Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tomyee3@gmail.com (ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Relativity is a pseudoscience II. The Hafele-Keating HOAX,
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2024 16:36:57 +0000
Organization: novaBBS
Message-ID: <cdd2c298f8ae5022cb50ad1287207140@www.novabbs.com>
References: <dad338831baa98f3eb1ca50452fd9401@www.novabbs.com> <be051db4136835108537c9497c5dfab8@www.novabbs.com> <e766d5b3f2f87f9604f0937ad65a4284@www.novabbs.com> <3fddf5a7bc291abaf2bc49d856d87fcb@www.novabbs.com> <45ca134f20b357d137e34b1fcdd80764@www.novabbs.com> <f4ec6c0220ab548a18740c2680d12dee@www.novabbs.com> <631323acf0c3dda0238e7c216ad843ab@www.novabbs.com> <8fe67191e5d71c706cc50c05e95ee23b@www.novabbs.com> <67bd6e19bb1d0337420a99583f647508@www.novabbs.com> <70c184ff68360069eb636416a2ccffb1@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2666022"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="ovbq/l84ala/wLhXSqScU9GOSIzjukMrxJB27Aq7eyg";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Posting-User: c1a997029c70f718720f72156b7d7f56416caf7c
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$ScR/MV.fbDn1z7NJooE8G.AJ47cm3mfp707BOTVqy5JRMPSKygc06
Bytes: 5042
Lines: 80

On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 16:05:28 +0000, rhertz wrote:

> It's incredible what I have to read from you and Paul.
>
> It's like to discuss politics with fanatic democrats, or with right-wing
> liberals here in Argentina.
>
> You both DON'T THINK about the main problem to sustain your positions.
> You both REPEAT what was written in a paper that tried to save face in
> 1971/72. Even facing ELEMENTARY INFORMATION about the impossibility of
> establish a link over 15,000 miles (1971) between H-K and the USNO, you
> both ARE IN FULL DENIAL.

(FACEPALM)

They didn't try.

Look at Fig. 1 on page 169. They did comparisons with USNO while they
were on the ground in the United States between hours 0-240, 300-450,
and 530-650. During the Eastward and Westward flights they had no
contact with USNO, neither in the air, nor while they were on the
ground along the way.

Before, after, and during the flights, they made continuous clock
inter-comparison. These continuous clock inter-comparisons allowed
them to detect and compensate for clock glitches.

> There was NO TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TO SEND THE READINGS OF THE CLOCKS,
> FROM THE DIFFERENT AIRPORTS TO THE USNO that could have the precision to
> account for NANOSECONDS lost on each stage (about -8nsec/stage).

Before, after, and during the flights, they made continuous clock
inter-comparison. These continuous clock inter-comparisons allowed
them to detect and compensate for clock glitches.

> No HF link or satellite link could have provided such precision at each
> stage, considering HOW PRIMITIVE were the communications in 1971.
> Geostationary satellites were a novelty, and the delay involved using
> them was no less than 240 milliseconds. With this level of delay for ONE
> SATELLITE JUMP, considering other random delays, measuring remotely -8
> nsec/segment WAS IMPOSSIBLE.

Before, after, and during the flights, they made continuous clock
inter-comparison. These continuous clock inter-comparisons allowed
them to detect and compensate for clock glitches.

> And even today, repeating the experiment using real time data exchange
> is beyond the capabilities of current technology (forget using GPS).

Before, after, and during the flights, they made continuous clock
inter-comparison. These continuous clock inter-comparisons allowed
them to detect and compensate for clock glitches.

> 4) So, the DIFFERENCES between USNO clocks and H-K clocks could be
> measured ONLY once ALL THE CLOCKS were placed side by side in the USNO,
> once each flight finished.

THEY WERE SIDE BY SIDE THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE EXPERIMENT, AND
WERE CONTINUOUSLY COMPARED WITH EACH OTHER.

> Read the Hafele paper that I cited above, and stop talking nonsense
> about INTERMEDIATE data exchange with the USNO. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

(FACEPALM)

OF COURSE IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!!!!

> ********* PLEASE RE-READ ************************************
> There were 4 traveling clocks, identified by serial number in
> Fig. 1 of H&K's results paper: 361, 408, 447 and 120.
>
> From Fig 1, it should be obvious that while on the ground at
> home, they continuously compared the clocks against USNO time
> (as well as against each other). While in the air and during
> short layovers in different cities of the world, they could
> not compare against USNO, but they did continue the regular
> inter-comparisons of the clocks against each other.
>
> Most of what you have written about how you believe H&K
> collected their data is sheer fantasy.
> *************************************************************