 What Time is it – Now? How about now?
by Arthur "Art" Ryan
While watching a show on Discovery’s Science Channel, I became
aware that our Global Positioning Satellites (GPS) are subject to
a different rate of time than us on Earth. It was postulated that
time runs faster on the satellites. That caused me to become
confused. I did not understand how that could be possible given
the Special Relativity Theory which demands that time runs slower
when an object is moving at a higher rate of speed. Go fast and
time slows down.
So, some quick research was done and I confirmed that the rate
at which time transpires on GPS orbiters are ever so slightly
faster than earth-based time. This, of course, has to be regularly
compensated for or our GPS System would be completely useless. At the elementary level, this may seem unimportant, and in our
everyday life – as long as GPS works, we don’t care. After all,
our measurement of time is a concept based on the rotation of our
planet. It is divided into segments that could have been of any
length and called by any name we collectively accept.
The actual time that we perceive was devised in order to
standardize train schedules. Therefore, we have time zones within
which the entire area uses the same time no matter the position of
the sun in the sky. Which results in situations where the sun
could be at its highest point above you and the time as you know
it should be noon; yet, the accepted time could be 12:30, 12:45,
or something similarly different. That is the perception of our
concept of time.
But, a perception of a concept of time is not the subject of
this article. We will be looking at a deeper idea of time that
until recently, I thought was already figures out. Yet, it seems
that time is another area of science that is riddled with doubts.
Normally, when I address things that just don’t seem right
within dogmatic science, I would express where my doubts emanate
from and offer a new idea to possibly correct the problem. This is
not going to happen in this article. I have only been considering
the subject for a little over a week and have not wrapped my mind
around it long enough to see an alternative to the dogmatic
accepted time. I will pose many questions herein that are asked
without an answer from me. They are presented to illustrate my
doubts and to challenge the scientific community.
The depth of the questions is potentially profound and will
call into doubt many accepted theories and our basic understanding
of the universe around us. Some of the questions will be provided
to point out areas for further research and others will be
discussed to establish doubt in other areas. Please bear with me
and I think you will see the dilemma that has formed in my head. A
dilemma that simple, common-sense reasoning may need help with.
So, the assistance of my guest writers, non-associated scientists
and scholars, and you will be eagerly accepted.
A very basic understanding of the Special Theory of Relativity
has told us that time runs slow during movement. This slow-time
compounds itself the faster the movement. In theory, if you travel
at the speed of light – time (clocks) stop. Many Sci-Fi movies
have set their plots around this supposed phenomena. “Planet of
the Apes” shows space travelers awakening from stasis to find
themselves back on Earth many, many years into the future. It is
this proposed element within the Special Theory of Relativity
dealing with time and speed of travel that allows us to enjoy the
movie as something that could happen.
With the Special Theory of Relativity establishing the
expectation of Time Dilation, why do we find time on a satellite
to be running fast?
It was this simple thought that caused me to begin to mull the
idea over. After all, when considering that the satellites used
for GPS are traveling in orbit around Earth at great speed
compared to the commercial jet used in the Haefle-Keating
Experiment. That experiment apparently confirmed the thoughts on
time/speed in Special Relativity. Yet, here we find a very
different observation on our GPS satellites. A contradiction.
So, it became apparent that something was amiss and immediately
things were wrought with doubt.
For instance, the reason for the
increase rate at which time lapsed on satellites was attributed to
distance from the Earth (mass) at which they were located. This
causes one to believe that time is susceptible to gravity. This is
pretty much the theory accepted today and is a very interesting
thought that will be discussed further in this article.
However, the known observations do not prove that time is
affected by mass or gravity. It is just as possible that Earth’s
electro-magnetic field could be a causal factor. Temperature, to
my knowledge, has not been ruled out as an influence and the
Haefle-Keating experiment may have shown that time is subject to
resistance resulting from our atmosphere. As I see it, we just
don’t know and have not been looking. If we did venture into these
items’ possible effects, we may find that any number of them, or
others such as pressure, may change time’s rate of travel – its
pulse, it you will. It is even likely that we may find that time
is actually an object!!
Doesn’t that boggle the mind.
I know this - I can no longer accept the dogmatic influences of
movement on time. I used to believe that time was required to
simply measure movement. Without movement, there seemed to be no
need for time. Now I am not so sure. It still may be true; but, it
has become apparent that we don’t have enough information and we
need to begin to look deeper. Here are some things that we should
explore. Some may not have an effect on time. In order to know we
need to rule them out.
- It there a difference in the time deviation at greater
distances from the Earth?
- Is there a difference in the time deviation between
orbiting
and geo-stationary satellites?
- Is there a difference in the rate of time if the satellite
is
in a counter-rotating orbit?
- Can we determine a difference in the rate of time
between
satellites orbiting at different speeds?
These are just a probable few questions that can be readily
determined now. The answer to these would go a long way in
solidifying our understanding of time. But, this is far from all
of the possible variables. A large number of other questions, once
answered, could help rule-in or rule-out other influences.
- What is the deviation in time on our Deep Space Probes
in
comparison to local Earth orbiting satellites?
- What is the difference in time when on the surface of the
moon?
- Does a difference in the time deviation exist between the
lunar surface and lunar orbit?
- What is the time difference when on and/or near Mars?
- Are there any time anomalies when near other planets,
especially Venus with its dense atmosphere and large bodies like
Jupiter or Saturn?
- What effects are seen on time when nearer to the Sun?
- Do we also see different rates of time when in close
proximity to space debris, such as comets and asteroids, cosmic
dust or gas, or other satellites?
The answers to these questions would help us to see the effects
of gravity on time if it truly changes the rate of time. In
certain situations, the effects on other things like pressure,
temperature, and resistance may be speculated at. The information
to start making these determinations should easily be obtained by
current communications with probes, rovers, and solar satellites.
We can also experiment at the Earth-bound level to answer the
following questions.
- Is there a time rate deviation at different altitudes during
flight?
- Does the weather affect the rate at which time lapses?
- Does time’s rate change based on location on the Earth, say:
on the equator, at the poles (both magnetic and rotational), or
at depth beneath the sea?
- Does a comparison of atmospheric travel differ from
outer-space, even low orbit?
- In a laboratory creating electromagnetic fields, what are
the effects on time’s pulse both in attractive and repulsive
fields at any number electrical power levels?
- In a video studio, can disparities be found in the recording
and Earth-bound viewing rate that may be providing us with
unusual images, such as the apparent slow-mo films of people on
the moon?
- If there are disparities found on video and film from the
moon, do similar anomalies exist in other recorded media at
other places in our explored space?
- Within the medical community, is it possible to change our
own personal rate of time by varying moods, adrenaline, or other
stimuli or depressant?
The one thing that appears to be true, thus far, is that our
complete understanding of time is still elusive. At present, we do
not know which factors of those mentioned above, do or do not
effect time. This is unacceptable in view of the fact that much of
what we understand about the laws of nature rely on measured,
consistent time. For instance, the speed of light as a constant is
again called into doubt by me. Here is why! Imagine a star visible
from here on Earth. Its light traveling to us on a path that takes
it in close proximity to the sun. Its beam of light is moving as
the speed of light from the point of origin all the way to us.
Well, Maybe!!
The speed of light has been set at 300,000 kilometers per
second. This is a speed that has been calculated as a comparison
of distance traveled during a determined timeframe. However, we
have determined through our satellites that there is some sort of
influence on the rate of time that is sure to be found around the
sun. After all, the sun is a mass that has gravity which would
manipulate the rate of time. Therefore, as the light approaches and ultimately comes to its
closest proximity to the sun, the rate at which time lapses will
slow down. Thus, for the light to continue at the constant speed
of light that we have established, it would have to change its
rate of travel from our perspective. After all, the length of
travel did not change.
For the light to have transverse the set distance on its path,
as it closed with the sun’s effects on time, the speed at which it
traveled would have to exceed the constant, relative to us. Time
relative to the light has slowed; but, to us, as an outside
observer, it has remained the same.
So, with regard to the two established elements (length of
travel and our observed time) as absolutes, we can assume that the
rate of travel for the light accelerated as it entered the sun’s
influence.
It is also safe to assume that the rate of travel decelerated
as the light again left the sun’s effects. This is, again, self
evident from our observations of the change in the rate of time.
To better understand my argument for a change exceeding the
speed of light, further imagine that you are observing the above
situation from the side. The light leaves point A (the star) and
travels, at our established constant, and arrives at point C (the
Earth) at the elapsed time of X.
With the sun set as point B, we can assume that the light had to
achieve a speed of Y as it approached and came to its closest
proximity to point B. It then had to decelerate to a speed of Z as
it passed and completed the journey to point C. A definite
paradox!!
Relativity of time seems to create a real problem in this
scenario. On the path from point A to B and from B to C, the light
may have been confined to its own constant. Yet it is clear from
the outside, that if the constant was in effect for the entire
trip from A to C, then there had to be a change in the speed of
light along the path. Relativity fails to answer this anomaly.
This situation also allows us to further question the viability of
the speed of light as a constant.
Continuing to imagine viewing the above described path of light
from point A to point C, we can question the actual speed of light
at an extremely small fraction of a millisecond following it
departure from point A. Did the light achieve the constant
instantaneously? How long is the period of acceleration? This is
also important for determining the actual distance traveled based
on time. We cannot reasonably determine a distance traveled if we
do not know how long it took the light to accelerate to full
speed.
Next, we need to look from an outside perspective at another
situation where relativity appears to fail. If a space traveler
were riding on Einstein’s imaginary bus, at near the speed of
light and time has slowed in their isolated world to the point
that prevents them from walking forward within the spacecraft and
exceed the speed of light, what happens if that traveler were to
shine a flashlight towards the front of the craft. Or, what if the
spacecraft had headlights that were turned on? Science says that
the momentum cannot be added to the speed of light. The offer an
example that displays a bike rider throwing a ball compared to the
bike’s headlight being on.
They then claim that proves their point. Nice graphics, but, I
wonder how they can even say this is proof – it is speculation.
The fastest speed that we can travel now is only a miniscule
fraction of the speed of light and the addition of that momentum
cannot be proven one way or the other. Granted, I am also
speculating, but, I ask which thought makes more sense to you?
Let’s return to the immediate topic. From the perspective of
the traveler, things could be set to obey the constant limitation;
yet, from the outside observer, who may be stationary observing
the craft circling overhead, the light emitted from the headlights
would be slowed down considerably. The headlights would be visible
and, if the craft were (hypothetically) traveling only five miles
per hour (mph) short of the established speed limit, then the
emitted light would appear to be only traveling 5 mph from us as
the outside observer. At that slow speed, even more observations
of the light could be feasible. The particles/waves may even be
visible. However, this is also a paradox that makes the constant
doubtful.
On October 14, 1947, Capt. Charles E. "Chuck"
Yeager piloted the rocket-powered Bell X-1 to Mach 1.06,
destroying the myth of the "sound barrier." The NACA used the
X-1 to study the dangerous problem of air compressibility and
powerful shock wave formation during transonic flight. Credit:
Getty Images
This harkens back to a time before Chuck Yeager exceeded the
sound barrier. Then, science believed that the sound barrier could
not be broken. Thus, the word “barrier” was used to describe it.
Yet, Yeager not only broke that limit; his voice was able to leave
his mouth and reach the microphone in his gear to radio back that
was in control and alright. Based on that comparison, it becomes
possible that the light emitted from our spacecraft’s headlights
would travel at the speed of light away from the craft. From the
perspective of the outside observer, the light would be traveling
at nearly twice the speed of light.
Now, imagine two spacecrafts converging on each other. Their
headlights are on and pointed towards each other. If you can
imagine this, can you tell the readers and I, at what the speed
the lights collide? Hmm!!
From these described scenarios, it becomes possible that the
speed of light is not a constant. It further becomes possible that
there is a Grand Universal Time. A rate of time that is completely
free of all possible influences; let’s say a point located between
three galaxies, in the roughly triangular shaped area free of any
influence from any one of the three galaxies. For the sake of
understanding this zone of no influence, envision three equally
sized and powerful galaxies located on the same plane. Each with
their edges located as close to each other as possible without
effecting the others. There then becomes and influence-free zone,
where time would be able to run at its maximum rate. Given the
still possible effects that are created by speed of travel, we
would need to imagine a stationary object located there. One such an object in that zone, would time run at an infinite
rate or would it lapse at a speed that is greater than in other
areas and beg to be calculated and would that rate become our new
Constant, maybe even pushing itself into the equation of E=MC2.
Any of these is possible and, of course, probably impossible
for us to determine, given our current technology. However, we can
safely determine that there, theoretically, has to be a top speed
at which time lapses. An absolute speed limit that is understood;
even if, we cannot influence it ourselves. Of course, the term
constant has not been attached to that speed limit due to the
described known and/or possible influences. And, even if time is
not the element that should be included in Einstein’s famous
equation, we can now clearly see that the speed of light as a
constant is, at best, a localized matter.
In other words, the amount of energy that can be released from
an atom is different here (on Earth) than on the moon and,
further, less on those orbs than at any point between the same.
And, this energy potential fluctuation from outside influences
would be realized no matter where the energy is released. To
clarify, the potential for energy released would be far greater in
our imaginary space between three galaxies then it would be if the
release took place at or near the center of any galaxy and
somewhere in between those points we would find an energy
potential similar to that we see here on Earth.
Now that I have called the theory of relativity into question,
you are left wondering if we should really care – its close
enough. To that I would say that - the limitations we have set
have probably already prevented us from advancements and we should
immediately remove these barriers. It is quite possible that a
controlled manipulation of time could be the key to Intergalactic
travel.
As we work towards that possible ends, we still have more
questions that should be asked and answered.
- If there is a Grand Universal Time, at what rate does it
lapse?
- Does that maximum coincide with the speed of light?
- Is that rate of time an actual speed limit or can time be
exceeded in a form of hypertime?
- Is there a separation point from mass where time’s deviation
becomes neutralized and remains constant?
- Is there a speed of travel that overcomes the effects of
separation from mass?
- Does resistance, if an influence, eventually overcome the
effects of mass separation?
Scientists have been heard to say that we do not completely
understand time. With all of the above still in question, it
becomes apparent that is true. Now is the time to correct our lack
of knowledge. Much of what has been addressed herein is easily
accomplished, given the resources. These doubts, questions, and
suggestions may not give us a complete understanding of time; but
it would be a good start. Will anyone step up?
Copyright Arthur Ryan 2010
Presented with permission of the author
Articles by Art Ryan
Don't miss other articles by the author:
Art Ryan's official
website: www.sciencedoubts.com
and his Blog:
http://sciencedoubt.blogspot.com/
About the Author
Arthur “Art” Ryan is an independent researcher and
author, who is a full-time employee supporting a major railroad
and a small business owner of a process engineering consulting
company, that enjoys all manner of things science. He is a
baseball and football fan, who values his privacy and therefore
writes under a pseudonym.
His book concerning Earth Changes is called “Are We
Worth Our Salt?” which can be purchased through Lulu by visiting
http://stores.lulu.com/arthurryan or
Amazon and may be procured at you local Barnes and Noble
store.
Art accepts constructive criticism about his ideas
and welcomes evidence that support or dispute his thoughts.
Questions and comments can be addressed to Art through his
official website
www.sciencedoubts.com
At his site, Art has opened a controlled, closed
forum where intellectuals, professionals, academics, and aspiring
amateurs can express their thoughts, findings, and alternate
theories under pseudonyms; thereby avoiding possible damage to
their careers or loss of existing funding. This site is to be
driven by its users and will grow to fit the need. Those
interested in writing on Science Doubt are invited to review the
“Outstanding Questions” and “News Articles” sections for topic
ideas or to contact the editor about your own.
 |
Are We Worth Our Salt?
Have you ever wondered what is behind some of the World's
mysteries? Do you ponder Earth changes and natural climate
swings? If so, this is a book for you. Addressed herein is a
primary thought that when first published by another author
"electrified" Albert Einstein.
Yet, a cause for the theory was not previously given. This
book will show the process steps needed to bring it to
culmination. A cause and effect approach will be brought
into play to solve this dramatic puzzle. Our Civilization is
on the line and it requires your assistance to save it. Are
you up to the challenge?
Also available here:
http://stores.lulu.com/arthurryan
ISBN 978-0-6152-1270-8
ID: 2469512 |
|
