Thanks for your input Carl. Your points are certainly valid, but as far as I am concerned your objection is not. The reason that it is not valid is that we take it as read (I do anyway), that the time dilation is from the point of view of the observer - which in this case and in most cases on Earth is the man at the North Pole. If that statement is in error, then why bother mentioning him at all? As for ignoring GR, it is a convenience which makes life simpler and can be used later if required. <div><br></div><div>Tom Hollings.<br>
<br>
----Original Message----<br>
From: cj@mb-soft.com<br>
Date: 02/11/2016 15:12<br>
To: <physics@tuks.nl><br>
Subj: [Physics] Real Time<br>
<br>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Your group certainly has many creative ideas
regarding Einstein and Relativity. Unfortunately, nearly all of the
assumptions are not correct.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">The Earth provides wonderful evidence for us,
moostly because we have really accurate data rwegarding its (Equatorial)
diameter and its precise sidereal rotation period.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Specifically regarding your
discussions:</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Someone standing at the North Pole does not have
"velocity" nor "acceleration" and so the Lorentz-Fitzgerald (beta) factor is
exactly ONE. (velocity is ZERO).</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Fine. The more interesting situation is for a
man standing at the Equator. He DOES have a precisely known (v) there
and so it is easy to calculate the Time Dilation Factor to be <span style="font-weight: bold; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 18pt;">0.999 999 999 998 796
560</span></span></div>
<div><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">And so everyone ASSUMES that he would EXPERIENCE
Time Dilation there. There are TWO major errors in those
assumptions. (a) HE would not experience any Relativity issues, and only
the OBSERVER at the North Pole (motionless) would SEE any such effects.
Nearly everyone is wrong about this error.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">(b) the other error in assumptions is due to
everyone IGNORING General Relativity, which happens to have its own time-rate
effect. It is called the Equivalency Principle. (Surprisingly) this
effect happens to be the OPPOSITE of Special Relativity's Time Dilation.
Thaht calculation (onn Earth) is also easy and precise to do, and it is
<span style="font-weight: bold; font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: 18pt;">1.000 000 000 001 203
440</span></span></div>
<div><span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: 18pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Oddly enough, since BOTH Relativity time-rate
effects must constantly apply to our guy att the Equator, we must MULTIPLY these
two effects to find the ACTUAL Relativity time-rate effect for that guy at the
Equator. That simple product is EXACTLY ONE.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">In other words, the ACTUAL effect due to BOTH forms
of Relativity exactly cancel each other out. There is NO DIFFERENCE in
time rate between the guy at the North Pole nd anyone at the Equator, or
anywhere else on Earth.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Only when someone is in a Non-Inertial Reat Frame,
that is, accelerating, will an OBSERVER see any time-rate effects.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">A complete explanation is at <a href="http://mb-soft.com/public4/dilation.html">http://mb-soft.com/public4/dilation.html</a></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">Carl Johnson</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;">(A Theoretical Physicist, educated at the
University of Chicago)</span></div>
<div><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt;"></span> </div>
_______________________________________________<br>Physics mailing list<br>Physics@tuks.nl<br>http://mail.tuks.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/physics<br><br>
<br>
</div>