Re: Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of Light

On 11/17/2024 11:50 AM, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 19:03:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:
>

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:
>

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:
>

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

>
Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.
>
Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.
>
Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit
the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

>
Amost  there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

>
Clock with 8×10^−19 Systematic Uncertainty
Alexander Aeppli, Kyungtae Kim, William Warfield, Marianna S.
Safronova, and Jun Ye
Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 023401 – Published 10 July 2024
https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.023401
>
For a semi-popular account:
Reducing Uncertainty in an Optical Lattice Clock
Han-Ning Dai and Yu-Ao Chen
July 29, 2024• Physics 17, 118
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v17/118

"The Zeeman coefficients describe the effect
of a magnetic field on electronic energy levels,
and therefore on the frequency of light that is
emitted during the relevant transition."
Which is funny because at least 60 years before
Zeeman got a Nobel for not reproducing Faraday's
magnetizing the medium, Faraday did.
"Typically, magnetically insensitive clock transitions
are chosen so that the dominant first-order Zeeman
frequency shift is minimized. Such minimization
reduces the clock’s sensitivity to environmental
magnetic fluctuations. But weaker second-order effects
remain. "
Anyways you can read that "Zeeman" doesn't necessarily
reflect "clocks".
https://www.nature.com/articles/nphoton.2015.5
These only point at "10^ -18", yet, at least they're cold.
Those guys at "10^ -19" are like "don't look too close, ...".
What I'm saying is that the accelerated and retarded
frames with regards to the magnetic and the radiation,
or not, or accelerated charged particles, makes for
that there are a wide variety of ways to make
crystal or later "atomic" clock arrays.
How about a nuclear clock that simply measures radiation?
I think that you can understand that that would vary
in various accelerations in a kinetic field,
or, under an electrical field, whether it's
a magnetic field.
Also it would require very difficult to achieve
reference standards.
Anyways, Zeeman, has sort of a counterpoint
in Lyman, and Balmer, and Faraday, and so on,
with regards to "electron physics", and,
"the dominated-away" or otherwise the,
"not-electron physics".