Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: hitlong@yahoo.com (gharnagel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: I asked ChatGPT to prove that Hafele-Keating 1971 experiment was A
 HOAX.
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 19:44:26 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <4068b45f9decd9f08efa9ec65c3ff0cb@www.novabbs.com>
References: <f77fb3c3315095aacf628a4ee545f0a1@www.novabbs.com> <vurmv0$2sp4g$1@dont-email.me> <fd0533d44bb919ee765255c9402030ce@www.novabbs.com> <EhOdnRn3GJqoAYz1nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> <5f16762c075f4a5862273d734907cc49@www.novabbs.com> <v6qdnRPDdI6jrI_1nZ2dnZfqn_GdnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2576577"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="TRF929uvrTGZYJLF+N3tVBXNVfr/PeoSjsJ9hd5hWzo";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: cefb4c33981645a229d345bae7bb8942e6b32c35
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$8mEBkfw12OYiWnnwup0v8eytYcLX2y004hI4LWctDu0xPe5R13MTW
Bytes: 3772
Lines: 65

On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 14:18:34 +0000, Ross Finlayson wrote:
>
> On 04/30/2025 06:41 AM, gharnagel wrote:
> >
> > I find the AI discourse rather shallow.  There were no mentions of
> > more recent experiments which support relativity not at all dependent
> > on muons:
> >
> >
> https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2010/09/nist-pair-aluminum-atomic-clocks-reveal-einsteins-relativity-personal-scale
> >
> >
> > https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5253894/
> >
> > "Relativity in the Global Positioning System"
> >
> > https://www.nature.com/articles/nature01997
> >
> > "A test of general relativity using radio links with the Cassini
> > spacecraft"
> >
> > On Wed, 30 Apr 2025 3:42:29 +0000, Ross Finlayson wrote:
> > >
> > > Gravitational singularities rather exist, even if as regards to
> > > the "cosmic censorship" or "raw singularities", the wobbles as
> > > they may be result an unboundedly large concentration even if
> > > with a vanishingly small extent or duration.
> >
> > Singularities only appear in theories, not in reality.  Their
> > presence indicates that the theory has exceeded its domain of
> > applicability.
>
> Mathematics _owes_ physics better mathematics of infinities
> and singularities, because infinitesimals and multiplicities
> are in effect in dynamics of continuous change.

There has been considerable interplay between mathematicians and
physicists.  Mathematicians invented complex analysis and Laplace
transforms. which are used by physicists and engineers.  The Euler
function had no practical use until physicists noticed that it
seemed to predict baryon masses, which then led to string theory
and brane theory.

> Singularity theories are just half-accounts of multiplicity theories.

“as far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are
not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer
to reality” -- Albert Einstein

> When they asked Einstein "is the universe infinite" he said
> something along the lines of "it isn't not".

"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity,
and I'm not sure about the former."  -- Albert Einstein

> It's pretty well agreed we're looking at a field theory
> and a gauge theory and over a continuous manifold,

I'm not sure about that.  Those are mathematical models
of reality (see the first Einstein quote above).

> .....
> So, the "domain of applicability" here is "a physics",

Actually, it's a limit on a model.  If you want a larger
domain, get a new model.