What Time Dilation ACTUALLY Is In Relativity (Hint: It has nothing to do with time)

[Clete]

Driving my car faster gets me to my destination sooner--in a shorter amount of time, but does driving my car faster speed up time?

No, it slows it down, but not enough to notice at car driving speeds.

Good, so your not still mad at me for The earth is flat and we never went to the moon.

Do you understand what it was that got me so angry about that?

Believing that the Earth is flat is reserved for stupid people, or at least it sure as Hell aught to be! You are very clearly not stupid, which turns it from stupidity into evil.

You were destroying your reputation and pulverizing every ounce of credibility you had. Not only that, but you had an overtly Christian ministry through which you were undoubtedly spreading that lunatic insanity and lending it the credibility of scriptural support and which was just handing unbelievers, not only an excuse to reject Christ and Christianity, but also a weapon to use against both. You could hardly have been doing more damage without trying to witness to people while in drag. It would have made as much sense and been less damaging for you to come on here and defend Yahweh Ben Yahweh as being the true Son of God.

I argued and argued and argued until I was blue in the face and nothing penetrated, but I couldn't just give up! If reason didn't work, then perhaps shaming you would. It was a last resort, but it had to be done. When the result of that was you choosing to leave the site rather than repenting, it was a disappointment, but I was willing to allow the offense of the truth to work its ministry. If you haven't figured out that the Earth isn't flat yet, then you will, eventually. The longer it takes the more embarrassed you'll feel but no one on this side of that issue is going to hold a grudge and you'll find yourself to be better equipped to crush the Flat Earthers than almost anyone else alive, and I will have purchased your forever friendship with a few months of offense and a few years of separation. A bargain!

Having said all of that, no, I'm totally not mad at you at all. On the contrary, I've missed you being around. You're one of the few who actually understands how to think clearly. Your nose dive off the deep end when it comes to Flat Earth nonsense is an unsolvable mystery that I cannot fathom. It literally felt like there were two of you. I've literally prayed, many times, for your repentance on that issue, that God would just have someone say something to you that made the light come on and caused you to see the glaringly obvious nonsense that Flat Earthism is. Whether that has happened yet or not, it doesn't mean we can't have productive discussions about other things. Conversations that I miss and look very much forward to having.

 

[DFT_Dave]

I tried to make it clear that I was making the case for flat earth and we never went to the moon only so we could have that debate take place here at theology online. I never said that I believed in either. Climbing the hill of theology and making the case for open view and free will was a project that cost me a lot more than flat earth in real life. That cost me my ministry within my fellowship. I never made a case for FE or NWTM other than here, its not on my website, and I never preached or wrote on the subject or presented it doing evangelism. Cosmology and physics were my interest and we successfully covered much more then I had ever thought we would. I was researching spacetime, quantum physics, and multiverses and discovered, to my surprise, flat earth had become a major issue. In case you hadn't noticed, Dynamic Free Theism deals with God, space, and time, not just God and time. To your surprise and mine there are many Christians who believe in Geo-centrism and not Helio-centrism today. Einstein's spacetime creates a Box universe, "a theory of time that describes space-time as a four-dimensional block that contains everything that has ever happened and will ever happen", which sounds like a timeless eternity to me. The earliest rejection of the Bible is it's perceived immovable earth and stars that were created after everything else. The Bible saying it's flat is not that clear, but the point was I felt it was safe to have that debate here. I enjoyed researching and learning so much about the subject of cosmology. I think the theory of evolution does far more harm to Christianity than FE. A flat immovable earth is what we experience locally on the earth anyway. This is not incompatible with a globe in either a geo or heliocentric galaxy from a view that is far above the earth. The shape of the earth is not what I base my faith on, but a Bible I can trust is. To conclude with, FE was a gateway into all things cosmology and not meant to be the only point and it succeeded beyond my expectations.

 

[Clete]

I tried to make it clear that I was making the case for flat earth and we never went to the moon only so we could have that debate take place here at theology online. I never said that I believed in either. Climbing the hill of theology and making the case for open view and free will was a project that cost me a lot more than flat earth in real life. That cost me my ministry within my fellowship. I never made a case for FE or NWTM other than here, its not on my website, and I never preached or wrote on the subject or presented it doing evangelism.

Awesome! I'm so relieved to hear that!

Cosmology and physics were my interest and we successfully covered much more then I had ever thought we would. I was researching spacetime, quantum physics, and multiverses and discovered, to my surprise, flat earth had become a major issue. In case you hadn't noticed, Dynamic Free Theism deals with God, space, and time, not just God and time.

I totally had noticed which is why it just flabbergasted me that you'd ever buy into such things as flat earth conspiracies.

To your surprise and mine there are many Christians who believe in Geo-centrism and not Helio-centrism today.

Truly stunning. You can thank social media logarithms that are intended to trap people into their own echo chambers for that problem and others like it.

Einstein's spacetime creates a Box universe, "a theory of time that describes space-time as a four-dimensional block that contains everything that has ever happened and will ever happen", which sounds like a timeless eternity to me. The earliest rejection of the Bible is it's perceived immovable earth and stars that were created after everything else. The Bible saying it's flat is not that clear, but the point was I felt it was safe to have that debate here.

I sure wish you had sent me a private message or something letting me know that you weren't actually being irrationally stubborn and that I could relax! I'm not kidding about having prayed for you, Dave. I was really frustrated and worried about you there for quite a long time. I couldn't figure out what had corrupted the mind of someone I had so respected.

I enjoyed researching and learning so much about the subject of cosmology. I think the theory of evolution does far more harm to Christianity than FE.

I'm not so sure. Flat Earth is truly crackpot lunacy that no one has any excuse to believe for more than five minutes. It's the ultimate in turning off one's mind, rejecting anything that resembles logos in favor of simply believing anything you desire to believe for any random reason at all. There's better (still not good ones but, even so, better) reasons to believe in ancient aliens than in a flat Earth.

A flat immovable earth is what we experience locally on the earth anyway. This is not incompatible with a globe in either a geo or heliocentric galaxy from a view that is far above the earth. The shape of the earth is not what I base my faith on, but a Bible I can trust is. To conclude with, FE was a gateway into all things cosmology and not meant to be the only point and it succeeded beyond my expectations.

I too was actually quite surprised at the quality and depth that some of the arguments took. That is, the arguments in favor of a globe. None of the flat earth arguments sounded to me like they would convince a five year old child but I and a few others really came up with some outstanding proofs that the Earth is a globe, far more so than I would have expected when the thread began. In fact, I didn't even take it seriously when that discussing began. It seemed like it was satire or something. Although, I don't think yours was the first thread on the subject. There was some female poster that was posting these ridiculous YouTube videos that were simply laughably stupid and I just couldn't grasp that anyone actually allowed them to persuade their mind with such drivel.

I never could talk anyone into helping me attempt to measure the curvature of the Earth in that experiment I proposed. If you're ever in Houston, look me up and we'll spend a weekend making a YouTube video of it.

Clete

 

[DFT_Dave]

Modern cosmology (quantum physics and spacetime relativity) defies both reason and empirical evidence.

Here is our absolute standard for marking and synchronizing time.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night,

Days divide into hours, minutes, and seconds everywhere on earth. God created a heavenly clock for earth.

 

[Clete]

Modern cosmology (quantum physics and spacetime relativity) defies both reason and empirical evidence.

On that point, we are in 100% agreement!

Here is our absolute standard for marking and synchronizing time.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.” And it was so. 16 And God made the two great lights, the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night; he made the stars also. 17 And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth, 18 to rule over the day and over the night,

This is a major point that Bob Enyart made when he posted his "Summit Clock Experiment".

The Sun (and the rest of anything in the sky) stands as an independent third party that gives a bigger picture perspective in regards to the amount of time that has passed. If you've not read that thread in a while, I encourage you to do so. I spent months trying to convince people that no one, regardless of what they clock reads, ever leaves the present moment.

Days divide into hours, minutes, and seconds everywhere on earth. God created a heavenly clock for earth.

I'm reasonably sure that hours, minutes and seconds are ideas that men came up with, not God. That is to say that there is no direct evidence that God was the One who came up with the divisions of the day.

 

[Right Divider]

@DFT_Dave That might work for creating a calendar on earth. But it's totally useless for tiny measurements across great distances, etc.

 

[Clete]

So, because I mentioned Bob's Summit Clock Experiment, I decided to go find the thread and read through a chunk of it. Wow! That is a cool thread! It's hard to believe that I posted THIS almost exactly 17 years ago....

Johnny,​

​

Look, I don't know how else to say this. Either the same number of days have passed or they haven't. That is to say that either the same amount of time has passed or it hasn't. The Earth only spins one time per day. If the guy at the base of the mountain has experienced 365*Y (Y being the number of years) spins of the Earth and his clock tells him that there should have been 365 fewer spins than that then his clock is wrong. You cannot have it both ways. Either the same amount of time has passed for both clock watchers or it hasn't regardless of what their clocks say.​

​

Notice also that neither of them have ever left the other's present moment. The entire time the experiment ran they could have talked to each other on the telephone without any problem whatsoever, which, of course, is only another way of making the same point the open post makes by pointing out how many newspapers are delivered but the point I am making is that what is going on with the clocks doesn't have anything to do with time, it has to do with clocks. Whatever effect the gravity well is having on the clock watcher at the base of the mountain, it is effecting his clock, not time. If it were effecting time itself then he would have gotten a number of newspapers consistent with his very precise and well maintained clock.​

​

Finally, an absolute clock is not necessary, just a reliable one. As Bob stated in the opening post...​

​

​

"Genesis says that God gave us the Sun (and other astronomic bodies) for “seasons, and for days and years.” It turns out that God gave mankind great timekeepers (and less misleading ones than our atomic clocks as interpreted by theorists)! The movements within our solar system give us a more correct understanding of the absolute nature of time than do the ticks of atomic clocks. So, whatever cosmologists are actually trying to say when they speak of time dilation, here is the truth. Gravity does not affect time. Gravity affects clocks."​

​

Resting in Him,​

Clete​

​

 

[DFT_Dave]

Time on earth and above earth is measured by the 24 hour clock that is consistent--does not shorten or lengthen, and is not relative.

Light is everywhere at all times, sun light by day, moon and star light by night.

There is never a moment on the earth when there is no light.

 

[Clete]

Time on earth and above earth is measured by the 24 hour clock that is consistent--does not shorten or lengthen, and is not relative.

Light is everywhere at all times, sun light by day, moon and star light by night.

There is never a moment on the earth when there is no light.

True enough as stated, but it ignores the topic of the thread which has to do with the real effects that acceleration and velocity have on the duration of events relative to other events. Effects that have been experimentally verified to happen and that must be accounted for and dealt with for our modern society to function the way it does.

If you refuse to acknowledge that these effects happen then the videos are useless to you and you cannot hope to understand what they are trying to say. As a result, I believe you will have missed a terrific opportunity to gain a fuller understanding of God and His creation. In short, glib answers about how the Sun rises and sets once each day doesn't even begin to speak to the topic at hand here. The effects that are commonly referred to as "Relativity" are quite real and the videos in the OP give a terrific way of explaining with those effects that doesn't require buying into the main stream scientific community's worldview, which is something that I'd expect for you to like very much.

 

[Derf]

We're both wrong. It's "Aether".

Either ether or aether is correct.

 

[Derf]

"Clocks" can be literally any regularly occurring event, by the way. It does not need to be a watch or other typical clock you might hang on a wall. The rate of atomic oscillations, for example, can be used (and are used) as a clock. The point being that whether you are using them as a clock or not, those regular occurring events do, in fact, slow down in response to your velocity relative to some other frame of reference. Regardless, it is the events that are effected, not time, except as a sort of figure of speech.

This is an important point, and what it means is that everything is a clock, measuring time in some way. In that respect, then, time and the second law of thermodynamics are inextricably linked, as far as we understand time. There's obviously another understanding of time that we will have in the resurrection.

 

[Right Divider]

Time on earth and above earth is measured by the 24 hour clock that is consistent--does not shorten or lengthen, and is not relative.

It's not exactly 24 hours and it does change over time.

https://www.timeanddate.com/time/earth-rotation.html

 

[Right Divider]

There's obviously another understanding of time that we will have in the resurrection.

How so?

 

[Derf]

How so?

If time on this Earth is measured by increasing entropy, then I would not expect God's time, which would be used on the new Earth (and in the new heavens) to be measured that way.

 

[Derf]

GPS is a radio wave, "a type of electromagnetic wave that transmit and receive messages." What does it have to do with special relativity?

GPS is a system that generates precise radio waves in accordance with a base frequency derived from atomic clocks and available to anyone who cares to receive them. The satellites that emit these radio waves are moving at high rates of speed with respect to an observer on earth, and at a significantly higher altitude than an observer on earth.

So, it is easily available, and it provides both special and general relativity comparisons to observers on the earth, not to mention proxy observers on the other GPS satellites.

 

[Right Divider]

If time on this Earth is measured by increasing entropy,

It's not "measured" that way.

then I would not expect God's time, which would be used on the new Earth (and in the new heavens) to be measured that way.

It's not "measured" that way ... so you're way off base.

Again, time is an idea... a concept. It is NOT a physical thing that changes with new creations.

 

[DFT_Dave]

Again, time is an idea... a concept. It is NOT a physical thing that changes with new creations.

Time is the result of things that move and change. Time is not a thing in itself but time is not just a mere idea.

Time means everything does not happen all at once and space means everything does not happen all in the exact same place.

Time is not a thing in itself, something out there, that moves.

Space is where things move, also not a thing the moves.

Movement is meaningless without understanding what does not move--is stationary, or at rest.

Are these 5 points absolutely true or not?

 

[DFT_Dave]

"According to Einstein's theory of relativity, time runs slower near large masses like the Sun, so radio waves take longer to reach Earth when they pass close to the Sun. This is because spacetime is curved near the Sun, and the closer the radio wave is to the Sun's edge, the longer the delay.
--radio wave and time dilation, google

Can we say instead that "radio waves that travel close to the sun must travel a longer distance because space is curved which is why it takes more time to reach a give destination than radio waves that don't travel close to the sun?"

Is there a distinction between the two statements?

 

[Clete]

If time on this Earth is measured by increasing entropy, then I would not expect God's time, which would be used on the new Earth (and in the new heavens) to be measured that way.

Four things....

First, entropy, like time, is not an ontologically existent thing. It is an idea. There isn't any sort of physical stuff out there that is entropy. It's just a concept.

Second, as Right Divider pointed out, time isn't measured that way. Indeed, if anything, it is entropy that is measured in terms of time, not the other way around.

Third, even if time were somehow measured that way, it would just be happenstance. In other words, whatever it was about entropy that you found to use as a clock, it would still just be a series of regularly occurring events that were being used, not entropy itself, per se.

Fourth, we are given information in the bible of at least one major way in which time will be measured in heaven....

Revelation 22:2 In the middle of its street, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bore twelve fruits, each tree yielding its fruit every month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.​

 

[Clete]

Time is the result of things that move and change. Time is not a thing in itself but time is not just a mere idea.

Contradict yourself much?

Time means everything does not happen all at once and space means everything does not happen all in the exact same place.

That is not what either of those things mean.

Time is not a thing in itself, something out there, that moves.

That's because it is an idea.

Space is where things move, also not a thing the moves.

Again, this is because it is an idea.

Movement is meaningless without understanding what does not move--is stationary, or at rest.

Precisely correct! Motion is ALWAYS a relative term. It has no meaning otherwise. Motion happens but there is no stuff out there called "motion". Motion is just a word we use to give name to a particular kind of event were the positional relationship between some number of objects is changing.

Are these 5 points absolutely true or not?

NOT!

Time and space ARE concepts and nothing else. The proof is that you cannot even conceive of a demonstrable exception. People can pretend that time (and space) is malleable but not even modern theoretical physicists propose that anything ever leaves the present. They say that time slows down but what they mean is that the measured events lengthen in duration relative to other events. In other words, time is ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS about comparing some number of events to other events. Similarly, any discussion about space is ALWAYS about comparing the position of objects to the position of other objects.

Try as you might, you will not be able to refute that. It is completely consistent both with itself and with the reality that we all experience and it is utterly irrefutable. Not only that but is literally how the word "time" is defined as a word. How else would you propose to define what it means for something to be "absolutely true"?

time (noun)​

ˈtīm​

plural: times​

​

1a: the measured or measurable period during which an action, process, or condition exists or continues : duration​

2b: a nonspatial continuum that is measured in terms of events which succeed one another from past through present to future : sequence​

merriam-webster​