Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vcc83p$3ikkt$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: In 1911, EInstein thought that photons had mass. Still in use 123 years after, Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:45:38 +0200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 219 Message-ID: <vcc83p$3ikkt$1@dont-email.me> References: <b0788923a07a14a4d1cd494533f4ae12@www.novabbs.com> <vc8pel$2o5d3$1@dont-email.me> <61eaf4a368cca7b9a7dc0b0f3bf8f3ee@www.novabbs.com> <vca4tq$3237m$1@dont-email.me> <6399d56a9f97ea65d20025c9c9f12a92@www.novabbs.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 17:43:54 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d2e7efa1b6dccf81aeca6997f2213b90"; logging-data="3756701"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18E4uBdxn5V8rGaUUPhTmUu" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:2+KoTX96SqKZDFzuBpI10xEEXq4= Content-Language: en-GB In-Reply-To: <6399d56a9f97ea65d20025c9c9f12a92@www.novabbs.com> Bytes: 9572 Den 16.09.2024 23:53, skrev rhertz: > Paul B Andersen wrote: >> Den 16.09.2024 18:32, skrev rhertz: >>> >>> 2) The satellite clock is PERCEIVED to be ticking slower (from the >>> Earth's ground) by a factor: >>> >>> Δf/f = Φ/c² = GMe/c² (1/Re - 1/Rs) >>> >>> with respect to a TWIN CLOCK, located on the Earth's surface. >> >> This is wrong. >> >> Let us compare the proper times of two clocks. >> Both are atomic clocks which count seconds as defined by SI. >> >> Some data: >> Geocentric gravitational constant GM = 3.986004418⋅10¹⁴ m³/s² >> Speed of light in vacuum c = 299792458 m/s >> Sidereal day tₛ = 86164.0905 s >> Equatorial radius of the Earth R = 6378137 m >> >> >> Clock C₀ is stationary on the geoid at equator, longitude 0. >> The proper time of this clock will for one rotation of >> the Earth be τ₀ = 86164.0905 s >> >> Clock C₁ is in circular orbit in the equatorial plane. >> The orbital period p is half a sidereal day, p = 43082.04525 s >> The radius of the orbit is then r = GM⋅p²/4π² = 26561763 m. >> >> The proper time of this clock to make two orbits around >> the Earth will be: >> >> τ₁ = (1 + (GM/c²)⋅(1/R-1/r)+(v₀²-v₁²)/2c²)⋅τ₀ >> >> where: >> The speed of clock C₀ in the ECI frame v₀ = 2πR/tₛ = 465.1011 m/s >> The speed of clock C₁ in the ECI frame v₁ = 2πr/p = 3873.8291 m/s >> >> τ₁ = (1 + 4.4647⋅10⁻¹⁰)⋅τ₀ = 86164.0905 s + 38.49 μs >> >> Note that τ₁ and τ₀ are invariant proper times. >> They are real, there is nothing apparent about them. >> >> dτ₁/dτ₀ = (1 + 4.4647⋅10⁻¹⁰), so C₁ appear to run faster than C₀. > > APPEAR? You are using my expressions 100%: APPEAR; IS PERCEIVED TO BE; > ... You are a funny guy. > Trying to divert the attention form the fact that I showed you wrong? Your equation for a satellite with orbital time half a sidereal day would give: Δf/f = 5.2839⋅10⁻¹⁰, the correct is: Δf/f = 4.4647⋅10⁻¹⁰ Your equation is wrong because it doesn't contain the kinematic term. You can't ignore that for a satellite! Your statement: "The satellite clock is PERCEIVED to be ticking slower" is not the same as my statement: "C₁ appear to run faster than C₀" "slower" isn't 100% the same as "faster"! Your statement is 100% wrong. My statement is 100% correct. >>> >>> At ANY CASE, there IS NO experimental proof about any of these two >>> cases, because the relativity of the pseudoscience that relativity is, >>> prevents THAT ANY LOCAL MEASURE ONBOARD can be remotely measured from >>> ANY ground station. >> >> A GPS satellite sends the exact information of where it is and >> what its clock show to the receivers. That is the principle of the GPS. >> >> And the ground stations which are tracking each satellite for hours >> each day can measure the position of satellites, and what their >> clocks show. This way they can upload the correction data to >> the satellites so their clocks are kept in sync within few ns. >> >> This is necessary for the GPS to work, which it does, even >> if it according to you is impossible. >> > > The corrections ARE NECESSARY TWICE A DAY in order to correct every > onboard atomic clock, so the SLIPS due to flight perturbations, cosmic > and EM radiation PLUS natural short-term instabilities on each one. You > should know better about short-term jumps in ANY ATOMIC CLOCK, which (if > not corrected) would make each clock frequency randomly drift from the > others. And, as a digital clock is a counter, those instabilities > ACCUMULATE. So, from Earth, corrections are made constantly to have the > entire network in sync all the time. The SV clock is not corrected while the SV is in service. I have told you before: The monitor stations upload parameters in a correction polynomial to the SV, typically once a day. The SV downloads these parameters to the receiver. The receiver calculate the correction to add to the SV-clock time received from the SV. One parameter in the correction polynomial is the "clock offset". It simply says how wrong the clock is, and is added to the SV-clock time received from the SV. In the GPS, the number of bits in the register containing the parameter is so that the "clock offset" must be less than ~1 ms, or the register will overflow. That means that the SV clock must be less than 1 ms off sync. If the SV clock was not corrected by the GR correction (1-4.4647⋅10⁻¹⁰) the "clock offset" register would overflow after less than 25 days. But the SV clocks can run for years without corrections. >> Since the clock C₁ has exactly the same orbital data as a GPS satellite, >> dτ₁/τ₀ is the same as a GPS satellite where the rate of the clock >> is not adjusted down. >> >> Such a GPS satellite was in orbit 1977 >> https://paulba.no/paper/Initial_results_of_GPS_satellite_1977.pdf >> >> It confirmed GR's prediction. > > WERE YOU THERE WITNESSING THAT CRAPPY TEST? NO! YOU JUST BELIEVE IT. What a stupid remark! :-D Of course I believe it. This is not a test of GR, it is a test of a GPS satellite. The engineers that built the satellite were not convinced that the GR prediction was right, so the satellite was launched with no correction, but it contained a frequency synthesiser which could be switched on and lower the frequency by Δf/f = -4.45⋅10⁻¹⁰ It was run for some time without correction. See fig 10. It shows what was measured during 6 days. The frequency was Δf/f = 4.425⋅10⁻¹⁰ too high. When they switched on the synthesiser they measured Δf/f = -3.1⋅10⁻¹², see fig 21. The engineers who made this report didn't care if the GR prediction was right or wrong, their only concern was to get the satellite to work. They found that the GR-correction was necessary to make the satellite work. It is ridiculous to claim that they were member of a MAFIA, and profit from it, because the different results are COOKED with the help of statistical manipulations, fraud, cooking and peer complicity. You must be pretty stupid if you don't believe it. >>> >>> In the case of orbiting clocks, the theoretical accumulative difference >>> in TIME ELAPSED is questionable IF such clocks are sent back to the >>> ground lab for comparisons, because it violates the purity of the theory >>> in this way: Relativity formulae are ANALOG, while data stored in >>> orbiting clocks is DIGITAL. >> >> What an idiotic idea. 😂 >> ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========