fact the time coordinate can > actually still be reduced beyond what we would assume to be the baseline of > deep space, we call them warps, the opposite of a relativistic well where > time from our perspective speeds up instead of slowing down like it does for > a well or near luminal velocity. IMHO you can employ mass in the form of nano > geometry to segregates virtual particles via quantum effects into > concentrated zones of higher and lower density. My gut feeling is that the > longer wavelengths / larger virtual particles supposedly disallowed by > Casimir geometry are actually still present inside the cavity but actually > reshape that pocket of space time such that they get more space in exchange > for a smaller base unit of time. This “relativistic interpretation” of > Casimir effect would explain anomalous half lives of radioactive gases of > both varieties according to the gases affinity to migrate thru one zone in > favor of the other. To date most claims of anomalous half lives are based on > bulk measurements. I anxiously await an experiment that carefully measures > individual radioactive decay of earmarked gas atoms after prolonged > circulation thru casimir geometry. > Note.. I am out on a zero point limb here even by vortex standards so take my > opinion with a grain of salt, > Fran > > From: Steve Wallace [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 12:01 PM > To: vortex-l > Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Time, Mass, Gravity > > Ahhh, that helps me... I think. If I understand it correctly, even for atomic > clocks, time is a perception issue for the external observer. Is this a > correct statement? A starting point for observing time would be in ideal > vacuum, ideally away from object with mass, at that point, the observer would > theoretically observe/perceive relative time changes from gravity? > > > On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Roarty, Francis X <[email protected]> > wrote: > The gyroscope never lost energy from the perspective of a local observer who > is also unaware of any time dilation without use of external measurements… > The frame only appears contracted and slower from our frame of observation > because it is displaced into the 4th dimension. > > From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 2:33 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Time, Mass, Gravity > > To slow down the gyroscope you would need to apply a retarding force. Any > energy loss would show up as an increase of energy of the system that applies > the retarding force. > > In order to get your gyroscope into a higher position than it begins requires > you to apply a force against the gravitational field. The device that > applies this force must do work upon your scope. > > The amount of work required for each direction of travel is equal provided > the final location and velocity of the gyroscope equals the starting > condition. No net energy would be consumed. > > Dave > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Wallace <[email protected]> > To: vortex-l <[email protected]> > Sent: Thu, Nov 7, 2013 10:59 pm > Subject: [Vo]:Time, Mass, Gravity > > I am trying to get my mind around a very difficult subject. I am devising > various mind experiments to help me understand it. So I thought I would pose > my first mind experiment to see if anyone has some insights that might help > me. > > This is my limited understanding of this part of the theory that applies to > this experiment. For an external observer, time slows down for an object that > approaches a large mass. I also understand that experiments have validated > this theory using atomic clocks. If the mass is large enough, such as a black > hole, time will theoretically stop, or nearly stop. > > My mind experiment has to do with a larger macro type object, rather than the > vibrations of the atoms in an atomic clock. For this mind experiment I am > using a high speed, low friction gyroscope. If I understand the relationship > between mass and time for an external observer, the gyroscope should slow > down as it approaches a large mass and the rotations would return to normal > speed when pulled away from the mass. If this is the case, where does the > energy go when slowing down the gyroscope by approaching a mass, and where > does the energy come from to return the rotations to original speed when > pulled away? > > Steve W. >
