It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is
not a constant. Clocks tick at different speeds in different areas of
the cosmos. Does the accelerating expansion of space slow time? One
could create a theory that goes like this."Time runs slower the closer
you get to the universe's expanding horizon." If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)
things could get very tricky. Bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is

gravity doesn't have a "rate of flow."

speed also doesn't have a "rate of flow."

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is
not a constant. Clocks tick at different speeds in different areas of
the cosmos. Does the accelerating expansion of space slow time? One
could create a theory that goes like this."Time runs slower the closer
you get to the universe's expanding horizon." If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)
things could get very tricky. Bert


Question for you Herb--do you post to

[ ] draw fire?

[ ] impart wisdom?

[ ] cause it's just fun?

[ ] other?

Hi Sam You left out the main reasons for my posts. That is to make
people "THINK" It is fun to think with your own thoughts,and not have a
"Google" brain(just the thoughts of others. Sam you some day should try
it. It would however mean lifting your head over your belt buckle.
It would get your nose out of your fly. Bert

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
Hi Sam You left out the main reasons for my posts. That is to make
people "THINK" It is fun to think with your own thoughts,and not have a
"Google" brain(just the thoughts of others. Sam you some day should try
it. It would however mean lifting your head over your belt buckle.
It would get your nose out of your fly. Bert

Just out of curiosity, why do you think your newsgroup posts are any better than
the information people get on google? After all it isn't google making the web
pages, it's people that are indexed *by* google.

(G=EMC^2 Glazier) wrote in message ...
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is
not a constant. Clocks tick at different speeds in different areas of
the cosmos. Does the accelerating expansion of space slow time? One
could create a theory that goes like this."Time runs slower the closer
you get to the universe's expanding horizon." If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)
things could get very tricky. Bert


I'm sure you meant above to say that speed and gravity can change the
rate of the passage of time. However, I contend that the reason it
seems that gravitation changes time rates is simply because it changes
the speed of objects subjected to its effects. As an object is
accelerated in a gravitational field, its time rate slows as its speed
increases.

You pose an interesting hypothesis, Herb. My model claims it is
matter only which has the property of time and that dark matter and
energy are essentially fixed within the universe. Thus, space (and
the dark matter/energy) are not affected by time, apparently. I also
contend that the universe's expansion is space (dark matter/energy)
and visible matter expanding into space devoid of anything in it. In
such a case, space will expand outside of our dimension of time, but
not visible matter. Visible matter will have the property of time,
however, and if it is possible (by breaking a few of our local natural
laws) for matter to move at speeds ftl, it does indeed, as you say,
get very tricky.
TomGee

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)

Sure..............

------------------------------------------
The Duck

"Morituri-Max" wrote in message ...
G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is

gravity doesn't have a "rate of flow."

speed also doesn't have a "rate of flow."

Gravity is a moving continuum. And time flows.
Mitch Raemsch -- If Time isn't Still, It Moves --

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is
not a constant. Clocks tick at different speeds in different areas of
the cosmos. Does the accelerating expansion of space slow time? One
could create a theory that goes like this."Time runs slower the closer
you get to the universe's expanding horizon." If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)
things could get very tricky. Bert

No, proper time doesn't follow the inverse square law.
For weak gravitational fields, like that of the Earth,
proper time follows the gravitational potential. WRT
time in free space, t_0, time in Earth's gravitational
field, t_p , is given by

t_p / t_0 = 1 - (G M) / (R c^2)

Where Earth's Gravitational potential is given by

U(R) = - GM / R

Thus,

t_p / t_0 = 1 + U(R) / c^2

Where R is the distance to Earth's center, G is the
Gravitational constant, M is the mass of the Earth,
and c is the speed of light. More generally, for all
field strengths:

t_p / t_0 = sqrt[ 1 - (2 G M) / (R c^2) ]

Proper time stops (t_p = 0) at the event horizon of a
black hole, R = R_bh, where,

R_bh = (2 G M) / c^2

Thus, for any spherical body of mass, M, and radius,
R R_bh, proper time at the surface is given by,

t_p / t_0 = sqrt[ 1 - (R_bh) / (R) ]

[Old Man]

Time doesn't run slower close to the Universe's horizon. You yourself are
inside that horizon right now as is this world and galaxy and everything
else that belongs to the Universe's horizon, or didn't you know that that
single [universal] horizon encompasses the whole of the Universe and
everything in it just as the horizon of Earth, admittedly in a different
dimensionality of horizon, is everywhere over the entire surface of the
Earth and encompasses everything whatsoever on that surface?

If the speed of light is constant, then time is constant. The Moon is
about one and a half light seconds from Earth in time. Time on the Moon
doesn't wait for light to arrive to the Earth to advance on the Moon. So in
the time of light's travel from the Moon to the Earth, carrying a one sided
two-dimensional time frame that will be a frame of time one and a half
seconds old by the time of arrival to any telescope's lens on Earth, time
advances one and a half seconds [on the Moon]. One and a half seconds travel
to "here and now," and one and a half seconds forward advance to the Moon's
"there and now," the two nows being exactly the same now for both. That is
the way time, and light, and advancement works in this area of the Universe,
and it is the way time, and light, and advancement works in any and all
areas of the Universe.

The farther away though, the longer light takes to get sequenced time
frames to us, so the farther behind the times of whatever there and now,
wherever that will be, our observation will be here and now. That
measurement of length of time, there and then to here and now, is exactly
the same measurement of length of time between [time] there and then and
[space-time] there and now. It just doesn't matter, it is the same physics
whether for the Moon so close to us 1.5 light seconds of light travel away
and 1.5 seconds of time ahead now in time of light's arrival from it to
Earth, Andromeda 2.2 million light years of light travel away and 2.2
million years of time ahead now in time of light's arrival from it to Earth,
or some galaxy 13.4 billion light years of light travel away and 13.4
billion years of time ahead now in time (a there and now, physically) of
light's arrival from it (an event time frame picture of there and then 13.4
billion times 10 trillion kilometers distant in space, 13.4 billion years
ago rather than that space-time there and now) to Earth. Each of these
distances in [space] has an absolute--a constant--time of now, "there and
now," tied to it precisely the same as Earth "here and now."

The fallacy that time graduatingly slows throughout all space between here
and the farthest horizon--to almost a stop, if not actually a stop--near the
farthest horizon from Earth exists so that it can appear that the observer
on Earth is observing whatever is observed to be there between Earth and
that farthest horizon, its exact location and exact state of being,
instantaneously with whatever it is being there at any distance whatsoever
from Earth.

Having the entire Universe accelerate up in velocity going away from the
Earth, thus slowing down in time concomitantly with all acceleration up in
velocity, means the Einsteinian observer on Earth observes events occurring
anywhere in the whole of Universe instantaneously with whatever event
occurrance is in progress at whatever distance, whether 1.5 light seconds
from Earth, 2.2 million light years distant from Earth, or even 13 or 14 or
more billion light years distant from Earth.

Have you never seen the oft used picture illustration by physicists that
illustrates the ultimate possibility adhering to this instantaneous
observation of events the instant any event occurs anywhere in the Universe?
The picture illustration that shows the back of an astronomer looking
through a telescope and observing farthest distantly in the Universe himself
looking through that same telescope observing farthest distantly in the
Universe himself looking through that same telescope observing farthest
distantly in the Universe..... Creative science fiction writers and movie
makers, like George Lucas, have taken this to next logical step,
instantaneous communication across any distance in the Universe.

Brad


"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
It must if speed,and gravity can change its rate of flow.We know time is
not a constant. Clocks tick at different speeds in different areas of
the cosmos. Does the accelerating expansion of space slow time? One
could create a theory that goes like this."Time runs slower the closer
you get to the universe's expanding horizon." If the universe's
horizon speed is now faster than the speed of light(no reason why not)
things could get very tricky. Bert