Re: Einstein's disservice to physics

PD:
Ah, so you have experimental evidence that is clearly in conflict with
a specific prediction of SR?
VERGON
Yes, I have experimental evidence that Einstein's time dilation is in
error.
His time dilation theory claims that a moving clock will run *slow* in
*approach*.


There are two contributions here. One is time dilation. The other is
the Doppler Effect. The fact that you have chosen to ignore the
Doppler
Effect is nonbody's fault but your own.

Rest deleted because it is all based on Vergon's stupidity in ignoring
the
Doppler Effect.


VERGON

The rest was deleted because you want to maintain your ignorance (which
is backed up by stupidity)

The Doppler effect is the mechanics of wave alteration that results in
a blue shift. That does not alter the fact that as a clock the atoms
are running fast. The running fast (in approach) is an observation
only. In their own systems or frames they are keeping proper time.

TIME DILATION

Vertner Vergon



We examine time dilation as set forth in Einstein's paper and find it
has an inconsistency and a reductio ad absurdum. We ascertain a correct
time variation and illustrate its viability.



There is always an open question as to the accuracy of Scientific
articles. So the question arises, how can we judge the accuracy of an
article that involves a theory?

Firstly, the article (theory) must be consistent both internally and
with empiricism. If it isn't it is flawed.

Secondly, it must not violate any known physics laws. Nor, obviously,
can it lead to a reductio ad absurdum.

Theories necessarily contain speculation - else they are not theories
but simply logical constructs. Such constructs must also meet the above
requirements.

Articles generally contain both theory and reference to facts (such as
experiments). These must be verified.

If an article ( or theory) meets these requirements it cannot be
rejected. If it is, it is done so out of sheer obstinancy and/or
stupidity.

Let us examine the concept of Time Dilation as contained in the Special
Theory of Relativity.
We start our examination of the time dilation concept by going to its
source -- Einstein's paper, On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies. We
refer to his gedanken experiment of moving clocks. One of two
synchronized identical clocks remains at rest while the other moves
away and returns. When Einstein perceived the difference of the clock
readings in his calculations, he stated the moving clock "was slow by
....". The immediate perception by the public was that he meant if a
clock was "slow by" - it had to have run slower. He also said the
moving clock was "behind" the inertial clock by ... . These two
statements do not mean the same thing. If one clock is running slower,
then it is running slower, and that has only one meaning.

On the other hand to say one clock is behind the other is open to
alternative explanations, e.g., the moving clock could have traveled a
shorter world line -- or may have traveled faster than observed. In
either case the clock would maintain its normal (proper) rate but for a
shorter duration than the inertial clock and thus be behind. At any
rate the accepted version is that the clock ran slower and thus was
born the concept of time dilation.

This concept is usually presented by an illustration that says if one
were to observe a clock on a fast moving spaceship, they would observe
it to run slowly. It must be emphasized that this running slowly occurs
regardless of the direction or vector of the ship. That is to say it
matters not whether the spaceship is receding or approaching, time runs
slower. Also to be emphasized is that this slowness of time is not just
a matter of observation but actually takes place -- for when the clock
returns it is actually 'behind" the stationary (or Earth) clock.

Since this is the declared case, we are inevitably drawn to only one
conclusion, the moving clock has to be running slowly in its own
coordinate system. Here we are faced with an unforgiving contradiction
for basic relativity states that all clocks keep proper time in their
respective coordinate systems. It is inconsistent that a clock can
actually run slowly in its own coordinate system - and also, the
while, keep proper time; in short the clock would have to keep two
different rates simultaneously, a reductio ad absurdum. This
contradiction requires that the time dilation concept, i.e.,
t' = t (1 - v2/c2)^1/2 be discarded.

The question arises, is there something to take its place? The answer
is yes.
To lay the foundation for this replacement we note that any known
constant frequency is a clock. The scientific community has chosen the
excited cesium atom as the standard atomic clock. This is an arbitrary
choice. Next, we note that the cesium clock (or any other constant
frequency atom) will never vary in its rate. So they will always keep
proper time. However, observations of these clocks will show a
variation due to the Doppler effect. We declare this variation in
frequency is a variation in observed time. Since the frequency is a
clock, an observed variation in the frequency is an observed variation
in time. Call it Doppler or what one will, that is merely a description
of the mechanics. In the final analysis it is a variation in observed
time.

THINGS ARE NOT ALWAYS WHAT THEY SEEM.
Next, we examine a counter argument which states that the relativistic
Doppler rate is the result of the following: If one takes the
non-relativistic Doppler rate and modifies it by the time dilation
they, come up with the relativistic Doppler rate. This, supposedly,
confirms time dilation. Upon further examination, we perceive that even
if we were to accept that explanation, what we have is the situation
whereby an approaching clock is observed to run fast -- not as fast as
non-relativistic mechanics would have -- but fast. This is contrary to
time dilation which requires an approaching clock to run slowly. That a
reversal in direction results in a reversal of time rate is to be
expected since time variation is the result of velocity vectors - and
vectors are directional.

If a theory conflicts with empiricism, it has to be discarded.

Using the Doppler rate as the time rate will yield the time dilation
effect. And that is the proper way to refer to it -- "time dilation
effect". The reason: The net time differential when the movement of the
clock is complete is the same as though the dilation time was operative
throughout.

What then? What is the explanation for the "effect", but not the
actuality? Particle accelerator operators and Ives & Stillwell claim to
have "directly observed" time dilation. What they have observed is
transverse Doppler rates. And it so happens, by some extraordinary
coincidence, that the transverse Doppler rate is the same as the time
dilation rate.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "General Relativity Examined"
    ... I notice though that you deal with the time dilation of the STR. ... When Einstein perceived the difference of the clock ... were to observe a clock on a fast moving spaceship, ... Doppler rate is the result of the following: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • TIME DILATION
    ... Let us examine the concept of Time Dilation as contained in the Special ... Einstein perceived the difference of the clock readings in his ... variation due to the Doppler effect. ... Doppler rate is the result of the following: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • TIME DILATION
    ... Let us examine the concept of Time Dilation as contained in the Special ... Einstein perceived the difference of the clock readings in his ... variation due to the Doppler effect. ... Doppler rate is the result of the following: ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one
    ... We examine time dilation and find it leads to an unforgiving ... examining Doppler time we find it has none of these deficiencies. ... he stated the moving clock "was slow by ...". ...
    (sci.physics.particle)
  • Re: How to tell if a theory is a good one
    ... We examine time dilation and find it leads to an unforgiving ... examining Doppler time we find it has none of these deficiencies. ... he stated the moving clock "was slow by ...". ...
    (sci.physics)