Re: GR frequency shift formula


Sue... wrote:
mluttgens@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Sue... wrote:
vanep@xxxxxxx wrote:
snip
The correction is ~38,500 nanoseconds/ day.

Almost right!

The GR formula gives the approximate prediction correctly. Your formula
is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. Using your correction would
result in the GPS being off ~ 615,4 meters/day.

http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.html

<< What does GR predict for a cesium clock located in
hollow in the center of the planet ? >>

Sue...


Marcel Luttgens:
<<
My formula, which takes the relative velocity of the satellite based
and Earth based
clocks into account, reduces to
Nu2/Nu1 = 1 + M2*(1/R2-1/d-1/2d)
Shift = Nu2/Nu1 - 1 = 3.66E-10, which is the correct value.
Multiply the shift by the day in nanoseconds (8.64E10), and you get ~
31.6 nanoseconds/day. >>

"What does GR predict for a cesium clock located in
hollow in the center of the planet ?"

Sue

I have no idea of what GR would predict.
As for me, the shift is -3.47E-10

Marcel Luttgens


You seem to be saying it would run slower than a
a clock at the surface at a point with less gravity
than at the surface. Hmmm ?

Sue...

The shift is of course 3.47E-10 !

Marcel Luttgens





My formula, which takes the relative velocity of the satellite based
and Earth based
clocks into account, reduces to
Nu2/Nu1 = 1 + M2*(1/R2-1/d-1/2d)
Shift = Nu2/Nu1 - 1 = 3.66E-10, which is the correct value.
Multiply the shift by the day in nanoseconds (8.64E10), and you get ~
31.6 nanoseconds/day.

The value is 38 thousand 5 hundres nanoseconds/day.

http://www.eftaylor.com/pub/projecta.pdf

Notice that my reduced formula is identical to the GR approximate
formula.

Your formula is garbage. If it was identical to the GR formula it would
make a prediction that was incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day.

Using your formula the GPS would have crashed and burned in a couple of
minutes.

Seemingly, you have a problem with simplifying a formula.

You can't even convert your scientific notation to nanoseconds. You
seeminly think your formula predicts a delta of 31.6 nanoseconds/day.





Clearly you must know the GPS is completely functional and the
correction was made using GR so what logic leads you to make the
comment "Clearly, GR is a very poor tool"?

GR can only solve simple cases, like the GPS one.
Remember that to my question
"Do I have to conclude that GR cannot numerically solve this elementary

problem where
M1 = M* ( M* = 1 solar mass), R1 = 5 Km, M2 = 5 M*, R2 = 20 km, d = 50
km ?",

Folks who understand relativistic physics know what the difference is
between the weak and strong gravitational field. GR certainly is a poor
tool for you because you never read the operations manual. If we were
talking about a chain saw you would have cut off your leg.

Tom rightly answered
"No. But there is no useful approximation that applies, and this is a
quite complicated computation that can only be performed via numerical
simulation.",

whereas my formula at least gives straightforwardly an approximate
solution (Nu2/Nu1=0.9). If you are skeptical, perform the numerical
simulation.

Your formula is wrong. It doesn't give he right answer for the GPS.

If you could (what I doubt), you should obtain ~0.87.
As long as GRists content themselves with generalities or easy slogans,
they will not be taken seriously.

They will never be takin seriously by cranks such as yourself..


Marcel Luttgens

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: GR frequency shift formula
    ... Light emitted from the Sun's surface observed on Earth: ... The correction for the GPS would also include a difference in period ... is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR frequency shift formula
    ... Light emitted from the Sun's surface observed on Earth: ... The correction for the GPS would also include a difference in period ... is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR frequency shift formula
    ... Light emitted from the Sun's surface observed on Earth: ... The correction for the GPS would also include a difference in period ... is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR frequency shift formula
    ... is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ... As for me, the shift is -3.47E-10 ... make a prediction that was incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ... correction was made using GR so what logic leads you to make the ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: GR frequency shift formula
    ... is incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ... make a prediction that was incorrect by over 2000 nanoseconds/day. ... correction was made using GR so what logic leads you to make the ... GR can only solve simple cases, like the GPS one. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)