The Symmetric Twin Paradox
in [Math]
|
Prev: Yet Another SD Rodrian Prediction True: Gravity is NOT an attractive force between bodies
Next: Ilya Prigogine, The End of Certainty
From: train on 24 Jun 2010 20:54 On Jun 24, 9:17 am, "k...(a)nventure.com" <k...(a)nventure.com> wrote: > On Jun 21, 3:26 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_z> wrote:> "train" <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >snip > > Whales are mammals, whales have no legs. > > We establish by definition that all mammals have no legs. Stupid or a hoax? > > Androcles doesn't know how a mammal is definied? > > Or maybe what I post zipped right over his head. > > D.Y.K. Meanwhile we will take up Androcles excellent suggestion to consider the GPS satellites, and thence calculate for ourselves the time dilation of the gps clock wrt the earth clock and thence arrive at a xxxxx. That is what we are after is it not? OK speed of the satellites : 7000 km/h using the formula, tau ) tau = t/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) v squared : 3780864.198 c squared : 8.98755E+16 v squared over c squared : 4.20678E-11 1 minus that : 0.999999999957932000000 Square root : 0.999999999978966000000000000 so in this time, the position error would be 0.999999999978966000000000000 x speed of satellite 1944.4444444035500000000 metres am I right?
From: train on 24 Jun 2010 20:58 On Jun 25, 12:10 am, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) wrote: > "k...(a)nventure.com" <k...(a)nventure.com> writes: > >On Jun 21, 3:26 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_z> wrote: > >> Whales are mammals, whales have no legs. > >> We establish by definition that all mammals have no legs. Stupid or a hoax? > > >Androcles doesn't know how a mammal is definied? > >Or maybe what I post zipped right over his head. > > Never mind "Androcles" (John Parker), he's a senile old fart who has a > (bad) obsession with Einstein, and he doesn't really understand relativity > anyway. > > (space below is reserved for Parker to curse and cuss at me for pointing > this out) Parker as you call him has come up with some useful suggestions and even insight. He has patience with explaining the same things over and over again. You have to admit he makes us think. I understand he worked on the Concorde flight instrument system. ( no relativity calculations involved there, were there Androcles?)
From: Androcles on 25 Jun 2010 00:21 "train" <gehan.ameresekere(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:a5822132-1b36-498d-82d1-a2c7345aed89(a)d8g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... On Jun 24, 9:17 am, "k...(a)nventure.com" <k...(a)nventure.com> wrote: > On Jun 21, 3:26 pm, "Androcles" <Headmas...(a)Hogwarts.physics_z> wrote:> > "train" <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > >snip > > Whales are mammals, whales have no legs. > > We establish by definition that all mammals have no legs. Stupid or a > > hoax? > > Androcles doesn't know how a mammal is definied? > > Or maybe what I post zipped right over his head. > > D.Y.K. Meanwhile we will take up Androcles excellent suggestion to consider the GPS satellites, and thence calculate for ourselves the time dilation of the gps clock wrt the earth clock and thence arrive at a xxxxx. That is what we are after is it not? OK speed of the satellites : 7000 km/h using the formula, tau ) tau = t/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) ======================================= Not that it matters, but you really should learn basic algebra and how to read. http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/figures/img61.gif ======================================== v squared : 3780864.198 c squared : 8.98755E+16 v squared over c squared : 4.20678E-11 1 minus that : 0.999999999957932000000 Square root : 0.999999999978966000000000000 so in this time, the position error would be 0.999999999978966000000000000 x speed of satellite 1944.4444444035500000000 metres am I right?
From: kado on 25 Jun 2010 01:25 On Jun 24, 5:54 pm, train <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > snip > > Meanwhile we will take up Androcles excellent suggestion to consider > the GPS satellites, and thence calculate for ourselves the time > dilation of the gps clock wrt the earth clock and thence arrive at a > xxxxx. That is what we are after is it not? > snip > > 1944.4444444035500000000 metres > > am I right? I did not check your math or numbers. I did not have to, to see that you are wrong. Your goal was to calculate the time dilation of the 'gps clock wrt the earth clock'. So should not the solution be in units of measure of time, rather than length or distance? D.Y.K.
From: train on 25 Jun 2010 04:43
On Jun 25, 10:25 am, "k...(a)nventure.com" <k...(a)nventure.com> wrote:> On Jun 24, 5:54 pm, train <gehan.ameresek...(a)gmail.com> wrote:> > > > snip> > > Meanwhile we will take up Androcles excellent suggestion to consider> > the GPS satellites, and thence calculate for ourselves the time> > dilation of the gps clock wrt the earth clock and thence arrive at a> > xxxxx. That is what we are after is it not?> > snip> > > 1944.4444444035500000000 metres> > > am I right?> > I did not check your math or numbers.> I did not have to, to see that you are wrong.> Your goal was to calculate the time dilation> of the 'gps clock wrt the earth clock'. So> should not the solution be in units of measure> of time, rather than length or distance?> > D.Y.K.Time dilation , and thence the position error at 7000 kmh. |