Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<lebdd2FmqonU1@mid.individual.net> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2024 02:38:14 +0000 Subject: Re: No evidence (rotating frames) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity References: <4144a4a378a851665e4e8cf08dd46467@www.novabbs.com> <vc3l0m$1d7l3$1@dont-email.me> <22237708faf597ef0142e87eb1c821ba@www.novabbs.com> <f3c235167847a5acfb6ebb850598aad1@www.novabbs.com> <f76098bf89ccae80d87243051ec9c4d2@www.novabbs.com> <8a5e70674b99f96dc58aad03ed63912d@www.novabbs.com> From: Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:38:28 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8a5e70674b99f96dc58aad03ed63912d@www.novabbs.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <CkydnWC55d6LB3r7nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com> Lines: 73 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-PPBoOeVN55h7uJpkXTAq+n+b/wnrpAQLtDA120TqsmmNOeSgatAQOSxPWgxoKP9WCDYoSppvuZS+1sA!73ypNGGHfOTod6T9+fwa9UKegpGYudsuwTaW/ehhDFOP3jq9VYsF/ZuiFKDPfBTOKEWUu4YFHEkX X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 4291 On 09/15/2024 07:24 PM, gharnagel wrote: > On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:05:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote: >> >> Gary: Given that they are isolated, how would relative velocity >> cause them to run slower? (It doesn't cause time itself to dilate. >> That is pure nonsense.) > > It certainly is nonsense that velocity causes a clock to run > slower. Clocks run at their normal rate regardless of velocity > or gravitational potential. > > Relativity predicts that measuring such a clock at different > gravitational potentials or in relative motion will get different > results from measuring them when next to the clock. This is a > fact, valid information. > > https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04349-7 > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.12238 > > "we measure a linear frequency gradient consistent with the > gravitational redshift within a single millimetre-scale sample > of ultracold strontium. Our result is enabled by improving the > fractional frequency measurement uncertainty by more than a > factor of 10, now reaching 7.6 × 10−21." It could be space-contraction in the rotational instead of length-contraction and time-dilation separately, still making for that if you have an array of atomic clocks in a lattice, it can detect the hand-waving about it, without accelerating it. I.e. it makes a "gravitational wave detector" of a sort. Sort of like a "bullshit-and-lies detector", except it's just a mute scientific apparatus, which generally as a class comprise bullshit-and-lies detectors, yet aren't quite up to the task of the huge amount of bullshit- and-lies which accompanies many human activities. The Hafaele-Keating experiment flew a very particular track, Pound-Rebka stepped up to a laser vis-a-vis power transmission, and, Michelson-Morley is yet that "SR is local", so, that the equivalence principle falls away only sort of extra-terrestrially. I.e., that's one way to look at it, where of course any kind of putative _new_ explanation needs to of course satisfy every single aspect of _old_ explanation, or it's just a putative theory of an effect, subject to the configuration and energy of experiment, not necessarily as with regards to "the law(s)", of physics. There's Sagnac in here, the Coriolis, Cerenkov, Compton, Coulomb, Hall ("fractional" Hall), Birkhoff, Magnus heft, Casimir, effects, lots of these things that have approximations usually in accords with the stock premier theories of the day, also asymptotes. The JWST space-telescope has thoroughly paint-canned the fine-tuned inflationary cosmology and so on, you also have to keep in mind that other stuff was built on that. Of course, scientists would agree that all the experiments of all time all are according to a "the physics", given the laws being same.