Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: EINSTEIN'S TWIN PARADOX - IS IT REALLY CORRECT?

  1. #1 EINSTEIN'S TWIN PARADOX - IS IT REALLY CORRECT? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    24
    There are many tests which appear to prove the Special Theory of Relativity.
    But could it be that time itself is really immutable and that another part of the formula is in action?
    One test was the journey taken by an atomic clock for many miles at high speed which when it returned to earth registered time as being slower than an earth bound atomic clock. OK - We had to accept the results of that test. I am questioning the interpretation of the results

    Recently on a TV programme we were shown American military personnel struggling to adjust the time of their atomic clocks which their GPS system needed for accuracy. Einstein vindicated yet again?


    I would dearly like to know what the time differences in the 24 Global Positioning Satellites were. If gravity is really the cause of the different time displays then those satellites whose positions tarried for a long time between earth and the moon would register a faster time display than those satellites positioned for a long time where the Sun and the Earth were to one side of it.

    Another easy trial one could make was positioning an atomic clock down a deep shaft. There would be less gravity affecting that clock comparing the time display with one on the surface. That clock would register a faster time display even though it was travelling slower than a clock on the surface of the planet. That test alone would disprove Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. Coupled with the GPS data Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity would be dead in the water.

    The whole basis of my idea is that the stronger the effect of gravity on an atomic clock then the slower it displays merely the display of time. The weaker the effect of gravity on an atomic clock then the faster it displays the passage of tme. Therefore time is immutable and so Einstein is wrong.

    Harry Schneider


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: EINSTEIN'S TWIN PARADOX - IS IT REALLY CORRECT? 
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by harryschneider
    There are many tests which appear to prove the Special Theory of Relativity.
    But could it be that time itself is really immutable and that another part of the formula is in action?
    One test was the journey taken by an atomic clock for many miles at high speed which when it returned to earth registered time as being slower than an earth bound atomic clock. OK - We had to accept that results of that test.

    Recently on a TV programme we were shown American military personnel struggling to adjust the time of their atomic clocks which their GPS system needed for accuracy. Einstein vindicated yet again?

    But wait - these satellites were in a stationary orbit round planet earth. In relation to any point on the Earth's surface they were not moving. I would concede that in relation to a point in the centre of the earth they were moving faster than a point on the surface of the Earth. But it got me thinking! Could it be that it was only the force of gravity that was affecting the time display and time itself was not be affected at all!

    I would dearly like to know what the time differences in the 24 Global Positioning Satellites were. If gravity is really the cause of the different time displays then then satellite positioned between earth and the moon would register a slower time passage than a satellite positioned where the Sun and the Earth were to one side of it.

    Another easily trial one could make was positioning an atomic clock down a deep shaft. There would be less gravity affecting that clock comparing the time display with one on the surface. That clock would register a slower time even though it was travelling slower than a clock on the surface of the planet. That test alone would disprove Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. Coupled with the GPS data Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity would be dead in the water.

    Harry Schneider
    Your first mistake is assuming that gps satellites are in geostationary orbits, they are not, they orbit closer and faster.

    Secondly, General Relativity( of which Special Relativity is a subset) already predicts gravitational effects on clocks. GR predicts that a clock in orbit would run faster due to its position in the Earth's gravity field. This is known as Gravitational tim dilation. Adjusting GPS satellites requires taking both the effects from speed and gravity into account. (GR time dilation has also been tested.)


    One thing to keep in mind about Gravitational time dilation is that it depends on a difference in gravitational potential not on gravitational force. So a clock floating in space far away from the Earth would feel zero force and run faster than one sitting on the surface of the Earth. While your clock sitting in a mine shaft would feel also feel less force than the one on the surface, but because it is deeper into the Earth's gravity field, it will run slower than one on the surface.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    24
    I would dearly STILL like to know what the time differences in the 24 Global Positioning Satellites were. If gravity is really the cause of the different time displays then then satellites positioned between earth and the moon for a long time would register a faster time passage than those satellites positioned where the Sun and the Earth were to one side of it.

    Another easy trial one could make was positioning an atomic clock down a deep shaft. There would be less gravity affecting that clock comparing the time display with one on the surface. That clock would register a faster time display even though it was travelling slower than a clock on the surface of the planet. That test alone would disprove Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. Coupled with the GPS data Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity would be dead in the water.

    I would STILL dearly like to see the results of the trial described by me.
    Harry Schneider
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Moderator Moderator Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2,220
    Quote Originally Posted by harryschneider
    I would dearly STILL like to know what the time differences in the 24 Global Positioning Satellites were. If gravity is really the cause of the different time displays then then satellite positioned between earth and the moon would register a slower time passage than a satellite positioned where the Sun and the Earth were to one side of it.
    Special relativity effects would cause the GPS satellite's clocks to tick slow by 7 micoseconds per day.
    General Relativity effects would cause the clocks to tick fast by 45 microseconds per day.

    The combined effects cause the satellite clocks to tick 38 microseconds per day. Thus GPS clocks are designed to tick this much slower while on the ground to compensate.


    Another easily trial one could make was positioning an atomic clock down a deep shaft. There would be less gravity affecting that clock comparing the time display with one on the surface. That clock would register a slower time even though it was travelling slower than a clock on the surface of the planet. That test alone would disprove Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity. Coupled with the GPS data Einstein's Special Theory of Relativity would be dead in the water.
    Since Relativity already(due to gravitational time dilation) predicts that such a clock would tick slower this would do nothing of the sort

    I would STILL dearly like to see the results of the trial described by me.
    Tests have already been done to test the predictions of GR, showing that a clock at the top of a tower will tick faser than one on ground level. Note that the clock at the top experiences less gravitational force than the one at the bottom.
    You are entitled to your supposition but science demands proof.
    What supposition? I'm telling you what Relativity predicts and how actual experiments have borne out these predictions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    24
    Thanks to Janus I have altered the errors of symantics in my original postulation. I believe it reads better now and although through no fault of his Janus's remarks seem odd. My apologies.
    Harry Schneider
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •