Jorrie wrote:PS: Dave_O, thanks for you patience, but the floor is now yours... ;)

I got lost when you rotated the Epstein Graph. I thought it made sense when the X-axis was depicted as Velocity being 0.6 speed of light and the Y-axis was depicted as proper time (Clock Dilation) or 0.8 Time which translates as: "60% Speed of Light = 80% Clock Rate".

When you rotated the Graph, it seemed to imply that one could exchange velocity through Space with velocity through Time. Or in other words, both X and Y axis represented velocity. This is what I wanted clarification about.

Now I've heard many Relativists say virtually this exact same thing but never understood it. Specifically.. how one could have variable Velocity through Time.

It is reasonable to suggest that given a race between two vehicles that started at the same point, that if one has a higher velocity, then there would exist a growing spatial separation between them. If both hold their respective rates then they can never meet again until one speeds up.. or the other slows down. Something has to change for them to meet again at the same place in Space and Time somewhere ahead.

But the same should apply if one accepts velocity through Time. That if one has a higher velocity through Time, that a temporal separation should emerge. That this separation must continue to exist until something changes or one speeds up through Time or the other slows down through Time, in order for them to meet again at the same place in Space and Time somewhere ahead.

So.. if it was true that velocity was exchangeable between Space and Time, then I would expect that the Alice and Bob, when they reconnect after Alice's trip, would be equally caught up with each other on both Place and Time. That the rules for Distance should also apply to the rules of Time.

Thus, one would find this exchangeable velocity concept acceptable if Alice's clock matched Bob's clock when they rejoined each other after her trip. But this appears not to be the case in reality.

The only logical conclusion is that Alice's clock wasn't really measuring Real coordinate Time. That her clock was measuring something other than Velocity through Coordinate Time.

I've heard a few times that some have hypothesized that Time is a form of Entropy. Perhaps velocity has physically changed the Matter-Energy composition of Alice and reduced her Energy Functions. Thus clocks run slower for Alice and she ages less that Bob, due to a real physical change in her physical entropy because of her higher velocity.

If this is the case, then clocks measure Entropy and not Time. That Alice and Bob both always maintained the exact same Velocity through Time (Speed of Light).. but she was operating at a lower energy level while her velocity through space was greater than Bob's.

So it's not so much about the Math of Relativity as much as the interpretation of what is Physically happening. If Relativists were to swap terminology from "Proper Time" to "Proper Entropy" (or some such equivalence) then the true concept of "Time" may be much more obvious. Simultaneity is easy to understand given the Finite Speed of Light.

I predict that within the next decade or two, that Engineers and Physicists will create a device called an Ansible (in current science fiction literature). A device that exploits Entanglement for instantaneous two-way communication over any distance.

If we could employ such a device with our Alice and Bob scenario, we would discover that Alice and Bob can communicate instantly throughout her Journey. But.. she would perceive Bob is talking at a higher pitch and more words per minute than usual (like a sped up recorder), while Bob would perceive just the opposite and hear Alice like a slowed down recorder.. all the while holding a real time conversation.

This is in direct violation of the Premise that BOTH would perceive the Other as being slower in communication rates than themselves. I find this current Premise logically annoying because it doesn't add up.

Anyway, I wasn't going to comment again on this thread as the Goal was to teach Relativity in a manner easy enough for the common Layman to understand (I thought). I didn't want to confuse this endeavor with my personal observations. On the other hand, I'm not sure that the average reader received much enlightenment from this thread as is (I may be wrong).

In simple terms one could have just said: "Alice took off at really high speed and Bob was stationary. When Alice returned back to Bob.. she had aged less than Bob during her trip".

All the Graphs and Charts (and English) never clearly explained.. WHY.

Does raw speed actually slow down "Time".. or just simply stretch-reduce energy consumption over distance? Do Clocks measure Time or Energy?

Ok, bedtime for me.. back later.

Best Regards,

Dave :^)