[Physics] Physics Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2

[Doug Marett]

Hi Carl,

    Weren't you the one who also argued that the Sagnac effect isn't real??
Considering I have observed the Sagnac effect thousands of times in
experiments, I guess I must be hallucinating : )
So now you are also saying the Hafele and Keating results are fake??
Doug

On Fri, Nov 23, 2018 at 12:45 PM <cj at mb-soft.com> wrote:

> To Doug:
>
> Your coimments i8nvolve several incorrect aspects of logic, which are the
> sources of the confusion you have.  Some of these even appear in the
> reasoning of my fellow Physicists.
>
> Your thoughts regarding your three people are based on a serious logical
> flaw, which even my associates at NASA often get wrong.  In 1971, NASA
> tried to do the Hafedle-Keating experiment, because they thought they were
> going to prove that Special Relativity existed.  At the time, I madee some
> fun of saome of my NASA friends due to the serious logical errors.  SR is
> mathematically very simple and BASA decided that they understood it.  This
> was only a few years after Einstein had died, so he was no longer around to
> explain to them that they  HAD TO ALSO account for GR (which they did NOT
> do)
>
> The scale of the SR experiment they wanted to do is very minimal, and even
> thoughy they included FOUR Cesium atomic clocks in each airplane, the
> experiment was a dismal failure due to differences between the four clocks
> having Error Factors that were greater than the result they hoped to find.
> That data is still available, and it is obvious from that data that their
> expriment had no chance of success.
>
> But worse, my friends at NASA were NOT willing to understand that GR also
> was in effect in that experiment.  They understood the simpler SR, due to
> our "velocity of rotation of the Earth" (although even those calculations
> were NOT acttually done properly).  But as we each personally revolve
> around the Earth each day, we necessarily ACCELERATE DOWNWARD (raidially)
> as part of that same motion.  That is Centripetal acceleration.  The
> Handbook of Chemistry and Physics gives the (roughly) correct value of the
> Centripetal acceleration for someone at the Equator.  That value can be
> used in the Equivalence Formula of GR to calculate the GR time rate effect
> of GR (WHICH NASA never bothered to do).
>
> We know the dimensions of the Earth really well, and so it is easy to
> calcunate the SR (time dilation) effect to a precision of 18 places.  It
> turns out that by using the Equivalence Formula, we can also calculate the
> GR time rate effect for that same person at the Equator (or anywhere else
> on earth.  I was shocked when I firat did those precise calculations about
> twenty years ago.  Since we are always BOTH "spinning" with VELOCITY" and
> "centripetally acceleration", continuously, we must MULTIPLY those two time
> rate effects to learn the NET Relativistic time effect".  Feel free to
> repeat my calculations, which are included in
> http://mb-soft.com/public4/dilation.html   The result was a shock to me,
> where the NET Relativistic time rate effect on us, no matter where we are
> on Earth, is always EXACTLY 1.000 000 000 000 000 000  .  In other words,
> the two Relativistic effects, SR and GR always exactly cancel each other
> out regarding "time rate passage"
>
> Your three "observers" each would have DIFFERENT GR time rate effects,
> which nulls out the result you claim you would find.
>
> IF those statements were TRUE, yes, it WOULD be "fattal" to Relativity,
> but since they each contain logical flaws, then no, it is fine.
>
> Your other reasoning is also not correct, but xsue to other logical flaws.
>
> I encourage you to read http://mb-soft.com/public4/dilations.html
>
> This shows some basic logical errors that nearly everyone triess to apply
> to SR.
>
> Carl Johnson
>
> _______________________________________________
> Physics mailing list
> Physics at tuks.nl
> http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.tuks.nl/pipermail/physics/attachments/20181123/5b3db88f/attachment.html>