Faraday cages

@sonhouse said
Both mass and mass going close to c causes time dillation. This is a proven fact. Time dilation from velocity has to be accounted for in particle accelerators since going very close to c greatly changes the time flow if the individual particles being accelerated. They also acquire greater mass by having velocities close to c. That greater mass means the magnets controlling s ...[text shortened]... lower gravity field changes time flow and has to be accounted for otherwise GPS would be worthless.

I agree. You say that as if I said otherwise at some point. Never happened.

I specifically said time dilation from matter. Do you think if you digress into velocity time dilation enough you can fool people into thinking I meant something I did not? Do you really think people are that stupid?

@deepthought said
I took a look at Greene's Wikipedia page, and he also has a D.Phil. and not a Ph.D. having been at Oxford. His advisor was Professor Graham Ross, who was there when I was. I think he's pretty good, anyone who works in the areas that he does has to have a pretty good understanding of these things. I am sure that whatever Greene said is either a simplification for a lay-audience or it is just that metalbrain failed to understand what was being said.

"I am sure that whatever Greene said is either a simplification for a lay-audience or it is just that metalbrain failed to understand what was being said."

If you were sure you could explain it and you cannot. You are assuming again. You are not sure at all.

Assumption #1
Greene has a good education so he must be right.

Assumption #2
Metal Brain does not agree with GW alarmists so he must be wrong.

Assumption #3
Metal Brain must be wrong about GW so he must be wrong about GR as well.

Assumption #4
Greene is right and Metal Brain is wrong even though they made the same claim, so it must be a misunderstanding.

Your claim it is a misunderstanding is based on an assumption Greene is giving two explanations to different audiences. That is a guess and nothing more and you know it. You have absolutely nothing that suggests that at all. The Washington Post called Brian Greene “the single best explainer of abstruse concepts in the world today.”

Greene did not explain things differently for the layman and there is a reason you cannot prove it.
You made it up!

http://www.briangreene.org/portfolio/light-falls/

Brian said "that tiny time warp is why things fall. Objects do not want to age. The math shows things are drawn to locations where time elapses more slowly."

Those are his exact words about an hour into the program.

@metal-brain said
http://www.briangreene.org/portfolio/light-falls/

Brian said "that tiny time warp is why things fall. Objects do not want to age. The math shows things are drawn to locations where time elapses more slowly."

Those are his exact words about an hour into the program.

What about it? What do YOU think he meant?

@metal-brain said
"I am sure that whatever Greene said is either a simplification for a lay-audience or it is just that metalbrain failed to understand what was being said."

If you were sure you could explain it and you cannot. You are assuming again. You are not sure at all.

Assumption #1
Greene has a good education so he must be right.

Assumption #2
Metal Brain does not agre ...[text shortened]... xplain things differently for the layman and there is a reason you cannot prove it.
You made it up!

This has nothing to do with global warming.

@metal-brain said
http://www.briangreene.org/portfolio/light-falls/

Brian said "that tiny time warp is why things fall. Objects do not want to age. The math shows things are drawn to locations where time elapses more slowly."

Those are his exact words about an hour into the program.

I'm not loving the way he's expressed this. He is not talking about time dilation here. This is the relativistic version of Fermat's principle, the principle of least time from optics. The falling object's motion is such that the proper time is minimised over the motion. Proper time is the time as measured by a clock that is in the same place and moving at the same speed as the object. He's expressed this in terms of a time warp and assigned desire for eternal youth to objects. This quote is consistent with the post I made in the other thread.

@deepthought said
I'm not loving the way he's expressed this. He is not talking about time dilation here. This is the relativistic version of Fermat's principle, the principle of least time from optics. The falling object's motion is such that the proper time is minimised over the motion. Proper time is the time as measured by a clock that is in the same place and moving at the same sp ...[text shortened]... re for eternal youth to objects. This quote is consistent with the post I made in the other thread.

Time dilation from matter is what causes things to fall. Greene explained it well. You are in denial.

Einstein knew time dilation caused gravity after he invented the equivalence principal in a thought experiment. Knowing this made perfect sense he then needed to work out the mathematics to prove the validity of his theory. That was the hard part.
When he came up with GR field equations he didn't later come to the surprise conclusion that his equations predicted time dilation as has been suggested. He knew that time dilation caused gravity all along. He just needed to confirm it with the math. Not a prediction, a confirmation of what he already knew with equations. It just appears that way when looking at the equations from a limited perspective.
He worked his butt off to confirm it, otherwise people like kazetnaggora would say it was a fringe theory and he would get plenty of cheerleaders to put the patent clerk in his place and you would have never heard of GR until years later.

If it were not for Einstein's friend Marcel Grossmann it may not have happened when it did. Not just because he helped him with the math for GR either, he helped him with his notes in college and Marcel's father got him the job at the patent clerk office. What if he had never met Grossmann? What if instead he had a friend like kazetnagorra?

Einstein used the term bending of space/time because it included all the known dimensions of space with the dimension of time. It was a more complete explanation. Unfortunately the term stuck so well the time dilation part of those four dimensions got lost in the teaching process.

Time dilation and space/time are just different descriptions of the same thing. The former is one dimension and the latter is the other 3 from space. They are inexorably linked. Time dilation bends space with it. Space cannot bend without time dilation.
The assertion that the bending of space/time causes time dilation is a fallacy. You took the word "cause" literally, just as people took the word "predicted" literally. Maybe some day you will finally understand Einstein's field equations well enough to accept that. The = sign is not a trivial matter!

@metal-brain said

Einstein knew time dilation caused gravity after he invented the equivalence principal

No, he didn't. Stop making crap up.
If you look up the equivalence principle the term "time dilation" isn't even mentioned;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

Einstein would have completely disagreed with you on many points, ESPECIALLY on your denial of time dilation being possible without gravity involved thus your denial of special relativity, and think you are just an idiot. Even Greene would since he would surely accept special relativity as scientific fact!

@humy said
No, he didn't. Stop making crap up.
If you look up the equivalence principale "time dilation" isn't even mentioned;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

Einstein would have completely disagreed with you on many points and think you are an idiot.

Nope. Einstein's GR is based on his idea that time dilation causes gravity. The equivalence principal is why he came to that conclusion. That is why he told people about it. It isn't because it is some rigid rule. We all know velocity is not dependent on acceleration and the correlation ends there. It is a thought experiment that helped him see the equivalence between velocity time dilation and matter time dilation. Since velocity caused time dilation he figured time dilation caused gravity.

I made several assertions. You would thing if I am wrong you could prove at least one out of all of them wrong. Can you do that?

@humy said
No, he didn't. Stop making crap up.
If you look up the equivalence principle "time dilation" isn't even mentioned;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle

Einstein would have completely disagreed with you on many points, ESPECIALLY on your denial of time dilation being possible without gravity involved thus your denial of special relativity, and think you are just an idiot. Even Greene would since he would surely accept special relativity as scientific fact!

"ESPECIALLY on your denial of time dilation being possible without gravity involved thus your denial of special relativity"

LIAR!

I never made such an idiotic claim. You must be desperate again. You always lie when you are desperate. It is as if you lose grip on reality because you get so angry.

@metal-brain said
"ESPECIALLY on your denial of time dilation being possible without gravity involved thus your denial of special relativity"

LIAR!

"Time dilation created by a spacecraft? That would be impressive if it was possible. How do you create time dilation like that?" (your quote)

How does that NOT deny time dilation being possible without gravity involved thus deny special relativity? In addition, you claimed earlier that time dilation IS gravity thus denying time dilation effects due to special relativity. You are the liar.

@metal-brain said
Einstein's GR is based on his idea that time dilation causes gravity.

Prove it!
Quote where he said/implied this...

http://www.briangreene.org/portfolio/light-falls/

Brian said "that tiny time warp is why things fall. Objects do not want to age. The math shows things are drawn to locations where time elapses more slowly."

Yep, that is time dilation alright. Greene is a professor of physics at Columbia University and has written many bestselling physics books.

Perhaps somebody on here should write Greene and tell him to prove it. Greene did not get anything wrong in his statement above. It is the basis of GR.

@humy said
Prove it!
Quote where he said/implied this...

He is not the only one saying time dilation causes gravity.

YouTube

@metal-brain said
He is not the only one saying time dilation causes gravity.

You have yet to show where Einstein said/implied "time dilation causes gravity" in particular so your above "He is not the only one saying..." doesn't make sense.
So, given that you still haven't proven that Einstein said/implied this, we can only assume you lie.

Besides, the main point of contention here is your other claim which is that time dilation IS gravity, something that Einstein would CERTAINLY never say because that is just nonsense because that contradicts time dilation in special relativity thus by insisting that time dilation IS gravity like you do is to deny special relativity.
And X causes Y (even if true) doesn't logically imply X IS Y!

Do you deny that part of special relativity that implies there can be time dilation without gravity being involved?
If yes, how is that NOT denying special relativity?
If no, then that is a clear example of time dilation NOT being gravity.