Where is the universe hiding its missing mass?

Welcome to the Plasma Universe, where the cosmic web of electric currents drive the largest scales processes just as they do all the way down.

Except for the confirmation afforded by numerous observations, such as the above article.

Everything to do with PC as the cosmic web is an explicit prediction of the theory. The cosmic web hes no place in standard guesswork, only ad hoc a posteriori epicycles were conjured up to fit it to observation. As usual.

Everything to do with PC as the cosmic web is an explicit prediction of the theory. The cosmic web hes no place in standard guesswork, only ad hoc a posteriori epicycles were conjured up to fit it to observation. As usual.

Where is the universe hiding its missing mass?

Epicycles

Even the sad crackpot that constantly links to a vanity press where he or she was scammed out of money for no gain show us a disinterest in learning what science is and is not.

Even the...

"scammed" ??

.........what do ya call the hundreds of millions of dollars spent on all the so-called research for inferred DARK MATTER that has never yet been discovered, and holds no promise in the future to show observational evidence this cosmic fairy dust exists. But you don't bitch about that being a scam do you?

As far as you're concerned, the immutable fantasies of funny farm Pop-Cosmology transcend criticism because they are YOUR FUNNY FARM FACTS.

Just admit you don't like FACTS that detract from your immutable DM fantasies. Anything that detracts from your immutable fantasies are a scam as far as you're concerned.

The dark matter and dark energy are confirmed multiple ways. @SRU is lying again. So's @Benni.

Welcome to the Plasma Universe, where the cosmic web of electric currents drive the largest scales processes just as they do all the way down

Meanwhile, looks like you got some reading of all these peer-reviewed articles published in the scholarly journals to do. I'd say about a week.

None of them is outdated, @Benni. The evidence is what it is.

And like usual, here you are lying again.

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

That song always makes otto cry boohoo

These filaments are known by astronomers as the "warm-hot intergalactic medium" or WHIM.

In other words plasma, the physics of which are accurately described by Alfvén and Peratt. The purveyors of The Plasma Universe and plasma cosmology. So yes, it all makes very good sense.

Your fantasy world of Pop-Cosmology is everything you live for in this chatroom, and is what the "lying" is all about.

The filaments match very well what was predicted by scientists using models that include DM.

Locally we observe acceleration in the direction of mass

Spacetime doesn't just curve down in the presence of mass, it curves up in it's absence. The upward curvature is what we've dubbed Dark Energy.

"acceleration" of what? Certainly not electro-magnetic waves.

Spacetime doesn't just curve down in the presence of mass, it curves up in it's absence. The upward curvature is what we've dubbed Dark Energy.

what is this "curves up in it's absence" effect? If there is an absence of a gravitating mass, how does curvature of any kind occur whether you want to define it as "up" or "down"?

What is your theory that "upward curvature" is Dark Energy?

If the curvature increases with the distance between masses, we should observe a diminishing effect of gravity (curvature) with distance, though possibly so small as to be unmeasurable on very small (intragalactic) scales. (cont.)

As the distance between masses increases, eventually spacetime begins curving up rather than down, and as distance grows the curvature becomes negative

As the distance between masses increases, eventually spacetime begins curving up rather than down, and as distance grows the curvature becomes negative

It sounds like you're saying that subsequent to a particle of mass passing through the stronger field of a larger gravitating body, that it will suddenly take a turn in a different direction than the one it was deflected into by the larger gravitating body? Is this what you're saying?

Gravity only establishes the links between 2 or more bodies of mass, while Space makes the journey smooth and enables the Motion and Momentum of each body.

Gravitational lensing is only light that is deflected off of mass and is redirected toward another line of sight.

It sounds like you're saying that subsequent to a particle of mass passing through the stronger field of a larger gravitating body, that it will suddenly take a turn in a different direction than the one it was deflected into by the larger gravitating body? Is this what you're saying?

It will appear to have taken a turn. That's how we describe the effect we've named "gravitational lensing" and observed to occur around distant galaxies.

Gravitational lensing is only light that is deflected off of mass and is redirected toward another line of sight

Awhhhh, blotto! That is so sweet of you. And so near Valentine's Day, you must care so...

Gravitational lensing is only light that is deflected off of mass and is redirected toward another line of sight.

Awhhhh, blotto! That is so sweet of you. And so near Valentine's Day, you must care so...

Crackpot idiot pseudoscience theories make me cry as well so what can I say?

Sorry BackBurner,, but your "blueberries in a bowl" analogy doesn't explain why bodies of mass move/drift apart.

It sounds like you're saying that subsequent to a particle of mass passing through the stronger field of a larger gravitating body, that it will suddenly take a turn in a different direction than the one it was deflected into by the larger gravitating body? Is this what you're saying?

It will appear to have taken a turn. That's how we describe the effect we've named "gravitational lensing" and observed to occur around distant galaxies.

BB, you're confusing the issues here. You start off talking about the effects of two gravitating masses on one another, then mixing "gravitational lensing" into that, two separate issues.

LOL It may seem metaphysical, but it is what it is.

@BB, there is no slope, hills or dales in Space.

No. It has only been REDIRECTED into a different course at the same velocity. It only SEEMS to have accelerated due to it having been deflected by the Mass that deflected it. c remains at c

The closest anyone has come, other than dark matter, to an explanation of all of it is MOND

BackBurner I'm giving you all 5s anyway even though we essentially disagree. You've made a great argument for your understanding of the issue. You are correct on grav lensing, but as I said, it is equivalent to the triangle analogy.

it is that Space itself requires that Mass is given enough leeway to keep its distance from other Mass - otherwise, it would be like a game of pool (billiards) where one ball is hit by a cue stick and scatters all the other balls in many directions, often colliding.
Sorry for that analogy, but there has to be a certain formality, even in astrophysics.
Moving right along, even clusters of galaxies keep their distance from each other. This avoids chaos and disorder.

it is that Space itself requires that Mass is given enough leeway to keep its distance from other Mass - otherwise, it would be like a game of pool (billiards) where one ball is hit by a cue stick and scatters all the other balls in many directions, often colliding.
Sorry for that analogy, but there has to be a...
Moving right along, even clusters of galaxies keep their distance from each other. This avoids chaos and disorder.

says I

........the effects of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics, ENTROPY, the distribution of energy. The randomness of the distribution of energy is what avoids chaos & thus a breakdown within the closed boundary of an energy system. The Universe is a big energy generator & the galaxies in motion is it's motor consuming all that energy giving motion to all we see about us via what we call KINETIC ENERGY.

BackBurner I'm giving you all 5s anyway even though we essentially disagree. You've made a great argument for your understanding of the issue. You are correct on grav lensing, but as I said, it is equivalent to the triangle analogy.

Thanks. Sincerely. I appreciated the opportunity to try, though I may have not convinced anyone. It's a model I've been working on for many years. But, in the immortal words of Monty Python, "it's only a model".

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

@Benni and BackBurner

There is no such animal as Time Dilation.

Try visualizing two galaxies with enough distance (vacuum) between them. Now, visualize a spacetime curvature who's Y axis dimension (using the 2D "rubber sheet analogy) increases with the distance between the masses. Within a dense field, the increased curvature is negligible but likely observable; at some distance even local masses will cease attracting. At distances beyond that, they begin repelling. At large distances they measurably begin accelerating away from each other. Hence an expanding universe accelerating in all dimensions.

Come on guys, this isn't rocket science :)

I wanted to mention that all Mass is going ONE WAY.

Gravity is pulling Andromeda

toward the Milky Way. The greater the volume of Mass, the stronger is the gravitational pull towards it from behind. If it didn't go in one direction only - then all of the galaxies would be colliding or have "near misses" - thus utter Chaos.

I wanted to mention that all Mass is going ONE WAY.

That is the popular view. I disagree, as does observation.

I wanted to mention that all Mass is going ONE WAY.

That is the popular view. I disagree, as does observation.

The Big Bang itself is the main indicator that all are going one way - outward from the centre of wherever the Big Bang initially occurred. Even if all are going in all directions from that point like the spokes in a wheel - it would still mean that galaxies are following the ones ahead of them, in a row from whichever "spoke" they are on.

You're very welcome. You should consider all possibilities put forth, including mine and Benni's. I believe that you will come to the conclusion that a Phd doesn't mean that a scientist/researcher has considered all the possibilities

toward the Milky Way. The greater the volume of Mass, the stronger is the gravitational pull towards it from behind. If it didn't go in one direction only - then all of the galaxies would be colliding or have "near misses" - thus utter Chaos.

But of course they aren't. Some near galaxies do collide; same blueberry bowl.

Other's run from each other at accelerating speeds apparently. We need to describe both observed phenomena with our models. I've tried to do that.

With or without parens?

Surveillance_Egg_Unit writes:

"So you seem to be saying that everything began within a static Universe. That would mean that there is no beginning and no end; that everything existed already and that it is all chaotic like your blueberries in a bowl."

In essence, yes.

That's my fundamental understanding. No beginning, no end. From a philosophical perspective (maybe you'd call it metaphysical) I agree with that model. I find it very difficult to accept a "beginning" or "end" of time. However I'm an empiricist, so I do accept contravening evidence.

But you turn around in your seat and see that another car is following YOU...blue shift.

There is no "end of time".

@BackBurner
We've had a very interesting discussion and I appreciate your candor and wit. I wish you well in your endeavours and hope that you remain open to new logic - even if unpopular.
I assume that you're in Oz, so I hope that there's a break in the hot weather and things cool down.

With or without parens?

Without. Punch it in your calculator and see what you get.

@Benni, since you cannot do differential equations, you cannot understand entropy.

Hell, you can't even figure out fractions or for that matter

2 + 2 / 2 = ?

It was a tangental question ...... The original question was "does gravity influence the acceleration of electromagnetic radiation". We have evidence it does and we call it "gravitational lensing".

There is no "end of time". Please review what I've said about the Time element that was illogically included in "Spacetime" by Mr. Einstein - who obviously appears to have thought that Time was a dimension - which it most certainly isn't.

Time has ALWAYS existed,

Time has ALWAYS existed,

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

REGARDLESS of whether there was a beginning of time, time by definition has "ALWAYS existed".
That is because (even) if there was a beginning of time then there was no 'before' that beginning of time (else, as logically implied by the word 'before', there was a point in time 'before' that beginning therefore the said "beginning of time" isn't the beginning of time) which means if there was a beginning of time then all points of time "existed" in "ALWAYS" because the word "ALWAYS" means AT ALL POINTS in time and thus "ALWAYS" doesn't including a point in time where time doesn't exist (which would be a contradiction ANYWAY). Therefore time by definition has "ALWAYS" "existed" i.e. "ALWAYS existed".
But I doubt any of that was what you really meant to say.

. If you're in a car following the car ahead of you, you would see that car in the red shift. But you turn around in your seat and see that another car is following YOU...blue shift.

so what then is the mechanism of this ETERNAL CLOCK?

says SpookyOtto

Would you care to add your own "pseudoscience" to the mix? Don't worry. We won't think any less of you.
:)

so what then is the mechanism of this ETERNAL CLOCK?

Benni

Exactly what do you mean by "ETERNAL CLOCK" and how do you know there exists one?

Therefore time by definition has "ALWAYS" "existed" i.e. "ALWAYS existed".

Blueberries in a bowl or our Universe

A bran new concept
for our Universe
how fitting a name for our Universe
blueberries in a bowl
well why not
we explain gravity
in our expanding Universe
as berries expanding on a rubber sheet
so if individuals come to think of our Universe as blueberries in a bowl
blame the individuals who explain gravitational expansion as berries on a rubber sheet
as to time
is simply
the moon makes 12orbitals of earth as earth makes 1 orbital of the sun
is the basis of the mathematics of time
because
as a physical entity time does not exist, except in mathematics
Albert knew this even as devised time dilation
as he struggled with Pythagoras's theorem
as light bends its path it travels a longer path
rather than accept light takes longer to travel this longer path
Albert theorised, thought a bit more then by George he got it in one
Time Dilation - Length Contraction or Pythagoras's Theorem

so what then is the mechanism of this ETERNAL CLOCK?

Benni

Exactly what do you mean by "ETERNAL CLOCK" and how do you know there exists one?

You're the one who insists on it's existence,

"Always existed", TIME with no beginning & no end is what you're saying,

-Cantdrive85 is the only other poster to refer to me as blotto.

Cantdrive85 = SEU

so what then is the mechanism of this ETERNAL CLOCK?

Benni

Exactly what do you mean by "ETERNAL CLOCK" and how do you know there exists one?

"Always existed", TIME with no beginning & no end is what you're saying,

Nope. I clearly said no such thing. Apparently you cannot read.

Therefore time by definition has "ALWAYS" "existed" i.e. "ALWAYS existed".

You can take this to Galactic proportions

Benni, A real kinetic energy clock in action
when the Earth rotates 91,250,000,000 days
the Moon makes 3,000,000,000 orbital's of Earth
as Earth makes 250,000,000 orbital of the Sun
as the Sun makes 1 orbital of the galaxy

beeds> Maybe the missing mass is somehow related to the kinetic energy of the stuff we can see?

Time has ALWAYS existed,

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

REGARDLESS of whether there was a beginning of time, time by definition has "ALWAYS existed".
That is because (even) if there was a beginning of time then there was no 'before' that beginning of time (else, as logically implied by the word 'before', there was a point in time 'before' that beginning therefore the said "beginning of time" isn't the beginning of time) which means if there was a beginning of time then all points of time "existed" in "ALWAYS" because the word "ALWAYS" means AT ALL POINTS in time and thus "ALWAYS" doesn't including a point in time where time doesn't exist (which would be a contradiction ANYWAY). Therefore time by definition has "ALWAYS" "existed" i.e. "ALWAYS existed".
But I doubt any of that was what you really meant to say.

Kinetic Energy is mass in theory - E = MC²

beeds> Maybe the missing mass is somehow related to the kinetic energy of the stuff we can see?

The Milkyway is . . .
this equation of Albert's, E = MC² is 4 or more time the energy E that exist in the mass
the mass that has to provide the energy to accelerate the mass to over 90% the speed of light
in point of fact
if the existing mass multiplied by its velocity
The kinetic energy, more than accounts for the missing mass, in spade full's

...
So if TIME has always existed, how was it measured?

SEU, latest in the long line of pirouette/russkiye/pussycateyes/obamasocks iterations of the same perennial crackpot, has this to say in response to my response to cantdrive85

says SpookyOtto

Would you care to add your own "pseudoscience" to the mix? Don't worry. We won't think any less
:)

-Cantdrive85 is the only other poster to refer to me as blotto. The aforementioned suckpuppet menagerie used to call me that all the time.

I've long suspected that that poster (commonly referred to as pussytard for short) was a 'regular' poster who donned one of these idiot socks every once in awhile in order to bait the legitimate posters here as a way of feeding his egomaniac proclivities; and because of that last response by SEU, I now suspect cantdrive85 the EU czar, is none other than one and the same crackpot.

Cantdrive85 = SEU

Go take your D-K meds before you completely lose your mind

Brilliant estimation. Mass/Energy are convertible and interchangeable from one to the other and back again - over and over ad infinitum.

. If you're in a car following the car ahead of you, you would see that car in the red shift. But you turn around in your seat and see that another car is following YOU...blue shift.

Since you are three are travelling in the same direction and at an equivalent, you would see NO shift (Unless your driving a 5 speed manual)

Worth noting at this point that the treatment of time as a dimension is special relativity theory, not general relativity theory, and time dilation is one of those inconvenient laboratory-proven facts that shows it's correct.

Oops.

Eventually, MilkyWay is slowing a bit TOO much and Andromeda (the name of the gal. behind him) will soon go crashing into MilkyWay's car where they will merge and live happily ever after.

Worth noting at this point that the treatment of time as a dimension is special relativity theory, not general relativity theory, and time dilation is one of those inconvenient laboratory-proven facts that shows it's correct.

Oops.

Worth noting that they are still wrong.

Show what makes Time dilate and what it looks like, idiot twat nutjob

1. Don't lie about me. Especially trash mouth lies. I'll humiliate you.
2. If you wanna stop being stupid you gotta learn.
3. Don't be an asshole.

@SEU

How do you know if you are in the earths gravitational field on the surface feeling a force of mg, g being 9.8 m/s^2, or in an craft accelerating at 9.8 m/s^2? You both feel a force of mg.

@SEU

Please go on and explain how gravity slows a clock down. This is very interesting.
What about a digital clock. How does this happen?

A Caesium clock, you mean, aye jimmybobs? I told you already that nuclear clocks are affected by gravity, depending on the height of said clock, direction, and velocity. On a plane at 33000, the clock will run slower than the one at the surface. Higher than that and it runs even slower.

Here, I will teach you something, if you're smart enough to learn:

Show what makes Time dilate and what it looks like, idiot twat nutjob

It's already shown what makes time dilate. What does it look like? Well, that depends on what frame of reference you're looking at it from.

There you go. The essential lesson of relativity. All frames are equivalent, but not all frames are equal.

1) have you ever had sex up against the microwave?

2) are you allergic to sweet sorghum or no?

3) have you ever had your comments here at physorg altered by sinister forces?

4) have you ever called the NRC to recommend cooling meltdowns with dry ice?

5) have you ever worked for NASA as an engineer?

6) were you in the control room all night when Curiosity landed?

7) were you ever a black psychiatrist?

8) do you believe that the only way to achieve zero growth is not to make any babies AT ALL for 100 years

9) do you believe the FACT that the solar system is just big enough to accommodate all the planets, is PROOF of the existence of god?

You told us there's no time dilation. Then you say in this post atomic clocks measure time dilation.

Therefore time by definition has "ALWAYS" "existed" i.e. "ALWAYS existed".

So if TIME has always existed, how was it measured?

So you proved there's no singularity.

As you've been told over and over, most physicists don't think there's one either. We just don't have a quantum gravity theory to tell us what is there. Next?

So you proved there's no singularity.

As you've been told over and over, most physicists don't think there's one either. We just don't have a quantum gravity theory to tell us what is there. Next?

........"Next"? What do you mean "what is there"? You got pictures that makes you think something is there? Like what?

@humy
There was no beginning (of time) and no end (of time).

Time can't be dilated.

@humy
There was no beginning (of time) and no end (of time).

How do you know this? NOBODY does! And, at least currently, nobody can know! Scientists still have an incomplete picture.

Time can't be dilated.

If what you mean by that is that there is no such thing at time dilation, WRONG!
It is a proven scientific fact, backed-up by numerous observations and measurements, that there is time dilation. Learn some science.

Albert Einstein- Oct 1939

On a Stationary System With Spherical Symmetry Consisting of Many Gravitating Masses
Author(s): Albert Einstein Reviewed work(s): Source: The Annals of Mathematics, Second Series, Vol. 40, No. 4 (Oct., 1939), pp. 922-936 Published by: Annals of Mathematics Stable URL:

http://www.cscamm...hild.pdf

"This investigation arose out of discussions the author conducted with Professor H. P. Robertson and with Drs. V. Bargmann and P. Bergmann on the mathematical and physical significance of the Schwarzschild singularity. The problem quite naturally leads to the question, answered by this paper in the negative, as to whether physical models are capable of exhibiting such a singularity."

>schneibo.....Okay schneibo, I see you have had a change of heart & now want to start invoking Einstein into your unhinged tirades, so how about YOU go look at the link I just put up?

You can also take an atomic clock up a mountain;

http://leapsecond...eat2005/

So you proved there's no singularity.

As you've been told over and over, most physicists don't think there's one either. We just don't have a quantum gravity theory to tell us what is there. Next?

........"Next"? What do you mean "what is there"? You got pictures that makes you think something is there? Like what?

You can also take an atomic clock up a mountain;

http://leapsecond...eat2005/

It's called changing the kinetic energy input to a system.

You can also take an atomic clock up a mountain;

http://leapsecond...eat2005/

It's called changing the kinetic energy input to a system.

So you proved there's no singularity.

As you've been told over and over, most physicists don't think there's one either. We just don't have a quantum gravity theory to tell us what is there. Next?

........"Next"? What do you mean "what is there"? You got pictures that makes you think something is there? Like what?

Strong gravity, electric charge (if it has any), and angular momentum (if it has any). Those are the only things that can come out from behind the event horizon; everything else is inside. That's according to theory; and nothing we've seen around any black hole has ever cast any doubt on it. Next?

......which is why you can't prove SgrA* is NOT a barycenter, because there's nothing to see there.

You can also take an atomic clock up a mountain;

http://leapsecond...eat2005/

It's called changing the kinetic energy input to a system.

Is that supposed to mean something? Because it doesn't seem to have anything to do with time.

Is that supposed to mean something? Because it doesn't seem to have anything to do with time.

.....you don't comprehend it because of your inability to comprehend 1/2mv², and that it's the system in motion that undergoes dilation, not TIME.

Explain how TIME can be INPUT to a system to change it's kinetic energy? You can't, so you start another name calling rant.

You can also take an atomic clock up a mountain;

http://leapsecond...eat2005/

It's called changing the kinetic energy input to a system.

http www cscamm umd edu people facult tiglio GR2012 Syllabus files/EinsteinSchwarzschild pdf

You learn some science, the "dilation effect" is the result of kinetic energy input to a system,

"time" cannot be "input" to a system

You are talking complete gibberish, as usual.

-cont-

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

Just one small part of the evidence

https://www.scien...verified
"Physicists have verified a key prediction of Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity with unprecedented accuracy. Experiments at a particle accelerator in Germany confirm that time moves slower for a moving clock than for a stationary one.

The work is the most stringent test yet of this 'time-dilation' effect,..."

Also

https://en.wikipe...periment

Read more at: https://phys.org/...tml#jCp/

LOL I hate to say it but, humy, you are so gullible.
Those scientists claiming that Time Dilation has to be real are also gullible/deluded. I have already said that TIME IS INANIMATE. This means that Time is NOT an object which can be captured, caged, tortured, experimented on or with, taken photos of, moved up or down, or any of the things that scientists do

@Larson

The epicycles were based on observations too, and tooled to explain those observations in a fundamentally warped way, to wit, in order to maintain a religious creation story with the earth at the center. In modern times, The Big Bang has become such a story, and thus all the swirling theories are as suspect as epicycles, quite frankly. Most so-called scientists in the realm of cosmology understand where their bread is buttered, and the successful can ones approach their theory building from a very results oriented perspective. In short, epicycles.

You must try to understand that scientists are desperately hoping to hold on to Einstein's GR/SR theories in order to uphold their own credibility as scientists. You will never hear that they've debunked any part of GR/SR

LOL I hate to say it but, humy, you are so gullible.
Those scientists claiming that Time Dilation has to be real are also gullible/deluded. I have already said that TIME IS INANIMATE. This means that Time is NOT an object which can be captured, caged, tortured, experimented on or with, taken photos of, moved up or down, or any of the things that scientists do

Stop being an ignorant twat, just for once. Time dilation is a measured effect. Without taking account of it, you tosser, your GPS wouldn't work.

YOU are the one that's thick. You need to remove your rose-colored glasses and look at the real world.

...
You learn some science, the "dilation effect" is the result of kinetic energy input to a system,

"time" cannot be "input" to a system, it is simply a UNIT OF MEASURE, just like any system of recording measurements. If you think differently, then YOU explain the physics of inputting time into a system.

I can run slower with elevation and it has to be adjusted for that also.

The GPS works through nuclear atomic power and is not Time dependent. It is set at a certain setting and then the Caesium atoms enable to keep running for thousands of year. Occasionally, depending on the Time Zone it is above, the clock's "face/numbers" have to be updated by a human. I can run slower with elevation and it has to be adjusted for that also.
Nothing gets dilated in GPS. It is all automatic and mechanical.

Occasionally, depending on the Time Zone it is above, the clock's "face/numbers" have to be updated by a human

Occasionally, depending on the Time Zone it is above, the clock's "face/numbers" have to be updated by a human

F*** me! The stupid here hurts! Time zone? WTF difference would that make, you idiot? Dear me. Some people are just so thick.
They launched the first satellite without adjusting for GR/SR as some people (probably bloody engineers) didn't think such effects were real. The physicists included a frequency adjuster should it be shown that they really did need to account for GR/SR. Guess what? They did.

Occasionally, depending on the Time Zone it is above, the clock's "face/numbers" have to be updated by a human

F*** me! The stupid here hurts! Time zone? WTF difference would that make, you idiot? Dear me. Some people are just so thick.
They launched the first satellite without adjusting for GR/SR as some people (probably bloody engineers) didn't think such effects were real. The physicists included a frequency adjuster should it be shown that they really did need to account for GR/SR. Guess what? They did.

says the gullible jones

Yes, Time Zones. You know the kind that when you fly West or East, there are increments of 1hour for each time zone that is passed over. Or maybe you didn't know that. I wouldn't be surprised.

...
You learn some science, the "dilation effect" is the result of kinetic energy input to a system,

Not getting your connection on this one...

"time" cannot be "input" to a system, it is simply a UNIT OF MEASURE, just like any system of recording measurements. If you think differently, then YOU explain the physics of inputting time into a system.

Actually it's about how a "system" is input into time...

I can run slower with elevation and it has to be adjusted for that also.

You run slower cuz

Occasionally, depending on the Time Zone it is above, the clock's "face/numbers" have to be updated by a human

F*** me! The stupid here hurts! Time zone? WTF difference would that make, you idiot? Dear me. Some people are just so thick.
They launched the first satellite without adjusting for GR/SR as some people (probably bloody engineers) didn't think such effects were real. The physicists included a frequency adjuster should it be shown that they really did need to account for GR/SR. Guess what? They did.

says the gullible jones

Yes, Time Zones. You know the kind that when you fly West or East, there are increments of 1hour for each time zone that is passed over. Or maybe you didn't know that.

Twat. That is nothing to do with adjustments to GPS you ignorant fool.

That's full steam ahead BS. Time DILATION is a hoax. There is no way to halve or quarter it or make it smaller or larger or bend it - because it's not a THING. IT IS A CONCEPT CONCEIVED BY THE HUMAN MIND TO MEASURE THE PASSAGE OF EVENTS.
YOU are the one that's thick. You need to remove your rose-colored glasses and look at the real world.

That's full steam ahead BS. Time DILATION is a hoax. There is no way to halve or quarter it or make it smaller or larger or bend it - because it's not a THING. IT IS A CONCEPT CONCEIVED BY THE HUMAN MIND TO MEASURE THE PASSAGE OF EVENTS.
YOU are the one that's thick. You need to remove your rose-colored glasses and look at the real world.

Space is a concept conceived by the human mind as well to measure distance between two points. Space and time are inseparable. Space therefore cannot be dilated either by your logic.

We know that's not the case though. Or you figured out something Einstein and Minkowski were unaware of?

TIME IS INANIMATE . This means that Time is NOT an object which can be captured,

Time DILATION is a hoax.

I will read those later,

....you don't comprehend it because of your inability to comprehend 1/2mv², and that it's the system in motion that undergoes dilation, not TIME.

What kind of dilation does the system in motion undergo?

I don't see where it's an input to anything you've said here so far.

Meanwhile, how come we measure it as different for a system in motion relative to us?

TIME IS INANIMATE . This means that Time is NOT an object which can be captured,

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

And science and the scientists don't say or think time is a living thing and "an object which can be captured", whatever the hell that is supposed to mean. You make up a load of straw man crap.

Time DILATION is a hoax.

Oh not yet another stupid world-wide mass conspiracy theory. Time dilation is a scientific fact.

I will read those later,

That tells us you haven't even bothered to ever try and learn the first thing about the scientific theories/facts you say are all wrong.

....you don't comprehend it because of your inability to comprehend 1/2mv², and that it's the system in motion that undergoes dilation, not TIME.

What kind of dilation does the system in motion undergo?

.......change in MASS as kinetic energy is input into the system, or removed from the system. Try removing or adding TIME to a system & see how far you get.....zip.

I don't see where it's an input to anything you've said here so far.

Meanwhile, how come we measure it as different for a system in motion relative to us?

.....as I explained: "change in MASS as kinetic energy is input into the system, or removed from the system".

Time can't be weighed, seen, or moved about. It is not conjoined with Space as you seem to be alluding to. Objects are able to move through Space, but not through Time. YOU are referring to Distance - not Space itself. Space dilates, you know. Ever hear of gravity wells?

Again, you've not answered the question, but merely sidestepped it

well I did answer the question so directly to schneibo that it couldn't be missed, but somehow YOU managed it.

That which is being physically DILATED is the increasing or decreasing MASS of the system in motion.

The closer a MASS approaches the speed of light due to the input of kinetic energy, the more massive in every physical feature it becomes, including increasing gravity to the system

Einstein said it right there in section 3 of On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies in 1905. In 1936, Ives and Stilwell proved it in the laboratory, and many experiments since have confirmed it.

That's how science works. There is nowhere to hide except in lies or delusions.

Incidentally you never said how changes in kinetic energy operate to do something

The closer a MASS approaches the speed of light due to the input of kinetic energy, the more massive in every physical feature it becomes, including increasing gravity to the system.

You said something dilates, but when asked your only response was to repeat what you'd said earlier.

Would you like to answer the question with something other than handwaving at kinetic energy now?;

.....as I explained: "change in MASS as kinetic energy is input into the system, or removed from the system".

Time can't be weighed, seen, or moved about. It is not conjoined with Space as you seem to be alluding to. Objects are able to move through Space, but not through Time. YOU are referring to Distance - not Space itself. Space dilates, you know. Ever hear of gravity wells?

Again, you've not answered the question, but merely sidestepped it and repeated your point (and you've also needlessly downvoted the honestly posited question, though I suppose this is to be expected of your ilk.)

---continued---

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

Just one small part of the evidence for time dilation:

https://www.scien...erified/

BULLSHIT MATH IT IS.

accelerating lithium ions to one-third the speed of light a set of transitions within the lithium as electrons between various energy levels. The frequency of the transitions served as the 'ticking clock Transitions in stationary lithium ions clock.
http://www.fourmi...rel/www/

They used 2 clocks: one stationary and one traveling. ... IT IS GRAVITY THAT CAUSES ONE TO RUN SLOWER THAN THE OTHER, ...
IT IS GRAVITY THAT IS DOING IT - not Time Dilation.

More stupid bulls*t from you link, humy
says "FEW SCIENTISTS DOUBT THAT EINSTEIN WAS RIGHT" - but YOU swallowed it hook-line-and sinker, didn't you, humy?
Ahaaa - it is says: "But the MATHEMATICS describing the time dilation effect are fundamental blah blah blah blah and blah.
BULLSHIT MATH IT IS.

As I've said all along - they make up the theory with Math BEFORE they do the Physics.

When MASS dilates so also do ALL parameters of measurements.

Your tit-for-tat opinion that Space cannot be dilated only because I had said that Time cannot is quite irrational and churlish.
And what is THIS that you sent to Benni, where you say: "And again, SR predicts time dilation as well as length contraction."
Time dilation and length contraction? Are you saying that SR includes Time as a rubber band - not only dilating but also contracting? Can Time also reverse so that you can time travel to the past? ARE YOU CRAZY? LOL

2 clocks: one stationary one traveling. ... IT IS GRAVITY THAT CAUSES ONE TO RUN SLOWER THAN THE OTHER, ...
IT IS GRAVITY THAT IS DOING IT - not Time Dilation.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

2, According to general relativity, relative differences in gravity can ALSO produce a time dilation effect. And we also have proof of that effect. So "gravity doing it" and "time dilation" are not mutually exclusive. As the link below shows, the observed wobble of Mercury's orbit is in fact proof of that time dilation effect.

https://en.wikipe..._Mercury

while the other is in motion and are still affected by enough Gravity

And which other Mass is Mercury closest to,

"There is no time dilation. We measure this other dilation thingie with time that is not time dilation."

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to practice?

2 clocks: one stationary one traveling. ... IT IS GRAVITY THAT CAUSES ONE TO RUN SLOWER THAN THE OTHER, ...
IT IS GRAVITY THAT IS DOING IT - not Time Dilation.

According to general relativity, relative differences in gravity can ALSO produce a time dilation effect. And we also have proof of that effect. So "gravity doing it" and "time dilation" are not mutually exclusive. As the link below shows, the observed wobble of Mercury's orbit is in fact proof of that time dilation effect.

It's time dilation, @Benni. Now you're just outright lying. There isn't anything else to dilate.

... "TIME" inputs nothing ...

...because it is not a FORCE...

"There is no time dilation. We measure this other dilation thingie with time that is not time dilation."

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to practice?

humy> Who said/implied 'time' is a 'force'? OBVIOUSLY, anyone, including myself, that knows the first thing about known physics wouldn't say this. Although there are know physical relationships between time and force, 'time' and 'force' are completely different concepts in physics and no one I am aware of says they are the same thing

BackBurner> MOND was certainly the first attempt I'd heard of there are variations The most recent was a non-linear description of spacetime distortion I read not two years ago It attracted my attention because it echoes my own thoughts The authors described a bubble around mass that causes gravitational effects to increase with distance very similar to my own thoughts Where they didn't go is towards the idea that sufficient distance between masses might result in a repulsive force between them, a negative gradient of gravity that might describe dark energy the force that drives expanding spacetime

Who said/implied 'time' is a 'force'? OBVIOUSLY, anyone, including myself, that knows the first thing about known physics wouldn't say this. Although there are know physical relationships between time and force, 'time' and 'force' are completely different concepts in physics and no one I am aware of says they are the same thing.

Pure unadulterated Pop-Cosmology psycho-babble, even you don't know what you just wrote.

humy> there is now in your statement

SPACE TIME IS SAID TO BE A FORCE

The force that drives expanding spacetime

< physical relationships between time and force >
by implication, humy
you are also implying
SPACE is a FORCE

as time is a mathematical formula, it is not an entity so does not exist

The word "force" in the above statement is for the vague common-English meaning of the word "force" NOT to be confused with the normally technically defined "force" in physics, which is the kind of 'force' I was clearly referencing.
see
https://en.wikipe...vocation

< physical relationships between time and force >
by implication, humy
you are also implying
SPACE is a FORCE
NO.
If there are a relationship between two things X and Y then that does NOT imply X = Y.
Example; there is a relationship between night and day; each one repeatedly follows the other. So night IS day?

…
it is the effect of gravity inputting kinetic energy causing the "dilation", "TIME" inputs nothing because it is not a FORCE, it is simply a mechanical unit of measure that dilates with the rest of the system.

…
it is the effect of gravity inputting kinetic energy causing the "dilation", "TIME" inputs nothing because it is not a FORCE, it is simply a mechanical unit of measure that dilates with the rest of the system.

Not exactly sure how your connecting gravity and kinetic energy to time. However, I do see time as a property of the combination of the three vectorable dimensions, allowing anything to exist and therefore, move, in a given space. Ergo, time/space being a single collective thing.

…
it is the effect of gravity inputting kinetic energy causing the "dilation", "TIME" inputs nothing because it is not a FORCE, it is simply a mechanical unit of measure that dilates with the rest of the system.

Whydening Gyre> Not exactly sure how your connecting gravity and kinetic energy to time. However, I do see time as a property of the combination of the three vectorable dimensions, allowing anything to exist and therefore, move, in a given space. Ergo, time/space being a single collective thing.

"There is no time dilation. We measure this other dilation thingie with time that is not time dilation."

Were you born this stupid, or did you have to practice?

LMAO.
Da Schitts using the line, I used on him, on someone else.

2 clocks: one stationary one traveling. ... IT IS GRAVITY THAT CAUSES ONE TO RUN SLOWER THAN THE OTHER, ...
IT IS GRAVITY - not Time Dilation.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit

...general relativity, relative differences in gravity can ALSO produce a time dilation effect. And we also have proof of that effect. So "gravity doing it" and "time dilation" are not mutually exclusive. As the link below shows, the observed wobble of Mercury's orbit is in fact proof of that time dilation effect.

....it is the effect of gravity inputting kinetic energy causing the "dilation", "TIME" inputs nothing because it is not a FORCE, it is simply a mechanical unit of measure that dilates with the rest of the system.

RealityCheck> Note that 'time' concept plays NO PART in ACTUAL biological physical parameters/outcomes, ie, ONLY CUMULATIVE MOTIONS/CYCLES of biological clock 'ageing' processes have any PHYSICALLY EFFECTIVE bearing;

- hence 'time/timing' DIFFERENTIALS are STRICTLY mathematical/graphing ANALYTICAL CONSTRUCT 'dimensions/comparisons', ie, NOT REAL/EFFECTIVE DIMENSIONS like spatial dimensions are

LOL Time (in the sense of a clockwork's mechanism) to walk the dog. Be back later.

LOL Time (in the sense of a clockwork's mechanism) to walk the dog. Be back later.

How much "time" did that take you?

Space does not exist, it is Vacuum

Light is not affected by the speed of the emitter

time does not exist

the speed of light is not affected by the speed of the emitter

Space does not exist, it is Vacuum

humy> That is a self-contradiction. 'vacuum', by definition, is SPACE devoid of matter.

-contd-
@Whyde
If you can understand HOW THE HUMAN MIND WORKS - you will understand that it is the human mind itself that conceptualises the degrees/increments of the passage of Time, and thus creating in his/her own mind a manufactured temporal ability to have "cause and effect" on Matter/Energy aka Mass. Time is only a concept. It is not REAL.

-contd-
@Whyde
If you can understand HOW THE HUMAN MIND WORKS - you will understand that it is the human mind itself that conceptualises the degrees/increments of the passage of Time, and thus creating in his/her own mind a manufactured temporal ability to have "cause and effect" on Matter/Energy aka Mass. Time is only a concept. It is not REAL.

..........well put Egg, it's all in their heads, better labeled as PSYCHO-BABBLE.

says Benni

It is a mistake to say that Time dilates with the rest of the system. Time cannot dilate because it isn't REAL, but only a concept of the human mind. The Mind conceives of MANY THINGS and always tries to place those concepts into the realm of Reality

Once its realized time dilation does not exist, cannot be measured,

It is a mistake to say that Time dilates with the rest of the system. Time cannot dilate because it isn't REAL, but only a concept of the human mind.

Time dilation is a circular argument
to prove time dilation in motion
first
find a clock
that by its mechanics
when in motion
its motion changes time
there by proving time dilation
A circular argument, which proves time dilation

where GR/QM based time, distance and angular concepts start failing.

How is a clock on top of a mountain in motion?

On top of a mountain a clock is traveling at a higher rate of velocity than one at the bottom. Don't know why do you?

How is a clock on top of a mountain in motion?

On top of a mountain a clock is traveling at a higher rate of velocity than one at the bottom. Don't know why do you?

How is a clock on top of a mountain in motion?

On top of a mountain a clock is traveling at a higher rate of velocity than one at the bottom. Don't know why do you?

To measure time dilation
a clock is required that does not use frequency

You beat me to it

To measure time dilation clock is required that does not use frequency

No a clock that uses frequency is just fine to measure time dilation as relative motion changes frequency just like relativity says it should which, when observed, is proof of time dilation
By admitting relative motion changes frequency just like SR says it should you are admitting relativity is correct thus there should be time dilation just like (special) relativity says there should.
And please talk coherently

^^^^^Irrelevant, you dick. If it was due to velocity, we would see time ticking more slowly, as in a spaceship clock. We see the opposite. Get that through your thick head. When physicists calculated the adjustment that would be necessary for GPS, they had to take into account the altitude, meaning the clocks would tick faster, and the velocity, which would cause them to tick slower. This turned out to be 45 microseconds faster for altitude (GR), and 7 microseconds slower due to velocity (SR). That equals a net gain of 38 microseconds per day.
Now, bugger off you clueless oaf.

It is irrelevant whether the correction is right or wrong
when all time is equally adjusted
All the clocks tell the same time

LOL Time (in the sense of a clockwork's mechanism) to walk the dog. Be back later.

How much "time" did that take you?

When physicists calculated the adjustment that would be necessary for GPS, they had to take into account the altitude, meaning the clocks would tick faster, and the velocity, which would cause them to tick slower

LOL Time (in the sense of a clockwork's mechanism) to walk the dog. Be back later.

How much "time" did that take you?

If it took you 15 minutes, you've traveled 250 miles of the rotation of earth...
And you've travelled 16500 miles of our orbit of the sun...
You've also travelled 128500 miles of our journey around the galaxy.
145250 miles in total.
You and that dog must be exhausted.
rabbit, all of it is a clock.

So if there's no such thing as time, what's a "second?" I mean, just askin'.

Trying to imagine this fool trying to use an oscilloscope. "What's the horizontal axis mean?" "Nothing, time doesn't exist."

It is the caesium clock telling the incorrect time at altitude, acceleration and velocity

-contd-
@Whyde
I am being repetitious so that you may understand better.
DISTANCE from Point A to Point B is measured by Red Shift out in the Cosmos that not only tells how far an object is from Point A, but also how fast Point B is traveling away (velocity) from Point A (supposedly). That is an EVENT just as how one would measure the distance that a runner must travel to get from Point A to Point B. In essence, Length and Distance mean the same thing.
The 882.5 seconds (~15 minutes) that it took us to walk that distance and for Precious stopping to poop and pee on the ground that we named after Da Schniebo - is the measurement of that EVENT and its DURATION that is measured by the increments on my expensive wristwatch.

How is a clock on top of a mountain in motion?

On top of a mountain a clock is traveling at a higher rate of velocity than one at the bottom. Don't know why do you?

Stupid idiot. The clock at the top of a mountain is ticking faster than one at ground level. A clock in a spacecraft is ticking slower due to velocity. Twat. Lern to scienz..

@SEU I quote you:

"You have it in reverse, jonesybonesy. The clock at ALTITUDE ticks SLOWER due to less gravitational pull/attraction than the clock at the surface. Do try to get it right or continue to humiliate yourself. The clock on a traveling airplane IS at ALTITUDE.
And no, a clock on top of a mountain does not tick faster than the one at ground level, as the mountaintop is a surface."

I enjoy watching you humiliate yourself in a public forum..

^^^^^^ Idiot. Then how are scientists able to predict the effect in advance? Sod off Granville, you are bloody clueless. Nobody is questioning the effects on time of GR and SR. Nobody who is scientifically literate, anyway. The Pound-Rebka experiment in 1959 was the first to confirm GR effects on time.

Scientists can predict anything they darn please - mainly through allegations involving math equations. They are way off the mark with regard to TIME, but they can't get their heads out of their arses enough to understand that TIME IS NOT a dimension. That Time is ONLY a concept invented by early humans to explain things such as the Earth's orbit and the duration/length of the sunrise to sunrise EVENT.

@SEU

You literally just humiliated yourself with your own words:

"You have it in reverse, jonesybonesy. The clock at ALTITUDE ticks SLOWER due to less gravitational pull/attraction than the clock at the surface. Do try to get it right or continue to humiliate yourself. The clock on a traveling airplane IS at ALTITUDE.
And no, a clock on top of a mountain does not tick faster than the one at ground level, as the mountaintop is a surface."

Scientists can predict anything they darn please - mainly through allegations involving math equations. They are way off the mark with regard to TIME, but they can't get their heads out of their arses enough to understand that TIME IS NOT a dimension. That Time is ONLY a concept invented by early humans to explain things

Twat. Look up NAVSTAR. And the people who thought alterations wouldn't be necessary, and those who did. They had to buile a frequency synthesiser into the satellite, just in case it was needed to correct for relativistic effects. The real scientists did the maths, and predicted the changes necessary. They were right, you uneducated cockwomble. GR -SR = 38 microseconds. You are proven wrong, you uneducated POS.

@SEU

Da Schneib and Jonesdave are right.
You continually humiliate yourself on this forum. The internet never forgets. I'd normally feel sad for you but you are such a jackass I don't. You deserve the ridicule.

Twat. Look up NAVSTAR. And the people who thought alterations wouldn't be necessary, and those who did. They had to buile a frequency synthesiser into the satellite, just in case it was needed to correct for relativistic effects. The real scientists did the maths, and predicted the changes necessary. They were right, you uneducated cockwomble. GR -SR = 38 microseconds. You are proven wrong, you uneducated POS

You cannot mathematical erase physical effects

These effects are not real

Twat. Look up NAVSTAR. And the people who thought alterations wouldn't be necessary, and those who did. They had to buile a frequency synthesiser into the satellite, just in case it was needed to correct for relativistic effects. The real scientists did the maths, and predicted the changes necessary. They were right, you uneducated cockwomble. GR -SR = 38 microseconds. You are proven wrong, you uneducated POS

As you cannot mathematical erase physical effects
because
these are not physical effects, but errors in measurement, due to instruments
Proved by mathematical erasure

-contd-
@Whyde
I am being repetitious so that you may understand better.
DISTANCE from Point A to Point B is measured by Red Shift out in the Cosmos that not only tells how far an object is from Point A, but also how fast Point B is traveling away (velocity) from Point A (supposedly). That is an EVENT just as how one would measure the distance that a runner must travel to get from Point A to Point B. In essence, Length and Distance mean the same thing.
The 882.5 seconds (~15 minutes) that it took us to walk that distance and for Precious stopping to poop and pee on the ground that we named after Da Schniebo - is the measurement of that EVENT and its DURATION that is measured by the increments on my expensive wristwatch.

it is ONLY the mechanics of that clock that measure duration by incremental measurements with wheels and gears (purely mechanical).

@SEU

You are an uneducated idiot, disrespectful, and a bully.

> Egg

it is ONLY the mechanics of that clock that measure duration by incremental measurements with wheels and gears (purely mechanical).

For good measure you could throw in all this dilation stuff that the Pop-Cosmology culture here wants labeled as a 4th dimension. They simply are unable to comprehend how atomic clocks work, via expenditure of kinetic energy as electrons cross back & forth through orbital repositioning. Expenditure of kinetic energy ain't no kind of 4th dimension.

SEU and Benni, have they put wind up gold jewelled Swiss watch
in the space station
and what is the result ?

SEU and Benni, have they put wind up gold jewelled Swiss watch
in the space station
and what is the result ?

the point that is being made is
how ever accurate these watches are at sea level
are they equaly as accurate in orbit

OK Precious has to go out and make weewee and poo on Da Schniebo.
Russia is making threats to the US - this should be VERY interesting. Another Cuba-missile-crisis?