[19th LA Inf]

I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that acceleration imposed by a centrifuge will have very little effect in "inertial space" as the center of rotation is just moving along with the earth's surface and is constantly cancelling out. If the force were applied in a straight line, then some measurable effect could be expected. Comments?

[Age of Reason]

Michael Jackson will be sleeping in a centrifuge next, one that spins counter-clockwise, in the hope of making himself younger forever.

[onedoug]

This is "time dilation", which has been well documented in relativity studies.

Everyone who's ever flown in an airplane has aged however imperceptably more slowly from being that much further from the local gravitational source, i.e., the earth.

I suspect though that "changing" time would require a corresponding change in the entropy of the entire universe, since that is what most likely sets the "arrow of time".

[RightWhale]

speed up the frequency of the pulses, or ticks, produced by the clock

Whoa! Is this correct? Wouldn't the clock slow down if anything? And then consider that the radial acceleration would be cyclical and cancel itself out. Only the initial tangential acceleration would count. For this to work, the clock would have to be accelerated to a tangential velocity and stay there. How fast will the clock be moving in the centrifuge? I would estimate no more than 700 mph due to sonic shock. They would have to spin it for a year to see anything, and even then it would be only a fraction of a second.

[SamAdams76]

I'm not a scientist but I just don't see how time travel is possible. Consider this. If time travel WAS possible, we'd already know it because we'd have already been visited by travelers from the future. The fact that this did not happen indicates quite strongly that the human race was never able to figure it out.

[tpaine]

19th LA Inf wrote: I'm no physicist, but it seems to me that acceleration imposed by a centrifuge will have very little effect in "inertial space" as the center of rotation is just moving along with the earth's surface and is constantly cancelling out. If the force were applied in a straight line, then some measurable effect could be expected. Comments

_____________________________________


I'm no physicist either but it seems to me that acceleration imposed in our local gravity field will have very little effect on relative time, - as the object [the clock] is just moving faster than the earth's surface, not faster thru space than our system. If the force were applied in a straight line, accelerating away from our solar system, then some measurable effect could be expected.

I suspect this story is BS.

[Socratic]

"If the force were applied in a straight line, then some measurable effect could be expected."

Straight line relative to what? Isn't that the point of relativity? If another watch on the other side of the centrifuge were to "look over" at the other one, they would each seem stationary to each other. (Actually I'd like to see more than one watch in that centrifuge, with its crystal aligned at 90 degrees to the first one to rule out physical deformation being the cause of any time change.) But, if it's the motion in space which causes the time shift, can't one posit a space referent? This has always been the paradox of relativity to me, since it seems that one ultimately has to define a referent space/time which then contradicts the notion of everything being relative. Any comments?

[Swordmaker]

The key is the velocity... and it matter not if it goes straight or in a circle. If it goes fast enough, and this means REALLY fast enough, time slows down ON THE HIGH SPEED OBJECT.

"The basic idea behind the experiment is to speed up the frequency of the pulses, or ticks, produced by the clock with force to push it ahead. Dolz said it takes about six hours to move the clock ahead four seconds.

I question this guys total premise and his prediction. He claims that a high-speed centrifuge with a digital clock mounted at the perimeter will GAIN (!) FOUR SECONDS in about SIX HOURS????

First of all, the high velocity clock should show a LOSS of time not a GAIN! It would be the stationary clock that would appear to have gained time compared to the moving clock.

Secondly, at the velocities a mechanical centrifuge could attain, I think it would take THOUSANDS, of not MILLIONS, of years to gain even ONE second, let alone FOUR! The atomic clocks carried for long periods of time on satellites or the space shuttle showed only millionths of a second time differences with Earthbound comparison clocks... and they were traveling at 18,000+ miles per hour.

[templar]

If the force were applied in a straight line,...

How does one determing if a straight line is, indeed, a straight line?