Re: A silly fact about an atomic clock that relativist never want you to know.

On Jul 14, 11:59 am, "Spaceman" <space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
PD wrote:
On Jul 14, 11:36 am, "Spaceman" <space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
PD wrote:
On Jul 14, 10:50 am, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
PD wrote:
On Jul 14, 10:21 am, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sue... wrote:
On Jul 13, 11:27 pm, "Spaceman"
<space...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You see, the basic atomic clock actually has to use gravity
to get it's most accurate reading.
They actually have a "fountain" almost like a water fountain
only it is forcing a very tiny ball or atoms upward and it has
to use gravity to return down and be counted as one second.

If you actually take the silly thing and flip it upside down,
It is as good as any pendulum clock of yesteryear.
It simply won't work right.
Isn't that funny?
Want to read about it also.

http://tf.nist.gov/cesium/fountain.htm

Do the cesium clocks on the GPS satellite
vehicles use a fountain?

Not sure and probably not the same,
but something in the same sort of form must be going on.
and cesium atoms are not immune to gravitational
effects so fountain or not, the atom will still be subject
to g forces.
Unless cesium is immune to g-forces like some
special alien spaceship would be.
:)

Already discussed. Time dilation appears in cases where the atoms
are moving and not moving and both are in the *same* gravitational
field, and so the "g-forces" are not responsible for the time
dilation.

Not moving (at rest)on a curved path and moving along a curved path
are a difference in g-forces.

I wasn't talking about a curved path, Spaceman. I was referring to
*straight* line motion, both under the *identical* terrestrial
gravitational field.

Now PD proves he does not understand that a truly straight line
motion can not stay in the same "terrestrial gravitational field".
A truly straight path would have to cross into higher or lower
gravitational potentials.
Sheesh

Nice try, Spaceman!
But the time dilation for *different* speeds in the same channel,
through the *identical* gravitational profile, follows the
expectations of SR. That is, you get what SR predicts for speeds of
0.5c, 0.8c, 0.9c, and 0.99c, even though they are in in the very same
beampipe through the same variation in gravitational field.

What "beampipe" are you talking about PD?
Any truly straight line can not be in the same gravitational force
from beginning to end.

No, you're right. A straight beampipe starts at one elevation and goes
to a different one. But you missed what I just said. Particles going
through the same beampipe at *different* speeds get *different* time
dilations, even though they are going through the *same* variation in
the gravitational field. Please understand cause and effect. If you
have two objects that exhibit DIFFERENT effects and they are subject
to the SAME influence, then the influence cannot possibly be the cause
of the effect.

and...
Why don't you get that I am not saying the predictions are wrong
at all. I am merely saying that the actual changes that the clocks
are showing are not caused by this stupid ass spacetime cause you
worship like an Easter bunny.

Then you'll have to explain why traveling through the SAME beampipe,
through the SAME variation in gravitational field, can produce
DIFFERENT time dilations.

This kind of thinking, Spaceman, is what draws you essential nonstop
ridicule. You nonetheless lap it up like a thirsty man in front of a
puddle.

The actual cause is the same cause that makes pendulum clocks
goof up too. A g-force change.
Sheesh

--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman


.

Relevant Pages