Clock Synching Experiment Again Demonstrates Einstein's Stupidity.
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: New Theory --- The Theory of Quantum Wave Sources
Next: Properties of the elements or different atoms
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 3 Feb 2010 16:30 If two clocks are synched whilst together and then moved apart, they will remain absolutely synched. (If anyone wants to argue, let the clocks be moved apart identically in opposite directions). O C1|C2 (ABSOLUTELY synched whilst together) C1 | C2 (still in absolute synch when separated) OK so far? ********************** Now, if two clocks, WHICH ARE COMOVING in the frame of a particular observer, are absolutely synched whilst together and then moved apart identically, why should they not remain in absolute synch in that observer's frame? O C1|C2->v (adjacent comoving clocks absolutely synched) C1 |->v C2 (clocks are identically separated) *********************** Therefore any pair of clocks that are synched and separated in this manner MUST remain absolutely synched in ALL observer frames. Henry Wilson... ........provider of free physics lessons
From: artful on 3 Feb 2010 16:46 On Feb 4, 8:30 am, ..@..(Henry Wilson DSc) wrote: More likely it will again demonstrate Henry's stupidity, if all his previous posts over the years are anything to go by .. but lets have a look ... > If two clocks are synched whilst together and then moved apart, they will > remain absolutely synched. No such thing. > (If anyone wants to argue, let the clocks be moved apart identically in > opposite directions). > > O C1|C2 (ABSOLUTELY synched whilst together) > > C1 | C2 (still in absolute synch when separated) No .. there is no absolute sync. But they are in sync in the frame you are illustrating > OK so far? In the original rest frame of the clocks, both will slow by the same amount when they move because they have the same speed at all times in that frame. In the frame of one of the clocks, for example, they will no longer be in sync as it is the other clock that is moving and so is running slower Which is fine as time, and sync, is not absolute in SR (just as it is not absolute in nature, which we know from experiments and observation) > ********************** > > Now, if two clocks, WHICH ARE COMOVING in the frame of a particular observer, > are absolutely synched whilst together and then moved apart identically, why > should they not remain in absolute synch in that observer's frame? Because there is no such thing absolute sync to start with .. so they were never in absolute sync and cannot remain in absolute sync. > O C1|C2->v (adjacent comoving clocks absolutely synched) > > C1 |->v C2 (clocks are identically separated) > *********************** > > Therefore any pair of clocks that are synched and separated in this manner MUST > remain absolutely synched in ALL observer frames. No .. they must not. That is not what SR predicts and not what we observe in nature. it is just wishful thinking on your part that the universe works the way you would like. It doesn't Henry once again shows his ignorance and the arrogance to expect nature to bow to his wishes.
From: Tom Roberts on 3 Feb 2010 17:33 Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > If two clocks are synched whilst together and then moved apart, they will > remain absolutely synched. Nope. There is nothing "absolute" about this kind of synchronization. > (If anyone wants to argue, let the clocks be moved apart identically in > opposite directions). I assume your "identically in opposite directions" is applied in some inertial frame. Then they remain synchronized in that inertial frame, AND ONLY IN THAT FRAME. Exercise for Henry: if they are moved apart "identically in opposite directions" in inertial frame A, are they also moved apart "identically in opposite directions" in inertial frame B that is moving relative to A along the direction the clocks were moved apart in A? Once again your post comes down to: "I am Henri Wilson, and the world simply must work the way I want it to work". The hubris in your approach is OUTRAGEOUS, and of course it is not at all related to science. Tom Roberts
From: kenseto on 3 Feb 2010 19:53 On Feb 3, 5:33 pm, Tom Roberts <tjrob...(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: > Henry Wilson DSc wrote: > > If two clocks are synched whilst together and then moved apart, they will > > remain absolutely synched. > > Nope. There is nothing "absolute" about this kind of synchronization. > > > (If anyone wants to argue, let the clocks be moved apart identically in > > opposite directions). > > I assume your "identically in opposite directions" is applied in some inertial > frame. Then they remain synchronized in that inertial frame, AND ONLY IN THAT FRAME. Then why don't you use those two spatially separated and synchronized clocks to measure OWLS????? Ken Seto > > Exercise for Henry: if they are moved apart "identically in > opposite directions" in inertial frame A, are they also moved > apart "identically in opposite directions" in inertial frame B > that is moving relative to A along the direction the clocks > were moved apart in A? > > Once again your post comes down to: "I am Henri Wilson, and the world simply > must work the way I want it to work". The hubris in your approach is OUTRAGEOUS, > and of course it is not at all related to science. > > Tom Roberts
From: Henry Wilson DSc on 3 Feb 2010 20:06
On Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:33:36 -0600, Tom Roberts <tjrob137(a)sbcglobal.net> wrote: >Henry Wilson DSc wrote: >> If two clocks are synched whilst together and then moved apart, they will >> remain absolutely synched. > >Nope. There is nothing "absolute" about this kind of synchronization. Do you deny that two clocks are absolutely synched when synched together? >> (If anyone wants to argue, let the clocks be moved apart identically in >> opposite directions). > >I assume your "identically in opposite directions" is applied in some inertial >frame. Then they remain synchronized in that inertial frame, AND ONLY IN THAT FRAME. They can be separated by a symmetrical mechanical system if you wish. It is identical in ALL frames. > Exercise for Henry: if they are moved apart "identically in > opposite directions" in inertial frame A, are they also moved > apart "identically in opposite directions" in inertial frame B > that is moving relative to A along the direction the clocks > were moved apart in A? Clocks are not altered in any way by movement. So these two must remain in absolute synch no matter who looks at them. >Once again your post comes down to: "I am Henri Wilson, and the world simply >must work the way I want it to work". The hubris in your approach is OUTRAGEOUS, >and of course it is not at all related to science. The world works they way I see it working..... that is with light moving at c wrt its source and c+v wrt an observer moving at -v wrt the source. There is any amount of evidence in support of that concept and zero against it. >Tom Roberts Henry Wilson... ........provider of free physics lessons |