Ballistic Theory, Progress report...Suitable for 5yo Kids
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: OWLS is not equal to c
Next: Mathematical Inconsistencies in Einstein's Derivation of the Lorentz Transformation
From: sue jahn on 27 Jul 2005 09:05 "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns96A05057C2B43WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > "Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:1122447602.380751.118520 > @g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > > Oh? Is this what they reveal? > > http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/h/hy/hyperfine_structure.ht > m > > from your citation: > > [quote] > The hyperfine structure transition can be used to make a .... microwave > notch filter with very high stability, repeatability and ... Q factor, > which can thus be used as a basis for very precise ... atomic clocks. > > [emphasis mine] > Typically, the hyperfine structure transition frequency of a particular > isotope > [end emphasis] > of ... caesium or ... rubidium atoms is used as a basis for these clocks. > > Due to the accuracy of hyperfine structure transition-based atomic clocks, > they are now used as the basis for the definition of the second. One ... > second is now defined to be exactly 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine > structure transition frequency of caesium-133 atoms. > [unquote] > > Notice that the frequency depends on the isotope. This implies that > different clocks can be constructed using differnent isotopes of the same > element and as well as by using different elements. > > This gives a wide range of possible DIFFERENT clocks that can be compared > with each other to determine their 'sensitivity' to ???/SR/GR/EEP effects. > > We do know that at least two different types of clocks show similar > effects. You keep saying things that indicate that you do NOT believe that > Einstein's SR/GR/EEP explains the change in the clock rate. You also cite > papers and baseballs in a way that indicates to me that you do not think > that gravity is making the frequency appear to change due to doppler > effect. > > To what do you attribute the changes that have been observed? > > Please tell me in your own words, don't cite the gauge again unless you > tell me exactly how you apply that gauge. And show me the derived algebraic > equation, the numbers you intend to substitute into the equation(s) and the > results you get from said substitution. > > Show your work. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. > > > -- > bz > > please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > infinite set. > > bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: sue jahn on 27 Jul 2005 09:20 "bz" <bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu> wrote in message news:Xns96A05057C2B43WQAHBGMXSZHVspammote(a)130.39.198.139... > "Sue..." <suzysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:1122447602.380751.118520 > @g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > > Oh? Is this what they reveal? > > http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/encyclopedia/h/hy/hyperfine_structure.ht > m > > from your citation: > > [quote] > The hyperfine structure transition can be used to make a .... microwave > notch filter with very high stability, repeatability and ... Q factor, > which can thus be used as a basis for very precise ... atomic clocks. > > [emphasis mine] > Typically, the hyperfine structure transition frequency of a particular > isotope > [end emphasis] > of ... caesium or ... rubidium atoms is used as a basis for these clocks. > > Due to the accuracy of hyperfine structure transition-based atomic clocks, > they are now used as the basis for the definition of the second. One ... > second is now defined to be exactly 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine > structure transition frequency of caesium-133 atoms. > [unquote] > > Notice that the frequency depends on the isotope. This implies that > different clocks can be constructed using differnent isotopes of the same > element and as well as by using different elements. > > This gives a wide range of possible DIFFERENT clocks that can be compared > with each other to determine their 'sensitivity' to ???/SR/GR/EEP effects. > > We do know that at least two different types of clocks show similar > effects. You keep saying things that indicate that you do NOT believe that > Einstein's SR/GR/EEP explains the change in the clock rate. You also cite > papers and baseballs in a way that indicates to me that you do not think > that gravity is making the frequency appear to change due to doppler > effect. > > To what do you attribute the changes that have been observed? They are easily attributable to Newton's second law. Mass of the atomic entites is one of the factors in the timing of the hyperfinet transition. GR, as you know can derive Newton's laws. > > Please tell me in your own words, don't cite the gauge again unless you > tell me exactly how you apply that gauge. And show me the derived algebraic > equation, the numbers you intend to substitute into the equation(s) and the > results you get from said substitution. I am not a mathematician but I have sense enough to know that rocket motors are not what sticks my bum to a chair. If you will study a few of those URL's with a eye to finding why Maxwell's equations you might come to learn why the Coulomb gauge is also called the radiation gauge. > > Show your work. Show me yours and I'll show you mine. I have seen your work. A pitcher throwing 30 balls per minute and a catcher at 31 and clocks controlled by spoonbending. LOL You still haven't said whether you think the Jovian moons or the Earth's rotation will slow when we connect a clock at altitude with one on the surface with a torque tube. :o) Sue... > > > -- > bz > > please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an > infinite set. > > bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: bz on 27 Jul 2005 13:16 "sue jahn" <susysewnshow(a)yahoo.com.au> wrote in news:42e78c1d$0$18641 $14726298(a)news.sunsite.dk: > I have seen your work. A pitcher throwing 30 balls per minute and > a catcher at 31 and clocks controlled by spoonbending. LOL gnaw, no spoonbenders all-owed. > > You still haven't said whether you think the Jovian moons or the > Earth's rotation will slow when we connect a clock at altitude > with one on the surface with a torque tube. :o) depends on what is on the other end of the torque tube. A 3 sol_mass neutron star at 300,000 km above the earth's north pole should have some effect on the rate of all clocks on the earths surface. :) -- bz please pardon my infinite ignorance, the set-of-things-I-do-not-know is an infinite set. bz+sp(a)ch100-5.chem.lsu.edu remove ch100-5 to avoid spam trap
From: Kim B on 27 Jul 2005 13:43 On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 22:41:00 GMT, H@..(Henri Wilson) wrote: >Clocks change when placed in orbit. Time doesn't. Right. All clocks do. Radioactive decays, biological, chemical, mechanical clocks all change the same way. Too bad it wasnt time that changed instead, that would have made everything much simpler Kim
From: Paul B. Andersen on 27 Jul 2005 14:36
sue jahn wrote: > "Paul B. Andersen" <paul.b.andersen(a)deletethishia.no> wrote in message news:dc7lbe$9ft$1(a)dolly.uninett.no... > >>Sue... wrote: >>> >>><<The principle of local Lorentz invariance states >>>that the outcome of any local non-gravitational >>>experiment carried out in a freely falling reference >>>frame is independent of the velocity of that frame, >>>while the principle of local position invariance >>>holds that the outcome of any local non-gravitational >>>experiment is also independent of where and when in >>>the universe it is performed. In this context >>>"local" means confined to a suitably small region >>>of space and time, while "freely falling" means >>>falling freely under gravity with no other forces >>>acting. >>> >>>Although Einstein used it to derive general >>>relativity, his equivalence principle implies >>>only that gravitation must be described by a >>>"metric theory" - a theory in which matter >>>responds to the geometry of space-time and >>>nothing else. >><< >>>--Clifford M Will is in the McDonnell Center for the >>>Space Sciences and the Department of Physics, >>>Washington University in St Louis, Missouri, US.>> >>>http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/18/1/5/1 >> >>A fine article. >>Clifford M Will goes through a lot of experiments testing GR, >>and refers to a number of experiments which are done and >>have confirmed GR. > > > Does he mention GR? Does he, indeed. :-) >>Was your point that GR is well confirmed? > > > Did I mention GR? You gave a reference to an article about the testing of GR, an article which refers to a number of experiments confirming GR. So I suppose your point was to make us aware of that fact. >>>So... Cliff knows that the SUMO has to do something >>>really unexpected or the violation of LPI indicated >>>by GPS, will be confirmed. Of course he probably >>>lacks the *faith* that motivates *true believers*. >>>http://www.bassirat.net/newspics/ASIE%20CENTRALE/normal_200309122253madrassa.jpg >> >>I haven't got the foggiest idea of what you are babbling about. >>And I suppose there is no point in asking what the LPI which >>is violated by the GPS is. >>You never seem to be able to explain the meaning of your words. >> > > Visit NPL and NIST and learn how clocks work. When your ignorance about atomic clocks is revealed, pretend that the ignorance is mine and not yours, eh? :-) > You can google for LPI and relativty if you don't know what it is. > > Happy hunting, > Sue... Why do you claim that the GPS indicates a violation of the Local Position Invariance principle? I am not expecting an answer, because you are never able to support your claims. I am however expecting an irrelevant reference. And you will live up to my expectations. Won't you? Paul |