Thanks for the comments.

 

Let me try one more time to explain what I think about time dilation.  I 
believe that if we try to measure how fast time is passing in a reference that 
is moving very fast with respect to our reference frame, we will get a 
different answer than someone measuring how fast time is passing in the fast 
moving reference frame.

 

What I also believe is that time is absolute and passes at the same speed 
everywhere in our Universe.  In other words we could measure how much time has 
passed since the Big Bang, we would all get the same answer.  I read somewhere 
that the Big Bang occurred 13.72 billion years ago and that the number was 
accurate to 4 decimal places.  I understand some galaxies are moving away from 
us very fast maybe at speeds close to the speed of light.  Would the people in 
those galaxies make the same estimate as we do?  If so that would indicate to 
me that the passage of time is the same everywhere in our Universe.

 

I also concede that atomic clocks run at different speeds in fast moving 
satellites than they do on earth.  There may be some explanation for the 
discrepancy other than that time is actually passing faster or slower in the 
satellites.  For example my understanding is that atomic clocks are based on 
the frequency of light emitted from certain atomic transitions.  Maybe the 
frequency changes at very high relative speeds or at different gravitational 
forces or different radial acceleration or there could be other answers.  

 

In any case, I realize I could be wrong.

 

 

 

From: everything-list@googlegroups.com 
[mailto:everything-list@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of LizR
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2014 6:16 PM
To: everything-list@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: TRONNIES

 

I may have been a bit harsh on you for using "believe" - it's OK in general 
discussions to mean something like "this is what I think is likely" but becomes 
a more loaded term when used to indicate something more outrageous, for 
example, that you don't think time dilation occurs. At that point it starts to 
sound like the "argument from incredulity" - "I just can't believe that such a 
weird thing could happen!" or words to that effect. Which is an argument that 
modern science has discredited many times ("I can't beleive the Earth orbits 
the Sun!" - "I can't believe humans descended from apes!" - etc)

I would recommend continuing to use it in the first, uncontentious sense, where 
it's merely a qualifier, but being more careful how you phrase things when 
you're making what most people consider a outrageous claim.

 

On 29 May 2014 12:51, John Ross <jr...@trexenterprises.com> wrote:

There are an equal number of electrons and positrons in our Universe.  Each 
proton includes two positrons and only one electron.  So the number of 
electrons outside of protons is equal to the number of positrons outside of 
protons plus half of the number of positrons inside protons.  I think I did 
that right.  My point is that the missing positrons are the extra positrons in 
the protons.

 

You asked why aren’t there an equal number of positrons and anti-protons.   An 
anti-proton is comprised of two electrons plus a high energy positron that has 
captured a neutrino entron with a mass of 1.65 X 10-27 kg, exactly opposite the 
proton.  Therefore, each anti-proton created removes two electrons but only one 
positron from the population of electrons and positrons .  So there may be an 
equal number of positrons and anti-protons.  This is a very good question.  
I’ll have to think about it some more. 

 

That is indeed the $64,000 question!

 

What I am fairly certain of (I would normally say “believe”) is that the number 
of electrons and positrons in our Universe is equal, but some of each are 
contained in protons and anti-protons.  The number of plus and minus tronnies 
in our Universe is also equal.  The number of protons and anti-protons are not 
equal.  

 

Yes, which is what I was hoping you'd be able to explain - if you can, that 
will (I believe :-) put you one up on existing theories.

 

In Black Holes there is a relatively large number of free positrons and a large 
number of neutrino entrons due to the destruction of protons in the Black 
Holes.  There is also a large number of free electrons.  Therefore in Black 
Holes you have all you need to make anti-protons,  So large numbers of 
anti-protons are made in Black Holes.  So after they are made, they combine 
with a proton and both the proton and the anti-proton are destroyed releasing 
all of the electrons and positrons in both particles.  Two neutrino entrons are 
also released.  Most of these neutrino entrons are released from the Black Hole 
to produce the gravity of its galaxy.  Some combine with electrons and 
positrons to produce either protons or anti-protons.  Each anti-proton produced 
will result in the destruction of another proton and anti-proton.  I calculate 
that if the Black Hole in the center of the Milky Way galaxy consumes the 
equivalent of an earth-size planet per day the resulting neutrino photon flux 
at our earth would be about 68,000 neutrino photons/m2 second.  See Chapter XX. 
 

 

I'm not sure about any of that. I think dealing with the symmetry question 
might help.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to