Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Paul.B.Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: Electron size, shape and spin.Confusion and conflicts with
 Einstein's 1905 SR.
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 20:53:36 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 151
Message-ID: <vrf73v$1iffb$1@dont-email.me>
References: <8d05bbe123c740f2934b31e367a92231@www.novabbs.com>
 <65006a73bc196736fbec3d54e21fa717@www.novabbs.com>
 <vr9tmf$q4vi$1@dont-email.me>
 <0c0b2bb49434e61879858abed2b9d6c2@www.novabbs.com>
 <vrbtgj$2k1q7$1@dont-email.me>
 <a1b3bbfca4b1e9797d98903a77f0cf59@www.novabbs.com>
 <f58a6ba75e73908078c5576f74ffe329@www.novabbs.com>
 <9ed9e92086e0d99fde7d81edfced643a@www.novabbs.com>
 <0082c223a6c8e6952b11ec32b83c473b@www.novabbs.com>
 <d38ac7fb8de3a1e3c8f08908a6e1953a@www.novabbs.com>
 <40f0e2c10ed1e2c2d24989b4c7917802@www.novabbs.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 20:49:20 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="488d3fe1513126c63e88b4e4de013734";
	logging-data="1654251"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19v9g1iIV9FdjIM6CpXUcTl"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:EyGzYBR1pgpQ8XEsjGwKZkYFHeE=
In-Reply-To: <40f0e2c10ed1e2c2d24989b4c7917802@www.novabbs.com>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 7461

Den 19.03.2025 01:58, skrev rhertz:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2025 21:42:44 +0000, gharnagel wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
>> I only support what I have determined the way the world actually works.
>> I do this by studying EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE and adjusting my belief
>> system to agree with that, rather then having a frozen belief system
>> like certain people in this "discussion" group.
> 
> YOUR "EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE" IS JUST BULLSHIT (Warning: mild profanity
> here).
> 
> Your belief is trapped in circular and fallacious logic. Here is why:
> 
> - The "evidence" is the result of theoretical calculations, not
> measurements.

I suppose you are talking about the GPS.

Below gharnagel has explained that the rate of an uncorrected
was measured for 40 days and found to be fast.
I will add one important thing, though.
It is obviously impossible to measure the frequency of the signal
from the ground, the Doppler shift is many order of magnitude
bigger than the GR correction so that was not what was done..
The SV is transmitting its time, and there are a number of
monitoring stations that can read what time of the SV clock.

https://paulba.no/paper/Ashby.pdf
https://paulba.no/paper/Initial_results_of_GPS_satellite_1977.pdf

The reading of the SV clock was compared to the master clock.
When the uncorrected clock had run for 6 day's it was 229.4 μs
ahead of the master clock, that's 38.2 μs/day or (1 + 442.5e-12)
too fast.

FACT: The measurements in 1977 _proved_ that the proper time τ₁
of the unadjusted clock in NTS-2 advanced faster than
the proper time τ₀ of the clock on the ground, and the difference
was dτ₁/dτ₀ = (1 + 4.425e-10)

GR predicts dτ₁/dτ₀ = (1 + 4.4647e-10), GR confirmed within less than 1%

Close to 50 years operation of the GPS has confirmed GR to much
better precision.

You have been told this many times, but you seem to believe
that you cam make facts go away by calling them BULLSHIT.

But facts won't go away, so you are only making a fool of yourself
by denying their existence.

> 
> - Suppose that the time of the onboard Cs clock is measured by
> accumulating
>   counts of cycles of the 10.23 Mhz master TCXO clock. This, to
> accumulate
>   pulses with a period of 97.7517 nsec during 86,400 sec, requires an
> onboard
>   digital counter displaying 883,872,000,000 counts (12 digits). Such
> data,
>   at the end of the 24 hours period MUST be sent down to Earth station,
> where
>   a twin Cs clock is also counting pulses in sync with the onboard Cs
> clock.

If the satellite counter is counting the cycles from the 10.23 MHz
oscillator for 86,400 sec measured in the satellite, then:

the satellite counter counts 883872000000 cycles

The ground    counter counts 883872000000 cycles.

>   Will a comparison differ in 389 LOST PULSES (38 usec)?

Which pulses do you miss? :-D

I wonder, is it a trick to imply that some pulses should be missing,
or do you really believe that there according to GR should be some?

I understand from where your blunder comes, though.

If the satellite transmitted the 10.23 MHz, then according to GR
883872000394 pulses would hit the ground during one solar day.
Obviously impossible to count.

But you are right about one thing.
If GR had predicted what you think it predicts, GR would be nonsense.
But it doesn't.

>   I don't think so and even less that such ONLY SOLUTION to the problem
> had
>   even implemented to prove the fucking (WARNING: severe profanity)
> relativity
>   in 1977. If you think so, you are an imbecile beyond redemption.
> 
> - The calculation of the 38 usec/day REQUIRES A THEORETICAL SEPARATION
> of GR
>   and SR effects using Schwarzschild. It's the same crap that in the
> Hafele-
>   Keating 1972 experiment, where data for SR and GR were calculated
>   theoretically.
> 
> - The ALLEGED EFFECT of the 7 us/day due to SR are MISCALCULATED using
>   Schwarzschild, because this alleged effect MANIFEST in rectilinear
>   trajectories, NOT IN NON-INERTIAL TRAJECTORIES OF AN ELLIPTIC ORBIT!!!
> 
> 
> I left this here because I'm tired of throwing FACTS on the table. You
> will rationalize and negate what I wrote.

You claim to be an engineer.
When an engineer by practical measurement finds that the SV clock
runs too fast by Δf/f = 4.425e-10, wouldn't he correct the problem
by adjusting the clock down by  Δf/f = - 4.425e-10 ?

What would the engineer Richard Hertz do?
Claim that the measurements must be wrong because he did't
get the expected result, and give up the GPS project?


>>
>> "At the time of launch of the first NTS-2 satellite (June 1977), which
>> contained the first Cesium clock to be placed in orbit, there were some
>> who doubted that relativistic effects were real. [Like certain reality-
>> deniers who frequent this group]  A frequency synthesizer was built
>> into the satellite clock system so that after launch, if in fact the
>> rate of the clock in its final orbit was that predicted by GR, then the
>> synthesizer could be turned on bringing the clock to the coordinate
>> rate necessary for operation. The atomic clock was first operated for
>> about 20 days to measure its clock rate before turning on the synthe-
>> sizer. The frequency measured during that interval was +442.5 parts
>> in 10^12 faster than clocks on the ground; if left uncorrected this
>> would have resulted in timing errors of about 38,000 nanoseconds per
>> day." -- Neil Ashby
>> http://www.leapsecond.com/history/Ashby-Relativity.htm
>>
>>> Not even one fucking single time the change in frequency has been
>>> measured,
>>
>> Denial of reality is a mental disorder.
> 
> 
> <snip>


-- 
Paul

https://paulba.no/