Stack Exchange network consists of 183 Q&A communities including Stack Overflow, the largest, most trusted online community for developers to learn, share their knowledge, and build their careers.
The concept of spacetime does not necessarily attest to space and time being of a same entity. Like the term "fabric of spacetime infers". But rather, it can be representative of a correlation that exists between properties of space and properties of time. That's a fundamentally different distinction, and in fundamental science context is everything. How is one to distinguish what is cause and effect if properties of systems are misappropriated. Unjustified inferences lead students toward conceptual mistakes
I believe the property of time has suffered the same fate, due to misappropriated inferences. While measures of time are derived from cyclic rates of physical systems, but then inferred to be a property of space. If time is a property of space then that would require an explanation that justifies "why the cyclic rates of physical systems is a property of space". The absence of such an explanation spells "incomplete science". The concept of spacetime does not necessarily say that space and time are a one entity, but rather that space and time are correlated.
Notice how those measurements are derived from electricity and magnetism, and therefore represent properties of Elec and Mag, but then they are labeled as being properties of free space? A measurement placed on one entity then inferred to be a property of another thing entirely. Everybody attempting to learn about these properties is given the impression they are properties of space. This is a fundamental problem in science, for it gives misleading impressions. A measurement should honor and be assigned to where and how it is taken. The context being so important.
So the answer to the following question is "yes"? is Maxwells work fundamentally based upon measurement of "forces? Furthermore, It can be correctly said that the speed of light was derived from two empirically derived measures of force.
Thank you, most helpful and fascinating. So it is believed that Maxwell employed an analogous model "propagation of sound waves" to achieve a model that successfully predicts the speed of light. But despite the similarities and success of this approach, the two systems are believed to be fundamentally different. ie, light waves are not oscillations in a medium of space. His model borrowed two properties from sounds propagation. 1. Restoration force and 2. Inertia, which is the capacity to resist force. Which classifies inertia as a force. So the answer to my question is, yes? C = force
Recently I heard it stated this way, I think while watching one of Richard Feynman's lectures. In effect he said "Maxwell derived the speed of light from the measured value of electric force and magnetic force". I hadnt heard it stated like that before and I would like to understand the particulars of it. I cant find the video
Thank you. I have received such a wide variety of advice and opinion, from here and Cosmoquest and Quora. Frankly I'm at a loss. My not having the qualified math to work this out on my own, or discriminate other peoples opinions.
@EmilioPisanty thank you. Apparently these units are small, lightweight, energy efficient, fairly resistant to heat influences, self contained. Sounds like bumbling amateurs will soon be able to track time dilation while out on their weekend picnic. A new pass time, forgive the pun
AdamDavis Thank you. That sounds promising. Can you please confirm the accuracy is 5.0E-11? I got my number from the video presentation, but cant say I did much research. If this is the correct accuracy, I would like to consider editing my question to reflect this value. @John Rennie how do you feel about me updating the sensitivity value in the question, because obviously it has implications for your answer? Would you then want to edit your calculations? What do you think we should do please? What would you like to do Lemon, if the sensitivity is to be revised?
@ChrisWhite No affiliations here. Just as happy to talk about whatever other brands are available, especially if somebody knows of a more accurate chip scale atomic clock? Who is the field leader in this tech?
John R has pointed out, that clock would need to be in orbit 20,000km overhead before it stood a chance of detecting time dilation. We'll have to wait for the next model release