Authors: Richard A Peters
Conventionally, time dilation is defined as the decrease in the rate of flow of time in a frame moving relative to an outside observer. I argue that any process (exemplified by, say, a clock) that moves through space takes longer than that process would take if that process were stationary relative to space. The space that I define in this context is a field (of particles as yet undefined) that I label the temporal-inertial (TI) field. The relation between the TI field and the Higgs field or Higgs fields is undefined in this conjecture. I argue that the TI field constitutes the one and only frame of reference for motion by which time dilation can be reckoned. Furthermore, the velocity of a process relative to the TI field is the one and only cause of time dilation for that process. Accordingly, time dilation is not a decrease in the rate of flow of time in a moving frame, but an increase in the time taken by a process in motion relative to the TI field. If we measure time by the cycle time of a process (e.g. the ticking of a clock) it doesn’t mean that time slows down when the process is in motion, it means that the process takes longer when moving relative to the TI field. The twin paradox is readily resolved by reckoning the motion of the traveling twin relative to the space through which the twin (or clock) moves, not relative to the reference, stationary twin (or clock). The time dilation between two clocks moving in space is shown to be based on each clock’s velocity relative to the TI field, not on the difference of their velocities relative to each other. The TI field is shown to be subject to gravity. Gravitational time dilation of a process (e.g. a clock) is shown to be caused directly by the velocity of the process relative to the TI field, not by the graviton flux at the process.
Comments: 21 Pages.
Download: PDF
[v1] 2014-07-09 15:30:22
Unique-IP document downloads: 219 times
Vixra.org is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. Vixra.org will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.
Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.