Time dilation below the surface

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Pi-R</i>
<br />Does anyone know of experimental measurements of time dilation made below the surface of the Earth? I'm trying to figure out if a clock would accelerate or slow down as it travels from the surface to the center of a mass.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">The experiment hasn't been done because there is no reason to doubt that we understand cause and effect well enough to be sure about what happens.

Gravitational force has no effect on atomic clocks. Gravitational potential does. As the clock goes below Earth's surface, gravitational force first increases slightly, then decreases rapidly to zero at the center. Meanwhile, gravitational potential from Earth's crust is not decreased by the clock going below the crust. It remains essentially constant. Meanwhile, the potential from the core continues to increase as the clock goes deeper. So clocks slow down from the gravitational potential effect as the go below the surface.

This is a simple continuation of clocks speeding up as they are taken up in altitude (e.g., on a mountain, in a plane, or in satellites). That effect has, of course, been experimentally verified to very high precision. -|Tom|-

If clocks speed up further away from earth's gravity field, then acceleration of gravitons near mass could cause acceleration of atomic clocks. High speed craft cause clocks to slow down the atomic processes. Time, as measured by the atomic clock is subject then to the operational atomic absorption rate of gravitons by MI'S. Motion, then must create an electrostatic repulsive force against gravitons at atomic level.

Since objects in space may actually recieve a greater number of Graviton absorptions accelerating the motion of time and atomic processes, it may be said that shielding by mass accelerations (accelerations create greater MI impacts that create greater field strength thus damping by competitive field return wave limiting MI absorption) may actually decrease time rate and cause a reduction of MI absorptions of gravitons (creating flux fields and radiation within gravitational alignment). So, that there could be less graviton bombardments with in the earth because of shielding from electrostatic forces at atomic levels, that would in effect slow down the atomic clock and cause time to slow down when mass itself is under gravitational allignment.

John

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
clocks slow down from the gravitational potential effect as the go below the surface.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Thank you, Tom, for your reply. Your patience with us amateurs is astonishing.

How, then, do you compute the clock's rate as a function of distance to the earth center? I suppose that sqrt(1-2GM/rc^2) would not apply since that would predict a singularity at the center of the Earth.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Pi-R</i>
<br />How, then, do you compute the clock's rate as a function of distance to the earth center?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">For matter above the clock, M and r are the mass and radius of each spherical shell layer. The location of the clock within that shell doesn't matter.

For matter below the clock, M is the total mass in all shells below, and r is the distance of the clock from the center.

Combining both effects accurately would require numerically integrating over lots of spherical shells, each with a different density that we can estimate from earthquake seismic wave transmissions. No simple formula applies unless you want to make some unrealistic simplifying assumption such as uniform density inside the Earth.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I suppose that sqrt(1-2GM/rc^2) would not apply since that would predict a singularity at the center of the Earth.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">With mass and radius defined as above, the same formula applies to each shell. There is no singularity at the center because the mass of each shell is the product of its area, its thickness, and its density. Its area is proportional to r^2. So the formula you quoted ends up proportional to r (for interior shells only), which approaches zero as the shells approach the center. -|Tom|-

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by cosmicsurfer</i>
<br />If clocks speed up further away from earth's gravity field, then acceleration of gravitons near mass could cause acceleration of atomic clocks.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">Gravitons do not "accelerate". What could possible cause them to do so? Certainly not gravity because gravitons <i>are</i> gravity, and they do not affect themselves.

As I said, theoretically and experimentally, gravitational force has no effect whatsoever on atomic clock rates. Nor does acceleration, even at 10^19 g in cyclotron experiments. But gravity does make elysium (the light-carrying medium or LCM) denser near masses; and denser elysium does slow clocks. Gravitational potential is a measure of elysium density.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">High speed craft cause clocks to slow down the atomic processes.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">That is because high speed causes the clock to encounter more elysium per unit time, which is just like being at rest in denser elysium. Then all electromagnetic waves in elysium slow in denser elysium, just as refraction theory dictates.

Once these points are considered, the rest of your past will need revision. You can read more about the different effects of "gravitational force vs. gravitational potential" at the link with that name at metaresearch.org/cosmology/gravity/gravity.asp
If you don't have a PowerPoint viewer, another link on that page will tell you how to get a free one. -|Tom|-

Hi Tom,

I did take a look at the Meta Cycle and I agree with most of your considerations and watched the Power Point presentation. The part that I find missing in the explanation is in large mass attractions such as our sun as balance point in solar system orbitals: just how does the sun work in creating a pull on tides, etc. If CG's are at constant motion in all directions without any charge relationship to MI's then a collision is the only momentum interchange (no central focus and no CG orbitals), and the photon shock wave is the result. However, in all other matter relationships at micro levels there is formed a dual nature where antimatter is created. So, why would there not be antigravitons? Also, I agree with the basic flow chart, but I think that the CG's would have to carry a charge and be attracted to MI's for the cycle to really work. Otherwise, solar nuclear reactions would not have the necessary inflow of energetics to drive the solar furnace (if indeed that is how it works which energies released may be more like what Randall Mills has discovered about hydrogen plasmas. That would correct the neutrino problem since it is an intermediate to nuclear reactions yet still has huge power outputs).

I also think that the graviton is a flux that is created and carries a charge and is attracted to matter. Thus electrical currents, and electrostatic force fields would result from the incoming graviton flux. It is one thing to have comets colliding with large massive objects as subject to gravitational "push" towards a gravity well. But, it is an entirely different process for gravity, atmospherics, electromagnetic fields, and all of the other field relationships to have evolved Life without having balance between all the forces (more refined then a collision process). Gravitons may be directed towards matter by charge causing the push and heating. It might be more like a demodulation of higher frequencies into a slower rate creating matter such as stated in the Atomic Vortex Theory.

So, I'm sticking with the premise that CG's are attracted to matter, and object accelerations would then cause a bow shock wave of expanded electromagnetic fields dampening the increased hits by CG'S.

John