In one famous time dilation thought experiment, Einstein uses two twins. The brothers synchronize their
    perfectly accurate clocks on Earth, and one of the twins sets off on a journey towards the stars. Einstein’s
    equation predicts that the twin that stayed behind will age faster because he remains in an inertial frame of
    reference. The Earth is considered an inertial frame because, in few words, it travels at a constant speed,
    i.e., you do not sense that you are shaken. The adventurous twin instead feels like in an elevator, he
    accelerates, dodges planets, circles stars, decelerates, and returns home. Gravity rocks him ad nauseam.
    When the twins meet again, Einstein predicts that the one that stayed on Earth will be chronologically and
    biologically much older than his adventurous brother. He adds that their clocks and physical appearance
    would change in accordance with this prediction. Researchers assert that time dilation has been confirmed
    in experiments where two accurate clocks are synchronized on the ground and one taken for a ride on a
    plane. [1] [2] [3]    Not all relativists believe that the results of this experiment agree with the predictions of
    relativity, [4]  but it is a fact that the clock that stayed on the ground ran slower than the one on the airplane.
    You must decide now whether it was the clock or time which suffered a physical transformation. Relativists
    say that it is time.

    According to relativity time dilation has two components one kinematic and one gravitational. [5] The
    kinematic explanation invokes the boxcar experiments that we just covered. The gravitational interpretation
    suggests that gravity slows clocks down by bending time. (And then they deny that time is a physical object.)
    Relativists boast that time dilation has also been confirmed by Pound and Rebka’s Harvard Tower

    [Relativists proudly proclaim this experiment as an important confirmation of relativity.
    The authors claim that gravity affects the frequency of a wave or, if you prefer, slows
    time down. Actually, the authors merely described an observation they didn’t understand.
    The authors gave no physical explanation for the results of their experiment. How does
    the concept gravity affect the concept frequency of the concept wave? Did graviton
    particles collide against photon particles? Did warp space bend an EM wave? The Harvard
    Tower Experiment will be a scientific paper the day the authors describe the physical
    objects that underlie the phenomenon (i.e., they have to tell us what gravity and light are
    and how one physically interacts with the other.]

    These researchers measured a change in ‘energy’ and concluded that gravity increasingly ‘compresses’ light
    the closer a wave is to the center of the Earth. Since light is the yardstick that relativists use to measure time,
    by extrapolation gravity has a similar effect on time. Here I will look at this gravitational claim.

    It was very considerate of relativists to have bought first class plane tickets for a couple of expensive atomic
    clocks at your expense, but they would have actually learned a lot more had they taken a couple of 10-cent
    hourglasses for a ride. You see, there is a significant difference between the watch that you carry around your
    wrist and an hourglass. We use clocks to measure something the mathematicians call time. With an hourglass
    you actually count grains of sand. This is the best ‘watch’ there is. It relies entirely on gravity. Of course, the
    mathematicians never liked to count. That’s kindergarten arithmetic and demeaning to them. They like to
    measure and calculate. Measurement allows them to put exciting variables in an equation and introduce
    testimony into scientific discussions. Measuring is college level stuff and gets you Nobel medals and honors
    and celebrity status. However, I insist. I will test time dilation with hourglasses if you don’t mind. If all clocks
    produce the results predicted by Special Relativity, no one should have any objections to my proposal.

    Let’s place Hourglasses # 1 and # 2 into orbit respectively at 1 mile and at 100 miles from the Earth’s surface
    (Fig. 1). If gravity is still working the same way it was this morning when I spilled my coffee on the floor, it
    should accelerate the grains of sand faster and faster as the grain approaches the Earth’s surface. [7]
    Therefore, either Clock # 1 runs faster or at the same rate as Clock # 2 which is farther out in space, but
    never slower. This observation leads to paradox because Special Relativity predicts that the clock that is
    farther should run faster. So what did we learn about time?

    The real problem with time dilation is that relativists have the scientific method backwards. In order for the
    mathematicians to show that gravity induces time to dilate, they must begin by hypothesizing that time is a
    physical object. A simple drawing of a chronon will suffice. Only then can we make sense of their claim. For
    example, we can compare the shape of time before and after and verify whether there was a change. Dilation
    would mean that the chronon or whatever object relativists present expanded like your pupils dilate when you
    enter a dark room. The only way to certify that something dilated is to measure the expansion or radius of the
    entity before and after.

    Relativists furiously counter-attack and accuse me of misrepresenting what they mean by time dilation. In
    relativistic jargon, dilation has a different meaning than in ordinary speech, they claim.

    Okay. No problem. I think I can handle it. Let’s concede the point for the sake of argument. What does time
    dilation really mean?

    When in doubt, consult the experts. In SR, time dilation means:

    “ the closer we come to traveling at the speed of light… the more time would appear
      to slow down for us from the perspective of someone who, in relation to us, was
      not moving. He [Einstein] called the slowing of time due to motion time dilation.” [8]

    “ Time dilation is the phenomenon whereby an observer finds that another’s clock
      which is physically identical to their own is ticking at a slower rate as measured by
      their own clock. This is often taken to mean that time has ‘slowed down’ for the
      other clock, but that is only true in the context of the observer’s frame of reference.
      Locally, time is always passing at the same rate.” [9]

    In other words, time dilation doesn’t mean that something happens to a hypothetical entity called time. It means
    that either something happened to the brain of an observer or to his clock. The observer thinks time passed by
    quickly or slowly, but this is clearly an erroneous explanation. Time does not pass!  There is no object such as
    time that can flow by you. We can also produce the same result by having an observer gulp down 5 liters of
    beer. So what have we learned about time? How is this relevant to Physics? It would seem a topic more
    appropriate for a psychiatrist. And if it is the clock that is objectively measuring time more slowly, perhaps we
    can get a clock that can do the job right. Relativists can argue that they attained brain or clock dilation, but
    hardly the dilation of time!  Physics is interested in a physical interpretation and the dilation of time IS the
    physical interpretation that relativity offers.

Fig. 1
Relativity predicts that due to stronger gravitational effects, as we
approach the center of the Earth, time should dilate (i.e., time runs
slower). Relativists present as proof the results of the Hafele-Keating
experiment: nearer the Earth, atomic clocks run slower.

Let's now do the experiment the way we do it in Science: objectively.
Science is like the Maffia. In order to guarantee objectivity, the first
thing we do is rub out any witnesses. Then, we avail ourselves not of
accurate, but of objective agents or mechanisms. Accuracy has no
relevance in this context. Here, I will do the time dilation experiment
with a couple of hourglasses. The hourglass is objective because we
'count'  grains  instead of 'measuring'  time. I 'predict' that the grains
will be pulled at the same rate on both clocks or faster on the clock
closer to Earth. Irrespective of which, what did we learn about time?

    The Hafele/Keating experiment did not show that gravity dilated time. In the best of cases, it showed that
    Mickey’s arms move slower. However, the mathematicians have trouble creating a variable called clock or
    'Mickey’s arm' that they can fit into an equation. Mathematics deals with seconds and minutes and years. It
    would not be very useful to a mathematician to say that Mickey’s right hand spun faster on Clock 1 than on
    Clock 2. Relativists wouldn’t be able to tell you that this has anything to do with one twin aging faster than
    the other. Relativistic aging has to do with quantitative time and not with clocks or arms or orbits. The
    mathematicians would only be able to tell you that the clock of one twin measured time differently than the
    clock of the other. (So what? Tell the twin to get his clock fixed!) Ergo, they conclude that what slowed down
    was time.

    Now you know why the idiots of relativity invented the term time dilation and why they always end up telling
    you always that dilation just means something different in Math, something different than what you imagine if
    you challenge the theory. Relativists perennially move the goal posts on you. Then they continue to treat time
    as a physical object and to argue amongst themselves in circles for another 4 hours in the forums.
I call it the hourglass. By
counting the number of
grains that fall on the floor,
for example, like this, I can
pretty accurately determine
how long to fry an egg.
Pastor Al's atomic
clock is out of
Adapted for the Internet from:

Why God Doesn't Exist

    Pages in this module:


                                  Home                    Books                    Glossary            

        Copyright © by Nila Gaede 2008