Re: = c + v (train)

From: kenseto (kenseto_at_erinet.com)
Date: 06/03/04 

Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2004 13:36:48 -0400

"The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
message news:rbk3p1-i53.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> In sci.physics, kenseto
> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> wrote
> on Tue, 1 Jun 2004 13:24:04 -0400
> <10bpej6afue3l41@corp.supernews.com>:
> >
> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote in
> > message news:mdduo1-dg.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> In sci.physics, kenseto
> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> wrote
> >> on Tue, 1 Jun 2004 09:11:25 -0400
> >> <10bovpftp2bndd9@corp.supernews.com>:
> >> >
> >> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net> wrote
in
> >> > message news:8ofto1-oc1.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> >> In sci.physics, kenseto
> >> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> >> wrote
> >> >> on Mon, 31 May 2004 18:21:55 -0400
> >> >> <10bnble229sold5@corp.supernews.com>:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net>
wrote
> > in
> >> >> > message news:25hpo1-avu.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> >> >> In sci.physics, kenseto
> >> >> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> >> >> wrote
> >> >> >> on Sun, 30 May 2004 10:41:46 -0400
> >> >> >> <10bjsaib539al7a@corp.supernews.com>:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > "The Ghost In The Machine" <ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net>
> > wrote
> >> > in
> >> >> >> > message news:hg3no1-70t.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> >> >> >> In sci.physics, kenseto
> >> >> >> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> >> >> >> wrote
> >> >> >> >> on Sat, 29 May 2004 08:34:15 -0400
> >> >> >> >> <10bh0fcgq6phr18@corp.supernews.com>:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > "The Ghost In The Machine"
<ewill@aurigae.athghost7038suus.net>
> >> > wrote
> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> > message news:5lplo1-ftr.ln1@lexi2.athghost7038suus.net...
> >> >> >> >> >> In sci.physics, kenseto
> >> >> >> >> >> <kenseto@erinet.com>
> >> >> >> >> >> wrote
> >> >> >> >> >> on Fri, 28 May 2004 13:58:06 -0400
> >> >> >> >> >> <10bev2ihgiq1s04@corp.supernews.com>:
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > "Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
> >> >> >> >> >> > news:40B7615E.DD534483@mchsi.com...
> >> >> >> >> >> >> kenseto wrote:
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >>
> >> A local clock second represents a local clock second. It needs to
> >> be converted into Universal Time.
> >
> > NO...a clock second in any frame will represent a specific of universal
> > time.
>
> Only if one knows the velocity relative to the reference, and
> perhaps local space warpage relative to the reference.

NO you are wrong. a clock second will represent a specific interval of
universal
time. There is no need to know the velocity relative to the reference.
>
> >>
> >> > A clock second in different frames represents different interval of
> >> > universal time.
> >>
> >> Right, it's not a Universal second. I think we more or less agree
here.
> >
> > That's true since we already declared that the earth clock second is
> > a universal second.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Besides the existence of universal (absolute) time and absolute
motion
> > will
> >> > enables us to unify all the forces of nature. If we stick with the SR
> >> > assertion
> >> > that there is no absolute time or motion then we will have eliminated
> > the
> >> > only viable way to unite all the forces of nature.
> >>
> >> The main problem is that a local clock second on Earth is different
> >> from a local clock second on, say, the GPS satellite (by a tiny
> >> amount).
> >
> > Right. In terms of universal time a ground universal second
> > is represented by 9,792,631,770 transitions of the Cs 133 atom
> > and a GPS universal second is represented by (9,792,631,770+4.15)
> > transitions of the Cs 133 atom.
>
> On Earth.

You didn't read what I said.
>
> >
> >> Defining a Universal second doesn't solve this problem,
> >> and in fact may exacerbate it if we're not careful (muon decay in
> >> particular depends on local time).
> >
> > Sure does. The existence of universal time and motion will allow us to
> > unify all the forces of nature. Rejecting the existence of universal
time
> > led us to the current mess....that there is no theory of quantum
gravity.
> > Do you really want to save the absurd SR assertions (that there is no
> > absolute time and motion) at the expense of a way to the unification
> > of physics?
>
> How is your system any better? At best, you've preserved SR with
> some additional buttressing regarding the local spacetime coordinates.
> At worst, it's completely superfluous.

<sigh> SR is incomplete. It asserts reciprocity between
relative frames where there is none. For example: The SR
effect on the GPS clock is 7 us/day running slow compared
to the ground clock.
IRT is a complete theory of motion. It includes SR and GR as subsets.
IRT posits that there is no reciprocity between relative frames.
>
> My computations suggest that your experiment is not precise enough
> to show much of anything.

Please show your calculations and e-mail me a copy.

Ken Seto