Experiment to test mutual time dilation
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Quantum memory may topple Heisenberg's uncertainty principle
Next: Does a flat observable universe imply an infinite universe?
From: PD on 2 Aug 2010 17:37 On Aug 2, 12:46 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > A and B are in relative motion. > 1. A sends a TV picture of his clock to B. > 2. B sends a TV picture of his clock to A. > 3. A measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of B and call this > ratio as Tvb/Ta. > 4. B measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of A and call this > ratio as Tva/Tb. > > Conclusions: > 1. If Tvb/Ta=Tva/Tb > Mutual time dilation is confirmed. > > 2. If Tvb/Ta is not equal to Tva/Tb. > Mutual time dilation is refuted. > > I am betting on #2. > BTW, my bet is supported by the GPS clock compared to the ground > clock. The SR effect on the GPS clock is 7us/day running slow > compared > to the ground clock. > From the GPS point of view the SR effect on the ground clock is NOT > 7us/day running slow compared to the GPS clock. In fact it is ~7us/day > running fast. > > Ken Seto Ken, you have no idea how to devise an ACCESSIBLE experiment that measures things to the PRECISION needed. Getting two TV cameras aimed at clocks traveling with relative speed close to c is neither accessible nor would provide the precision needed. IDIOT.
From: BURT on 2 Aug 2010 17:55 On Aug 2, 2:37 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Aug 2, 12:46 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > > A and B are in relative motion. > > 1. A sends a TV picture of his clock to B. > > 2. B sends a TV picture of his clock to A. > > 3. A measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of B and call this > > ratio as Tvb/Ta. > > 4. B measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of A and call this > > ratio as Tva/Tb. > > > Conclusions: > > 1. If Tvb/Ta=Tva/Tb > > Mutual time dilation is confirmed. > > > 2. If Tvb/Ta is not equal to Tva/Tb. > > Mutual time dilation is refuted. > > > I am betting on #2. > > BTW, my bet is supported by the GPS clock compared to the ground > > clock. The SR effect on the GPS clock is 7us/day running slow > > compared > > to the ground clock. > > From the GPS point of view the SR effect on the ground clock is NOT > > 7us/day running slow compared to the GPS clock. In fact it is ~7us/day > > running fast. > > > Ken Seto > > Ken, you have no idea how to devise an ACCESSIBLE experiment that > measures things to the PRECISION needed. > > Getting two TV cameras aimed at clocks traveling with relative speed > close to c is neither accessible nor would provide the precision > needed. > > IDIOT.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - If both clocks go slow by observation how is one goingt to age more lets say passing the Earth at near light speed in space? Mitch Raemsch
From: eric gisse on 2 Aug 2010 12:17 PD wrote: [...] .....aaaand people are responding to Ken again. That lasted a few days.
From: kenseto on 2 Aug 2010 23:11 On Aug 2, 4:10 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 8/2/10 12:46 PM, kenseto wrote: > > > > > > > A and B are in relative motion. > > 1. A sends a TV picture of his clock to B. > > 2. B sends a TV picture of his clock to A. > > 3. A measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of B and call this > > ratio as Tvb/Ta. > > 4. B measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it > > to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of A and call this > > ratio as Tva/Tb. > > > Conclusions: > > 1. If Tvb/Ta=Tva/Tb > > Mutual time dilation is confirmed. > > > 2. If Tvb/Ta is not equal to Tva/Tb. > > Mutual time dilation is refuted. > > > I am betting on #2. > > BTW, my bet is supported by the GPS clock compared to the ground > > clock. The SR effect on the GPS clock is 7us/day running slow > > compared > > to the ground clock. > > From the GPS point of view the SR effect on the ground clock is NOT > > 7us/day running slow compared to the GPS clock. In fact it is ~7us/day > > running fast. > > > Ken Seto > > Seto FAILS to understand that comparing GPS satellite clocks and GPS > ground clocks requires general relativity to correctly predict the > differences from either perspective. Hey idiot....I was talking about the SR effect only. From the ground clock point of view the SR effect on the GPS clock is 7 us/day running slow. Fron the GPS point of view the SR effect on the grouncd clock is ~7us/day running fast. Ken Seto > > See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks > > http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.....- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: Sam Wormley on 2 Aug 2010 23:16
On 8/2/10 10:11 PM, kenseto wrote: > On Aug 2, 4:10 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On 8/2/10 12:46 PM, kenseto wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> A and B are in relative motion. >>> 1. A sends a TV picture of his clock to B. >>> 2. B sends a TV picture of his clock to A. >>> 3. A measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it >>> to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of B and call this >>> ratio as Tvb/Ta. >>> 4. B measures the rate of passage of time of his clock and compare it >>> to the rate of passage of time on the TV clock of A and call this >>> ratio as Tva/Tb. >> >>> Conclusions: >>> 1. If Tvb/Ta=Tva/Tb >>> Mutual time dilation is confirmed. >> >>> 2. If Tvb/Ta is not equal to Tva/Tb. >>> Mutual time dilation is refuted. >> >>> I am betting on #2. >>> BTW, my bet is supported by the GPS clock compared to the ground >>> clock. The SR effect on the GPS clock is 7us/day running slow >>> compared >>> to the ground clock. >>> From the GPS point of view the SR effect on the ground clock is NOT >>> 7us/day running slow compared to the GPS clock. In fact it is ~7us/day >>> running fast. >> >>> Ken Seto >> >> Seto FAILS to understand that comparing GPS satellite clocks and GPS >> ground clocks requires general relativity to correctly predict the >> differences from either perspective. > > Hey idiot....I was talking about the SR effect only. From the ground > clock point of view the SR effect on the GPS clock is 7 us/day running > slow. Fron the GPS point of view the SR effect on the grouncd clock is > ~7us/day running fast. Who's the idiot. SR is the wrong tool for satellite clocks. One needs general relativity to correctly predict the differences from either perspective. See: Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html > > Ken Seto > |