Dear Mr. E. P.
I appreciate your engagement with the topic discussed in "A BRIEFER HISTORY OF TIME," and your thoughtful comments have prompted me to provide further clarification.
The 1962 experiment you mentioned, involving precise clocks at different heights, indeed supports the predictions of general relativity. However, it's crucial to acknowledge that similar experiments, while abundant, may have limitations and biases. Specifically, the notion of time dilation must be scrutinized.
Time is not a uniform, dilatable entity but a conceptual framework, as recognized in the principles of special relativity. Please refer to the precise definition of time for a more nuanced understanding.
Clock mechanisms, susceptible to external influences like relativistic effects from speed and gravitational potential differences, add complexity to the interpretation. The scale designed for proper time may not adequately accommodate dilated time, leading to potential discrepancies. Note that the scale of dilated time is distinct from proper time (t' > t), emphasizing that t' is not a simple sum of (t + Δt) but rather an independent quantity.
For additional insights, I recommend reviewing the following research papers:
Concerning your inquiry about the mass relativistic effect, I want to emphasize that it is not mass itself but the effective mass of relativistic energy. This distinction is crucial and is explored in detail in my paper titled "Relativistic Mass versus Effective Mass," where I delve into the energetic nature of relativistic mass and its equivalence to effective mass.
Moreover, please consider the points I made about time delay not being an enlargement or dilation but a change in time, and the relationship between mass and velocity being better understood as the effective mass of relativistic energy.
I also invite you to reassess the paper "Electromagnetism, Relativity and the Basic Unit System Concept" in light of the explanations provided. The paper introduces an alternative approach to the Special Theory of Relativity, considering not only particles in linear motion but also systems in interrelation within the complex plane.
Your thoughtful consideration of these points is highly appreciated.
Best regards,
Soumendra Nath Thakur
