Dave this is correct, high velocity of object thru the ether or in the case of gravity high acceleration of ether thru the stationary object, all formulas regarding time dilation have at the heart V^2/C^2 because it is due to the Pythagorean relationship between the spatial and temporal axii, Lorentzian contraction is both a perspective and a reality where a collision between a contracted near luminal object and a stationary object could be avoided under certain circumstances because the space time boundary stretches to contain the near luminal object. it would appear much slower and contracted in the direction of travel from the perspective of the nearby stationary object as it flashes past due to Lorentzian contraction. Even a trajectory taking the objects thru overlapping SPATIAL coordinates would still be offset by what appears to both observers as a spatial displacement but is actually a temporal displacement because we are trapped in a 3d ant farm and the mechanics of space time have to stretch space while shortening time for the object approaching C. the relativistic spaceship is turning outward into the temporal boundary that is our ant farm... and the boundaries stretch forming extra dimensional space from our perspective at the cost of one contracted dimension from the stationary observers perspective..Lorentzian contraction... IMHO the inverted hydrogen or hydrino works in the opposite manner.. instead of accumulating the intersection rate of a luminal spaceship with the passage of time, ether, virtual particles passing thru this ant farm we exist in to slow time, the segregation of the virtual particle passage by casimir geometry creates concentrated cavities where time is accelerated. Hence the claims of anomalous decay of radioactive gases.. My theory extends casimir's theory that larger virtual particles are excluded from the cavity and instead postulates the larger particles are still present in the cavity by making the time dimension smaller and enlarging the spatial dimension...
Fran From: David Roberson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2013 1:17 AM To: [email protected] Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:Time, Mass, Gravity I believe that the slowing of time is what an outside observer sees when he looks at the gyroscope within the strong field. Someone located near the affected instrument would not see anything unusual or any slowing in its rotation. If the gyroscope remains within the strong field for a long time, it would complete fewer revolutions than one that remained at the original position above the gravitational field. The same thing would happen to any clock device whether it is atomic or mechanical such as a heartbeat. I do not believe that mass change makes an important contribution to the slowing down of the rotation as seen from above. I suspect that rotational energy of the scope would be reduced in the exact same proportion as that observed for an atomic oscillator at the same location when compared to one outside of the field. You are asking an interesting question about where the energy is stored as the gyroscope mass is observed moving close to the gravitational source and slowing down. I would expect COE to be preserved so it should be possible to locate the missing energy. Dave -----Original Message----- From: H Veeder <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> To: vortex-l <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Sat, Nov 9, 2013 12:51 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:Time, Mass, Gravity I don't think it has been tested because the possibility is not predicted by General Relativity. GR says that the observed difference in the passage of time is due to the slowing of time rather than a change in the mechanical characteristics of the device (a gyroscope in this case) used to measure the passage of time. Harry On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Steve Wallace <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I will have to think this one through. I had not even considered that aspect and I haven't read any type of experiments on it. Have you? Best regards, Steve On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 10:33 AM, a.ashfield <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Steve Wallace, On possibility would be that the mass of the flywheel also increases, which would both explain the flywheel slowing and where the energy goes.
