Relavistic Time Dilation Test Fraud

Jan: I also think that clock slowing in the GPS is entirely due to gravitational interaction and SR does *not* play a part in this whatsoever.

On the GPS sat there is a centripetal acceleration and that and the orbital velocity are related inexctricably by an equation. TVF is an expert in these affairs. (a = v^2/r, I believe)

But we also know from the equivalence principle that acceleration due to free fall and gravity are equivalent effects, reducing to the equivalence of inertial and gravitational mass.

So, in agreement with Jan and 123...0, and in a more physical sense than formal logic, why should speed and relative motion have to do anything with clock slowing, other than gravitational effects only? The velocity of the GPS sat, under the influence of gravity produces a centripetal acceleration and that is what in my opinion effects the clock rate, and not the speed directly.

Then,it is free falling acceleration, which is equivalent to gravity, that slows clocks and not velocity by itself. It just happens that to get that centripetal acceleration in place we need the velocity but that is not the main cause of the slowing.

It may be, Jan and 123...0, that a lot of pulling of legs has been talking place just to conform observations to a popular theory in Physics, that is Relativity in general, whether SR or LR. This in my opinion is an effort to avoid a collapse of the foundations set in the 20th century based on this relativity concept. Too may things are at stake and too many will loose face if this relativity thing goes down the drain.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Enrico</i>
<br />Jan: I also think that clock slowing in the GPS is entirely due to gravitational interaction and SR does *not* play a part in this whatsoever.

It may be, Jan and 123...0, that a lot of pulling of legs has been talking place just to conform observations to a popular theory in Physics, that is Relativity in general, whether SR or LR. This in my opinion is an effort to avoid a collapse of the foundations set in the 20th century based on this relativity concept. Too may things are at stake and too many will loose face if this relativity thing goes down the drain.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">


GR is a true seminal result. SR, on the other hand, is inherently pathalogical, so I'm really surprised that SR has such a high status.



"It only takes one white crow to proof that not all crows are black."

Assuming the effect is real and I have no doubt it is real; the cause is the thing to be found and the main mystery. The model that says clocks slow is just a method to correct the difference that is caused by something. My studies indicate different conclusions than everyone else is attempting to produce here. I see this mystery as linked to redshift of the Hubble kind. And if one does the math it can be seen the scale of the cause if modeled as redshift is about the same as the Hubble Constant. This scale seems to show up in other mystery motion in gravity structures. You need to slow down a little bit and see the difference modeling methods make in what conclusions are drawn rather than favor one model over another.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by 1234567890</i>
<br />From what I've read, they bundled velocity and gravitation together as corrections to the orbiting clocks so this so-called "time-dilation" could be entirely due to a misjudgment of the strength of gravitational field at that elevation in space.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

To better appreciate what is happening, let's simplify. First, SR is now falsified in favor of LR by the six experiments showing that gravitational and electrodynamic forces propagate strongly FTL in forward time -- something impossible in SR. That point was made in my "Foundations of Physics" paper with Vigier. This means there is no such thing in nature as "time dilation". What happens in GPS is clock-slowing, with nothing happening to time itself. Anyone who has ever owned a wrist watch is familiar with the concept that clocks can run fast or slow without anything happening to time itself.

Next, we note that gravitational potential and orbital velocity are not measured as accurately as they can be calculated. For example, for circular orbits, potential = vecocity^2 = GM/r, which depends only on the source mass and its distance. So the separation of effects is done by calculation, not by measurement.

Third, the slowing mechanism is well understood. The local gravitational potential field is elysium, the light-carrying medium. Its density increases near masses. As happens for waves in most mediums, light waves propagate slower when the medium gets denser. That slowing effect is confirmed by direct measurement for laser and radar ranging experiments. But components of atomic clocks are effected by elysium density in the same way, and slow by the same proprotional amount as light does. That is why clocks tick slower in a denser elysium field (stronger gravitational potential).

Lastly, note that increased density of elysium can be simulated by motion, because a moving body encounters more elysium entities per unit time, just as a resting body in denser elysium would. So velocity squared and potential are not only mathematically equal, but produce the same kind of physical response, a slowing of elysium-dependent physical processes.

It is true that we cannot separate the potential and velocity contributions for any one satellite clock. But these can be separated by comparing them to ground clocks, or by measuring the potential effect by itself, as is done with laser beams and radar ranging.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">unless they have actually stopped the satellites in orbit to test for this difference, it's impossible to conclude whether relative velocity had anything to do with the time dilation. From what I've read, this hasn't been done.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

This has been done conceptually with ground clocks. Although no clock has been taken to the actual poles of the Earth where the velocity effect is zero, they have been taken to high latitudes and the velocity effect is seen to approach zero. But the observed potential effect remains in excellent agreement with calculations even when the velocity effect goes to zero.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Even more, I don't believe the information available to the public on the general specs of GPS, including the SR and GR corrections are accurate. I don't expect our Secretary of Defense nor any CEO of a corporation to give away sensitive trade secrets.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

GPS data is now in the public domain, so you can get some and analyze it yourself. I did my analyses of GPS raw psuedo-range and delta-range data while it was still classified, but nothing has changed since then except removal of the encryption of the signals. You can read about my analyses, and how to analyse such data in general, at metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter.asp

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">if a Cesium clock indeed runs slower when moving faster, it does not do so under SR nor any other R.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

It should run slower under LR for simple, classical reasons. -|Tom|-

TVF:

The local gravitational potential field is elysium, the light-carrying medium. Its density increases near masses.

Is this a general statement relating to gravity and light or specific to the Meta Model? I cannot see this as a physics statement but only as a metaphysics one. What is the justification for calling a gravitational potential a light-carrying medium? We know that light rays are bent by gravitational potential but what is the disturbance inflicted on the potential by light according to the law of action-reaction? We know that a medium where a wave is present is disturbed in some way to cause that wave. Are you disputing the particle nature of light?

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by tvanflandern</i>
<br /><blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by 1234567890</i>
<br />From what I've read, they bundled velocity and gravitation together as corrections to the orbiting clocks so this so-called "time-dilation" could be entirely due to a misjudgment of the strength of gravitational field at that elevation in space.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

To better appreciate what is happening, let's simplify. First, SR is now falsified in favor of LR by the six experiments showing that gravitational and electrodynamic forces propagate strongly FTL in forward time -- something impossible in SR. That point was made in my "Foundations of Physics" paper with Vigier. This means there is no such thing in nature as "time dilation". What happens in GPS is clock-slowing, with nothing happening to time itself. Anyone who has ever owned a wrist watch is familiar with the concept that clocks can run fast or slow without anything happening to time itself.

Next, we note that gravitational potential and orbital velocity are not measured as accurately as they can be calculated. For example, for circular orbits, potential = vecocity^2 = GM/r, which depends only on the source mass and its distance. So the separation of effects is done by calculation, not by measurement.

Third, the slowing mechanism is well understood. The local gravitational potential field is elysium, the light-carrying medium. Its density increases near masses. As happens for waves in most mediums, light waves propagate slower when the medium gets denser. That slowing effect is confirmed by direct measurement for laser and radar ranging experiments. But components of atomic clocks are effected by elysium density in the same way, and slow by the same proprotional amount as light does. That is why clocks tick slower in a denser elysium field (stronger gravitational potential).

Lastly, note that increased density of elysium can be simulated by motion, because a moving body encounters more elysium entities per unit time, just as a resting body in denser elysium would. So velocity squared and potential are not only mathematically equal, but produce the same kind of physical response, a slowing of elysium-dependent physical processes.

It is true that we cannot separate the potential and velocity contributions for any one satellite clock. But these can be separated by comparing them to ground clocks, or by measuring the potential effect by itself, as is done with laser beams and radar ranging.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">unless they have actually stopped the satellites in orbit to test for this difference, it's impossible to conclude whether relative velocity had anything to do with the time dilation. From what I've read, this hasn't been done.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

This has been done conceptually with ground clocks. Although no clock has been taken to the actual poles of the Earth where the velocity effect is zero, they have been taken to high latitudes and the velocity effect is seen to approach zero. But the observed potential effect remains in excellent agreement with calculations even when the velocity effect goes to zero.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Even more, I don't believe the information available to the public on the general specs of GPS, including the SR and GR corrections are accurate. I don't expect our Secretary of Defense nor any CEO of a corporation to give away sensitive trade secrets.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

GPS data is now in the public domain, so you can get some and analyze it yourself. I did my analyses of GPS raw psuedo-range and delta-range data while it was still classified, but nothing has changed since then except removal of the encryption of the signals. You can read about my analyses, and how to analyse such data in general, at metaresearch.org/solar%20system/gps/absolute-gps-1meter.asp

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">if a Cesium clock indeed runs slower when moving faster, it does not do so under SR nor any other R.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

It should run slower under LR for simple, classical reasons. -|Tom|-

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I guess under your description of LR, which assumes assymetry
between the frames, clock-slowing could exist. I also think
that different densities of "space-stuff", which you call elysium,
is a great explanation for gravity using first principles, but instead of having gravitons providing for the momentum exchange, we merely assume that space is attracted to (or equivalently, repels), matter.

I think gravitons in the MM are too problematical, especially
when you introduce a space that can possess different densities.
Why do you need the elysium if you have gravitons? Seems a little
redundant and an ad hoc device to explain the refraction of light
through a gravitational field.