Re: relativity of time
- From: "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 31 Aug 2005 17:27:25 -0700
francisco wrote:
> the clocks in the satellites have to be very precise. general relativity is
> needed to correct the clocks compared to what they would do if they were
> sitting on the ground.
I don't see that here:
<< The amount of correction to the Bohr energy levels due to hyperfine
splitting of the hydrogen atom is on the order of:
where
m is the mass of an electron
mp is the mass of a proton
a is the fine structure constant (1/137.036)
c is the speed of light.
This is a much smaller perturbation than the fine structure or Lamb
shift.
>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperfine_transition
>
> so far, the application of relativity theory to gps has not contradicted
> relativity theory. to say that it has is a wrong claim.
The need to offest the clocks before launch is inconsistant with
LPI.
http://tf.nist.gov/timefreq/cesium/parcs.htm
>
> all we need is one experiment to contradict relativity theory. so far there
> isn't any.
Yes... "Stay the course", "turn the corner" and
"in the last throes"...
Some folks will believe anything that is preached
enough. :o(
Sue...
>
>
>
> "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1125511554.014092.17630@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > francisco wrote:
> >> a scientific theory usually begins with general statements called
> >> postulates, which attempts to provide a basis for the theory. from these
> >> postulates we can obtain a set of mathematical laws in the form of
> >> equations
> >> that relate physical variables. finally, we test the predictions of the
> >> equations in the laboratory. the theory stands until contradicted by
> >> experiment, after which the postulates may be modified or replaced, and
> >> the
> >> cycle is repeated.
> >
> > So in this case you can offer some proof that moving observers alter
> > a path which they do not interact with?
> >
> >>
> >> the critical test of any theory is of course how well it agrees with
> >> experiment. einstein's special theory of relativity has been subjected to
> >> exhaustive tests over the past 98 years and has passed every one.
> >> classical physics and relativity predict different results, experiment
> >> has
> >> been found to agree with relativity theory.
> >>
> >> do you know of an experiment that does not agree with relativity theory,
> >> that proves that relativity theory is wrong?
> >
> > Sure,
> > H&K and GPS disproves *time dilation*.
> > Pound Rebeka and GPS disproves *gravitational redshift*.
> >
> >>
> >> the author of the following site:
> >> http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/LtClk.html,
> >> has not been able to prove with experimet that relativity theory is
> >> wrong.
> >> he has not been able to prove with experimet that his opinion is correct.
> >> thus, it is a waist of time to speculate with him.
> >
> > I don't know that he is even an experimentalist. His
> > description of the light clock absurbity is better that
> > most so I excerped for that purpose. Experiments are
> > not necessary to prove or disprove mathematical absurbdities.
> > They stand failed as conceived and experimentally impossible.
> >
> > <<
> > Elements of a scientific method
> > [...]
> > 3. Prediction (logical deduction from the hypothesis) >>
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method
> >
> > Sue...
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> news:1125503487.791886.12410@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >
> >> > francisco wrote:
> >> >> concerning the following site:
> >> >>
> >> >> http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/LtClk.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Typical Anti-Relativty garbage, not worth your time.
> >> >
> >> > Then you should have no problem addressing the issues it
> >> > raises with logical argument instead of disparaging remarks.
> >> >
> >> > Your opinion of the website does explain how a relative
> >> > moving observer can alter the path between the mirrors
> >> > to permit the appliction of special propagation calculations.
> >> >
> >> > Rain doesn't follow a longer path, nor take a longer period
> >> > of time to reach the ground, simply because you view it
> >> > from a moving vehicle.
> >> >
> >> > Sue...
> >> >
> >> >> __________________
> >> >> Janus
> >> >>
> >> >> The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
> >> >> so
> >> >> certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.--Bertrand
> >> >> Russell
> >> >>
> >> >> "Sue..." <suzysewnshow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> >> news:1125448209.388401.54560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >> >
> >> >> > francisco wrote:
> >> >> >> let observer S be at rest on the ground. let S carry a timing
> >> >> >> device,
> >> >> >> consisting of FD (a flashing lightbulb F attached to a detector D).
> >> >> >> let a
> >> >> >> mirror M be a distance L0 from FD, so that M - FD = L0. let M and
> >> >> >> FD
> >> >> >> be
> >> >> >> two
> >> >> >> points of a vertical line that represents L0, so that M is north of
> >> >> >> FD.
> >> >> >> let
> >> >> >> the bulb emit a ray of light that travels north to M from F. when
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> reflected light returns to D, the clock ticks and another flash is
> >> >> >> triggered. let delta t0 be the time interval between ticks
> >> >> >> according
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> S,
> >> >> >> so that delta t0 = 2L0/c.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> let observer S' be in a train moving horizontally east on a long,
> >> >> >> straight
> >> >> >> track. the train moves at constant speed v relative to S. let S'
> >> >> >> carry
> >> >> >> an
> >> >> >> identical timing device, consisting of FD and M, so that M - FD =
> >> >> >> L0.
> >> >> >> let
> >> >> >> M
> >> >> >> and FD be two points of a vertical line (a line that is
> >> >> >> perpendicular
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> length of the track) that represents L0, so that M is north of FD.
> >> >> >> in
> >> >> >> other
> >> >> >> words, L0 is represented by a line (inside the train) that extends
> >> >> >> across
> >> >> >> the train . let the bulb emit a ray of light that travels north to
> >> >> >> M
> >> >> >> from
> >> >> >> F.
> >> >> >> and when the reflected light returns to D, the clock ticks and
> >> >> >> another
> >> >> >> flash
> >> >> >> is triggered. again, let delta t0 be the time interval between
> >> >> >> ticks
> >> >> >> according to S', so that delta t0 = 2L0/c.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> the time interval delta t0 is observed by either S or S' when the
> >> >> >> clock
> >> >> >> is
> >> >> >> at rest with respect to that observer.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> let's consider now the situation when S looks at the clock carried
> >> >> >> by
> >> >> >> S'
> >> >> >> on
> >> >> >> the moving train. .
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> imagine that ABC is an isosceles triangle. let AC be the horizontal
> >> >> >> base
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> ABC, so that A and C are the base angles of ABC. let C be east of A
> >> >> >> .
> >> >> >> let
> >> >> >> B
> >> >> >> be the angle opposite AC. and let B be north of AC. let P be the
> >> >> >> midpoint
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> AC, so that BP is the perpendicular bisector of AC, and PC = AC/2.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> let the train move east, parallel to AC
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> according to S, the following takes place:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> the bulb in the train emits a ray of light at A. a light signal (at
> >> >> >> that
> >> >> >> instant) alerts S that the bulb has emitted a ray of light at A.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> the ray of light is reflected at B (from the mirror M inside the
> >> >> >> train).
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> light signal (at that instant) alerts S that the ray of light is
> >> >> >> reflected
> >> >> >> at B.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> the ray of light is detected at C (at the detector D inside the
> >> >> >> train).
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> a light signal (at that instant) alerts S that the ray of light is
> >> >> >> detected
> >> >> >> at D.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> according to S, delta t is the time interval between the light
> >> >> >> signal
> >> >> >> at
> >> >> >> A
> >> >> >> and the light signal at C, and
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> AC = v*(delta t).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> also, according to S, L = SQRT[(BP)^2 + (PC)^2], where BP = L0 and
> >> >> >> PC
> >> >> >> =
> >> >> >> AC/2
> >> >> >> = v*(delta t)/2
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> so, L = SQRT{(L0)^2 + [v* (delta t)/2]^2}.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> S observes that the light beam travels a distance of 2L, so that
> >> >> >> delta
> >> >> >> t
> >> >> >> =
> >> >> >> 2L/c
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> so, delta t = 2*SQRT{(L0)^2 + [v* (delta t)/2]^2}/c
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> substituting for L0 from delta t0 = 2L0/c and solving delta t =
> >> >> >> 2*SQRT{(L0)^2 + [v* (delta t)/2]^2}/c for delta t gives the
> >> >> >> following:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> delta t = (delta t0)/SQRT(1 - v^2/c^2)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> the factor in the denominator of this equation is always less than
> >> >> >> or
> >> >> >> equal
> >> >> >> to 1, thus delta t is greater or equal to delta t0. that is, S
> >> >> >> measures a
> >> >> >> greater interval between ticks. the effect is called time dilation.
> >> >> >> the
> >> >> >> time
> >> >> >> interval delta t0, measured by S', who is at rest relative to the
> >> >> >> clock
> >> >> >> inside the train is called the proper time.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > << The result depends on the angle of the light pulse to the
> >> >> > direction
> >> >> > of the two observers relative motion. The choice of the light clock
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > its orientation arbitrarily selects a particular direction which
> >> >> > gives
> >> >> > the correct result. We do not prove that the square of the longest
> >> >> > side
> >> >> > of any triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two
> >> >> > sides by drawing a right angled triangle, proving that it works in
> >> >> > that
> >> >> > case and then generalising. That is mathematically unsound and it is
> >> >> > mathematically unsound to pick a particular direction for the light
> >> >> > pulse to travel in when the result depends on the direction. In
> >> >> > short,
> >> >> > it is a mathematical fiddle. >>
> >> >> > http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/LtClk.html
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sue...
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >
.
- References:
- Re: relativity of time
- From: francisco
- Re: relativity of time
- Prev by Date: Re: Energy in gravity field?
- Next by Date: Re: why lorentz transformation?
- Previous by thread: Re: relativity of time
- Next by thread: Simple answers to so called great mysteries
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
