Re: Non-constant time rate

: Ivan Voras <ivoras@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
: let's say the Sun and the Moon and everything
: observable within the tech limits (pre-Einstein 20th century) are within
: the zone.

Depends then on what you think it means for "time to be faster" or "time
to be slower".  Until you answer that, the question is prohibitively
difficult to even interpret, let alone answer.  If you mean something like
what happens with a gravitational potential in relativistic physics,
but without any of the relativity, then there'd be no way to tell,
unless you compared to something ouside the zone one way or another.
If that's not what you mean, you have to be a lot more specific about
just what a "rate of time" means.

: I'm not disallowing any of those (actually, a solution that has
: something to do with radio or other EM discoveries of the time would
: be very useful; even early Planckian quantum physics, up to and
: including Einstein's work not connected with Relativity), but I really
: want the solution to not involve touching or observing anything from
: outside the zone.  I.e.  no information is to pass between the zones. 

Right.  Then you have to say what it means for time to run fast or slow.
Why would "time speeding up" have any effects on EM, or quantum effects,
or anything else?  I mean, the very notion of "speed up" or "rate" has
to do with "per each period of time".  So you're left with trying to say
that there's more time per period of time, or some such.  Which is fine
if it's time at one place vs another, but you've ruled that out.  

Shrug.  Basically, the question is too vague to have an answer.


Wayne Throop   throopw@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
   http://sheol.org/throopw