I finally figured out how to ask my question

[Dale]

Ok, so you are saying that if I was traveling in a car at .5c and I started counting off mile markers to calculate speed compared to my watch that I would conclude that the speedometer was wrong even though it is correct.

I certainly didn't say that. You would conclude that your speedometer was correct, and that the mile markers were spaced too closely (length contraction).

 

[Austin0]

I am not sure what you mean by this. Let's say that you have an array of identical receivers at different altitudes. A receiver at the same altitude of the transmitter would receive a 1 MHz signal and receiver at progressively higher altitudes would receive progressively lower frequencies. This is what is observed experimentally, but I don't know if this is what you are describing.

Yes that is what I envisioned. As I understand this picture the receiver array would have progressively higher shifted frequency ranges starting up from the bottom receiver.
If this is the case then an identical stream of signals would fall into those ranges at progressively lower relative points as it was received up the chain.
That time dilation of the receivers is complete and sufficient explanation for the phenomenon.
That to attribute any change to the signal itself would be, not just superfluous, but actually erroneous because then there would be two factors involved and this would only make sense if the decrease in relative received frequency was greater than the calculated time dilation for the receiver.
Does this make any sense?
If light frequency shift was the only means we had to validate and measure gravitational dilation then it might make sense to say it was indeterminable or irrelevant to wonder where the change was taking place but that is not the case. We have ample other evidence for G dilation so can take that part of this question as a given.
Thanks

 

[PaulRacer]

That is not how it works. The person at the center of the Earth will measure the length of a day to be slightly less than the person at the surface of the earth.

I certainly didn't say that. You would conclude that your speedometer was correct, and that the mile markers were spaced too closely (length contraction).

If the person at the center of the Earth measures the length of day to be slightly less when in reality the length of time that elapsed was the same and his rotations were in sync with the person on the surface wouldn't the person traveling in the car be much like the person in the center of the earth? If so, the person in the car would see his distance traveled as correct by counting the mile markers but from his frame of reference the time it took him to travel it was shorter therefore making him think that his speed was greater than what the speedometer read. If the person in the car thinks that the speedometer is incorrect it would seem to explain why light would appear to be traveling at c in front of him even though he is traveling at great speed. His perception of velocity would be faster while light travels at the same speed. This could only be true if time would theoretically stop if you could reach c.

 

[Dale]

If the person at the center of the Earth measures the length of day to be slightly less when in reality the length of time that elapsed was the same

This is a conceptual error. "In reality" the length of time (the number of seconds in a day) is not the same at the two locations.

and their rotations were in sync with the person on the surface wouldn't the person traveling in the car be much like the person in the center of the earth?

The person traveling in the car is a SR scenario and the person in the center of the Earth is a GR scenario. They are not equivalent. The SR effects exist in GR, but not vice versa.

 

[PaulRacer]

Ugh..., so no weird planetary matter time dilation twist or speedometer reading strangeness. Thanks for your patience Dale.