SR/GR use absolute time to synchronize the GPS clocks with the ground clock.
in [Physics]
|
From: kenseto on 25 May 2010 13:19 On May 25, 9:45 am, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 5/25/10 7:56 AM, kenseto wrote: > > > > > Hey idiot...You didn't answer my question. B predicts that an interval > > of delta(t'_A) on the A clock is worth: > > Delta(t'_A)= gamma*Delta(t_B) > > Ken Seto > >   Seto, you confuse A and B -- Know wonder you never understand >   what is going on! No it is you who is confused. If B is the observer he predicts that an interval of Delta(t'_A) on the B clock is worth gamma*delta(t_B) on the B clock. > >   You cannot assume that when A and B are separated and in relative >   motion that ât_A is identical to ât_B. Hey idiot I did not make such assumption. > Nor can you assume that ât_A' >   is identical to ât_B'. Seto, you mistakenly think these are all >   interchangeable. They are not! Hey idiot I did not make such assumption. > >          ____________________ > >   A and B are observers with identical clocks. That is A and B's >   clocks ticked synchronously when they were together. Yes. > >   ât represent a time interval between tick of the clocks. > >   Special relativity predicts that observer A will measure that >    ât_B' = γ ât_B No... A predicts that ât_B' is worth γ ât_A Ken Seto > >   where ât represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity >   between A and B, and γ = 1/â(1-v^2/c^2) . > >   Furthermore, special relativity predicts that observer B will >   measure that >    ât_A' = γ ât_A > >   Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of special relativity? >    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
From: PD on 25 May 2010 13:40 On May 24, 8:37 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 22, 8:23 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > Ken, you do not know what experiments show and do not show until you > > > look at the papers. > > > If you make an assertion about what experiments show and you haven't > > > even looked the papers, then you are just bullshitting. Everyone knows > > > you're bullshitting. > > > ROTFLOL....you don't have an arguement so you keep on telling me to > > read papers. is that what you tell your students when they ask you a > > taugh question that you don't have a valid ANSWER??? > > I *DO* tell my students to read the papers, yes. That is ABSOLUTELY > required of them, yes. And that is rightfully so. > > And keep in mind they are PAYING me to go over those papers with them > to help them make sense. > > You want just an answer without having to pay for it, and without > having to read anything. > > You are a lazy, shiftless, worthless fraud, and you aren't capable of > being a student. Having a hard time coping with the truth? > > > > > Ken Seto > >
From: kenseto on 25 May 2010 17:39 On May 25, 1:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 24, 8:37 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 22, 8:23 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > Ken, you do not know what experiments show and do not show until you > > > > look at the papers. > > > > If you make an assertion about what experiments show and you haven't > > > > even looked the papers, then you are just bullshitting. Everyone knows > > > > you're bullshitting. > > > > ROTFLOL....you don't have an arguement so you keep on telling me to > > > read papers. is that what you tell your students when they ask you a > > > taugh question that you don't have a valid ANSWER??? > > > I *DO* tell my students to read the papers, yes. That is ABSOLUTELY > > required of them, yes. And that is rightfully so. > > > And keep in mind they are PAYING me to go over those papers with them > > to help them make sense. > > > You want just an answer without having to pay for it, and without > > having to read anything. > > > You are a lazy, shiftless, worthless fraud, and you aren't capable of > > being a student. > > Having a hard time coping with the truth? No I decided not to waste anymore time with your because all you do is to tell me to read a book. Ken Seto > > > > > > > > Ken Seto- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: BURT on 25 May 2010 17:46 On May 25, 2:39 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > On May 25, 1:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 24, 8:37 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 22, 8:23 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > Ken, you do not know what experiments show and do not show until you > > > > > look at the papers. > > > > > If you make an assertion about what experiments show and you haven't > > > > > even looked the papers, then you are just bullshitting. Everyone knows > > > > > you're bullshitting. > > > > > ROTFLOL....you don't have an arguement so you keep on telling me to > > > > read papers. is that what you tell your students when they ask you a > > > > taugh question that you don't have a valid ANSWER??? > > > > I *DO* tell my students to read the papers, yes. That is ABSOLUTELY > > > required of them, yes. And that is rightfully so. > > > > And keep in mind they are PAYING me to go over those papers with them > > > to help them make sense. > > > > You want just an answer without having to pay for it, and without > > > having to read anything. > > > > You are a lazy, shiftless, worthless fraud, and you aren't capable of > > > being a student. > > > Having a hard time coping with the truth? > > No I decided not to waste anymore time with your because all you do is > to tell me to read a book. > > Ken Seto > > > > > > > > > Ken Seto- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - There are two times whose rates slow down. One time is the slowdown for gravity. The second time is the slowdown for energy flowing through space created by its acceleration. GR time and SR time slows together for a two rate clock moving through gravity. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 25 May 2010 17:53
On May 25, 4:39 pm, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > On May 25, 1:40 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 24, 8:37 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 22, 8:23 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote: > > > > > > Ken, you do not know what experiments show and do not show until you > > > > > look at the papers. > > > > > If you make an assertion about what experiments show and you haven't > > > > > even looked the papers, then you are just bullshitting. Everyone knows > > > > > you're bullshitting. > > > > > ROTFLOL....you don't have an arguement so you keep on telling me to > > > > read papers. is that what you tell your students when they ask you a > > > > taugh question that you don't have a valid ANSWER??? > > > > I *DO* tell my students to read the papers, yes. That is ABSOLUTELY > > > required of them, yes. And that is rightfully so. > > > > And keep in mind they are PAYING me to go over those papers with them > > > to help them make sense. > > > > You want just an answer without having to pay for it, and without > > > having to read anything. > > > > You are a lazy, shiftless, worthless fraud, and you aren't capable of > > > being a student. > > > Having a hard time coping with the truth? > > No I decided not to waste anymore time with your because all you do is > to tell me to read a book. And that is what you should do. What you've been doing so far is completely unproductive. Why would you continue to do things in an unproductive manner? 1. You are unpublished, except in a self-published book and in a pay- for-placement vanity journal for cranks. 2. You have given a web presentation, during which you were mocked. 3. You cannot get your experimental proposals even seriously considered, let alone funded. 4. You do not have a single physicist referencing your work. 5. You have spent 15 years on usenet being told over and over and over again that you don't know what you're talking about -- you don't even know what the terminology means. The first thing that ANY decent scientist does is read a ton of stuff about the work that has been done so far, even if he intends to try to find something better. I don't know why you think you are not obligated to do the same. If a physicist tells you it's time to read a book, then by golly that should be something you consider doing! And if you can't bring yourself to do it, then you need to look at yourself hard in the mirror in the morning and ask yourself why that is. > > Ken Seto > > > > > > > Ken Seto- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > |