Proof that Time Dilation does not effect time.

[gater]

I have argued that Time Dilation is the effect that gravity has on devices that measure time, but it has no effect on Time itself.
In the past 50 - 75 years, man has learned to accurately measure time. Everywhere on earth has exactly the same time, of course we have time zones, so it might be 12:05:03 in Los Angeles and 8:05:03 in London. Always the same - everywhere on earth.
If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?
But there has NEVER been any evidence that time is not a constant. I submit that this is proof that Time is a constant.

[Terrapin Station]

Time is what devices do (and what everything else does, too). So insofar as dilation affects devices it affects time.

[LuckyR]

I have argued that Time Dilation is the effect that gravity has on devices that measure time, but it has no effect on Time itself.
In the past 50 - 75 years, man has learned to accurately measure time. Everywhere on earth has exactly the same time, of course we have time zones, so it might be 12:05:03 in Los Angeles and 8:05:03 in London. Always the same - everywhere on earth.
If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?
But there has NEVER been any evidence that time is not a constant. I submit that this is proof that Time is a constant.

Attempting to separate time from clocks is a fool's errand, since time only has meaning when measured by clocks.

[Steve3007]

If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?

What you're asking here is this: "What observable phenomenon does the theory predict?" How might you find an answer to that question?

I have a wild and crazy idea: you could actually read what the theory predicts. If you do that, do you find anybody proposing a theory which predicts that "spots on earth are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet"? If so, please quote it. If not, who and what exactly are you disagreeing with?

[chewybrian]

If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?

What you're asking here is this: "What observable phenomenon does the theory predict?" How might you find an answer to that question?

I have a wild and crazy idea: you could actually read what the theory predicts. If you do that, do you find anybody proposing a theory which predicts that "spots on earth are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet"? If so, please quote it. If not, who and what exactly are you disagreeing with?

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016E ... U/abstract

We treat, as an illustrative example of gravitational time dilation in relativity, the observation that the centre of the Earth is younger than the surface by an appreciable amount...In this paper we present this estimate alongside a more elaborate analysis yielding a difference of two and a half years.

If I did the math right, based on the paper, the earth's surface is losing .02 seconds a year to the core, or a second in about 50 years.

((2+1/2 years lost/4+1/2 billion years age of earth)*31,536,000 seconds in a year))

I presume the difference for people living in Alaska vs/ Hawaii is ridiculously small, but I don't know how to calculate it. People in Alaska should age faster due to velocity, but slower due to gravity, right?

[h_k_s]

I have argued that Time Dilation is the effect that gravity has on devices that measure time, but it has no effect on Time itself.
In the past 50 - 75 years, man has learned to accurately measure time. Everywhere on earth has exactly the same time, of course we have time zones, so it might be 12:05:03 in Los Angeles and 8:05:03 in London. Always the same - everywhere on earth.
If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?
But there has NEVER been any evidence that time is not a constant. I submit that this is proof that Time is a constant.

There has never been any evidence that "time" even exists.

It is like mathematics, strictly a mental concept created by the human mind.

[Steve3007]

If I did the math right, based on the paper, the earth's surface is losing .02 seconds a year to the core, or a second in about 50 years.

I don't know if you did the maths right, but assuming you did, I guess the next question would be: What, if anything, might this mean in terms of something that can be measured/observed? i.e. if we wanted to falsify or verify that prediction, how might we do it?

I presume the difference for people living in Alaska vs/ Hawaii is ridiculously small, but I don't know how to calculate it. People in Alaska should age faster due to velocity, but slower due to gravity, right?

Again, I think we have to be really careful to put things in terms of observations - propositions that are falsifiable. What might a statement like "X ages faster than Y" mean in terms of actual measurements?

People in Alaska and Hawaii live at roughly the same depth in a gravitational well. They're both rotating round / accelerating towards the Earth's axis of rotation, but at different magnitudes. They're rotating round / accelerating towards each other. They're moving at different velocities with respect to an inertial reference frame centred on the Earth's core. That's not counting their movements relative to the Sun and all the other objects in the Universe.

So it's complicated. The general approach that physics takes to manage complexity: assume the horse is spherical.

[gater]

Time is what devices do (and what everything else does, too). So insofar as dilation affects devices it affects time.

Wrong - time has been passing at a constant rate forever. Man labeled time starting with days, years, hours, etc. Man attempts to measure time, but the devices we use are subject to gravity - that's what time dilation is.

[Terrapin Station]

Time is what devices do (and what everything else does, too). So insofar as dilation affects devices it affects time.

Wrong - time has been passing at a constant rate forever. Man labeled time starting with days, years, hours, etc. Man attempts to measure time, but the devices we use are subject to gravity - that's what time dilation is.

Time is simply motion or changes. "Time passing at a constant rate" would only be relative to a particular motion or change that we're using as a reference.

[gater]

I have argued that Time Dilation is the effect that gravity has on devices that measure time, but it has no effect on Time itself.
In the past 50 - 75 years, man has learned to accurately measure time. Everywhere on earth has exactly the same time, of course we have time zones, so it might be 12:05:03 in Los Angeles and 8:05:03 in London. Always the same - everywhere on earth.
If Time Dilation actually effected Time - wouldn't there be spots on earth that are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet?
But there has NEVER been any evidence that time is not a constant. I submit that this is proof that Time is a constant.

Attempting to separate time from clocks is a fool's errand, since time only has meaning when measured by clocks.

Wrong - a clock is just an attempt to measure time.

[LuckyR]

Attempting to separate time from clocks is a fool's errand, since time only has meaning when measured by clocks.

Wrong - a clock is just an attempt to measure time.

OK, please describe this "time" thing you are going on about, in the absence of time measuring equipment.

[gater]

Wrong - a clock is just an attempt to measure time.

OK, please describe this "time" thing you are going on about, in the absence of time measuring equipment.

Time is the measurement of the constant, eternal, universal now. There was no beginning of time.

[Steve3007]

Time is the measurement of the constant, eternal, universal now.

What do you use to measure a "constant, eternal, universal now"? Can you buy one from the supermarket?

[gater]

What you're asking here is this: "What observable phenomenon does the theory predict?" How might you find an answer to that question?

I have a wild and crazy idea: you could actually read what the theory predicts. If you do that, do you find anybody proposing a theory which predicts that "spots on earth are second slower or faster than the rest of the planet"? If so, please quote it. If not, who and what exactly are you disagreeing with?

https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016E ... U/abstract

We treat, as an illustrative example of gravitational time dilation in relativity, the observation that the centre of the Earth is younger than the surface by an appreciable amount...In this paper we present this estimate alongside a more elaborate analysis yielding a difference of two and a half years.

The center of the earth is younger than the surface? - Wrong The core of the earth is older than the surface, I know this because when the earth was formed the core was already there, and since then matter has fallen to the earth, and the atmosphere came when the earth started to cool. - All of the gold that has been found on earth came after the earth started to cool, because if the gold were here when earth formed it would have sunk to become part of the core.

[gater]

Time is the measurement of the constant, eternal, universal now.

What do you use to measure a "constant, eternal, universal now"? Can you buy one from the supermarket?

Time doesn't need a clock to be time.