Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Contrary to statements made in these forums by relativists, it does not
require speeds close to the speed of light. That is a cop-out.

Time dilation should be detectable at 30 km/sec.

This is precisely what the MMX was designed to detect.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Contrary to statements made in these forums by relativists, it does not require speeds close to the speed of light. That is a cop-out.

Time dilation should be detectable at 30 km/sec.

This is precisely what the MMX was designed to detect.

“Have you ever listened to someone for a while and wondered …
‘Who ties your shoelaces for you?’” – Mom’s Got Ink

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Gary: Time dilation is the difference in arrival times of the two beams
in the MMX caused by the ether wind. No such dilation took place. Time
dilation is disproven.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Nonsense.

Contrary to statements made in these forums by relativists, it does not require speeds close to the speed of light. That is a cop-out.

Who said so?

Time dilation should be detectable at 30 km/sec.

Of course it is. (and also at much lower velocities)
What you can detect depends only on the accuracy
to which you can measure.

This is precisely what the MMX was designed to detect.

More nonsense.
Michelson ever said anything even remotely like that,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 16.11.2024 o 12:06, J. J. Lodder pisze:

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Nonsense.

Contrary to statements made in these forums by relativists, it does not
require speeds close to the speed of light. That is a cop-out.

Who said so?

Time dilation should be detectable at 30 km/sec.

Of course it is.

In the meantime in the real world, however,
forbidden by your bunch of idiots "improper"
clocks keep measuring improper t'=t in
improper seconds.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

J.J.: I did not say that time dilation can only be detected at speeds
close to light. Relativists at the Google relativity forum told me this.

The truth is that the difference in the arrival times of the two beams
in the MMX is precisely what time dilation properly refers to.

You have a choice. Either you admit there was no difference, or you
insist that time itself dilated, concealing the difference.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

J.J.: If time dilation existed, a difference in arrival times in the MMX
would have been detected. That it was not proves time dilation does not
exist. Your claim that it does exist is a claim that something in the
MMX concealed the difference.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-11-16 21:48:34 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

J.J.: If time dilation existed, a difference in arrival times in the MMX would have been detected. That it was not proves time dilation does not exist. Your claim that it does exist is a claim that something in the
MMX concealed the difference.

The MMX is all about different arrival times. The central fringe is where
the arrival times are the same. All other fringes are because the arrival
times are different.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.

Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit
the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 17.11.2024 o 10:06, Mikko pisze:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.

Rather - to gedanke. Anyone can check GPS,
real time (as defined by your idiot guru
himself) is galilean, like always.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Den 16.11.2024 22:45, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Please quote what you are responding to. ========================================

J.J.: I did not say that time dilation can only be detected at speeds
close to light.

It is idiocy to claim that you didn't say what
you posted the previous day:

|Den 15.11.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities of
Close to the Speed Light

Relativists at the Google relativity forum told me this.

Don't claim that "someone said" without reference or a literal quote.

The truth is that the difference in the arrival times of the two beams
in the MMX is precisely what time dilation properly refers to.

This is incredible stupid!

You are claiming that "time dilation" is impossible
because the speed of light is isotropic. :-D

----------------------

You have no clue what "time dilation" is.

Given an inertial frame with two synchronised clocks A1 and A2
a distance L from each other.
Clock B is moving at the speed v in the inertial frame, and passing
the two clocks.
NOTE: all three clocks are running with their proper rate,
advancing one second per second.

Clock B is adjacent to A1
==========================
A1 and A2 show t₁, B shows τ₁:

B->v
---|--------------|---------------->
A1 L A2


Clock B is adjacent to A2
==========================
A1 and A2 show t₂, B shows τ₂:

B->v
---|--------------|---------------->
A1 L A2

According to SR:
Δt = t₂-t₁ = L/v
Δτ = τ₂-τ₁ = (L/v)⋅√(1 −v²/c²)

Δτ/Δt = √(1 −v²/c²)

This is "time dilation".
Note that no clock "dilates". All clocks run at their proper rate.

https://paulba.no/pdf/Mutual_time_dilation.pdf

You have a choice. Either you admit there was no difference, or you
insist that time itself dilated, concealing the difference.

--
Paul

https://paulba.no/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 16 Nov 2024 3:47:35 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen wrote:

Gary: Time dilation is the difference in arrival times of the two beams
in the MMX caused by the ether wind. No such dilation took place.

Exactly, therefore, there is no ether wind. If there is an ether,
it doesn't have the property of motion. Or the ether is dragged by
the mass of the earth (which is refuted by starlight aberration).

"The aberration of light, together with Lorentz's elaboration of
Maxwell's electrodynamics, the moving magnet and conductor problem,
the negative aether drift experiments, as well as the Fizeau
experiment, led Albert Einstein to develop the theory of special
relativity in 1905, which presents a general form of the equation
for aberration in terms of such theory."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aberration_(astronomy)

Time dilation is disproven.

On the contrary, relativity predicts a null result for the MMX.
Time dilation occurs when components of measurement are in
relative motion. There is no relative motion among the
components of the MMX (except for the possibility of an ether).
Null result = no ether motion, and that is all that was confirmed.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

J.J.: If time dilation existed, a difference in arrival times in the MMX would have been detected. That it was not proves time dilation does not exist. Your claim that it does exist is a claim that something in the
MMX concealed the difference.

No quoted text, no reply,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.

Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit
the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

Amost there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog <tomyee3@gmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 19:03:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of >>> Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe. >>
Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit >> the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

Amost there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

Clock with 8?10^?19 Systematic Uncertainty
Alexander Aeppli, Kyungtae Kim, William Warfield, Marianna S.
Safronova, and Jun Ye
Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 023401 – Published 10 July 2024 https://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.023401

For a semi-popular account:
Reducing Uncertainty in an Optical Lattice Clock
Han-Ning Dai and Yu-Ao Chen
July 29, 2024• Physics 17, 118
https://physics.aps.org/articles/v17/118

Yes, but 30 cm altitude difference
is what has been demonstrated already.
Again, c^2 = 9x10^16,
so a clock stability of 10^18 corresponds to an altitude resolution
of about 1 cm, [1]

Jan

[1] See that Wikipedia article on chronometric leveling
(aka relativistic geodesy) that needs to be written.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko: Time dilation was not detected in the MMX.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

J.J.: Do you think there was a time dilation of LT in the MMX?

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko: Then a difference in arrival times should have been detected in
the MMX at 30km/sec.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko: The arrival times were exactly the same in the MMX. A time
dilation or LT is a claim that something magically canceled the
difference.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko: The cause of time dilation is ether. Ether does not exist, so
time dilation does not.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko: It has been admitted above that time dilation can be detected at 30km/sec. Then, the MMX should have detected it. Instead, it is merely
an interpretation. Correctly understood, time dilation is the alleged
delay in arrival times. If time dilation exists, the MMX would have
detected it. It does not exist.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 17.11.2024 o 20:50, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog pisze:

On Sun, 17 Nov 2024 19:03:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder wrote:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of >>>> Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe. >>>
Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit >>> the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

Amost  there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

Clock with 8×10^−19 Systematic Uncertainty

A lie, of course, anyone can check GPS, systematic
uncertainty is much, much bigger.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

LaurenceClarkCrossen <clzb93ynxj@att.net> wrote:

J.J.: Do you think there was a time dilation of LT in the MMX?

No quoted text, no reply,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Am Sonntag000017, 17.11.2024 um 10:06 schrieb Mikko:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.

Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit
the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

The problem with SRT:

if 'at rest' is indistinguishable from any other velocity:

how then could you assign any velocity to any object in the force free
space of SRT?

In that space you always need to have some other object, in respect to
which you measure velocity.

That reference object is usually regarded as being at rest.

E.g. we could regard our home upon planet Earth as being at rest.

So, we walk down the street at walking speed and regard ourselves as
rather slow.

But that is, of course, wrong, because the Earth rotates once per day
and circles in a huge ellipse around the Sun once per year (together
with our home).

The entire solar system swirls around the galactic center and our home
galaxy around the local cluster.

But which speed is actually ours while walking along our street???


TH

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Paul B. Andersen <relativity@paulba.no> wrote:

Den 16.11.2024 22:45, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Please quote what you are responding to. ========================================

J.J.: I did not say that time dilation can only be detected at speeds
close to light.

I said no such thing. Please stop lying about what other people said.

It is idiocy to claim that you didn't say what
you posted the previous day:

|Den 15.11.2024 22:52, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities of
Close to the Speed Light

Relativists at the Google relativity forum told me this.

Don't claim that "someone said" without reference or a literal quote.

The truth is that the difference in the arrival times of the two beams
in the MMX is precisely what time dilation properly refers to.

This is incredible stupid!

You are claiming that "time dilation" is impossible
because the speed of light is isotropic. :-D

----------------------

You have no clue what "time dilation" is.

Given an inertial frame with two synchronised clocks A1 and A2
a distance L from each other.
Clock B is moving at the speed v in the inertial frame, and passing
the two clocks.
NOTE: all three clocks are running with their proper rate,
advancing one second per second.

Correct of course. Question for LaurenceClarkCrossen:
How do you think any clock could possibly do anything else?
(unless it is broken)

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-11-17 21:39:08 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Mikko: The arrival times were exactly the same in the MMX.

At central fringe. At other fringes they are not.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-11-17 19:03:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of
Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe.

Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit
the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

Amost there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

Gravitational effect has already been demonstrated on smaller altitude difference:

https://www.snexplores.org/article/a-new-clock-shows-how-gravity-warps-time-even-over-tiny-distances


However, Experiments with moving things are harder. All moving parts
tend to generate noise. Clocks are easiest to compare when stationary
side by side but then at least one of them must be accerated between
the comparisons and one must ensure that the acceleration does not
affect the clocks rhythm.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 2024-11-17 21:45:06 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Mikko: Then a difference in arrival times should have been detected in
the MMX at 30km/sec.

According to some theories. Both special and general relavitiy predict
zero. But so does FitzGerald's contraction theory, so the experiment
does not tell about time dilation.

--
Mikko

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 18.11.2024 o 11:23, Mikko pisze:

On 2024-11-17 21:45:06 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Mikko: Then a difference in arrival times should have been detected in
the MMX at 30km/sec.

According to some theories. Both special and general relavitiy predict
zero. But so does FitzGerald's contraction theory, so the experiment
does not tell about time dilation.

No it doesn't, and experiments don't say in general.
Time dilation is only said by a mumbling inconsistently
idiot and a number of brainwashed fanatics worshipping
him.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-17 21:45:06 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Mikko: Then a difference in arrival times should have been detected in
the MMX at 30km/sec.

According to some theories. Both special and general relavitiy predict
zero. But so does FitzGerald's contraction theory, so the experiment
does not tell about time dilation.

Right. MMX is a worthless experiment for learning about nature.
It's zero doesn't tell us anything much.
In the decades following it a great many theories were advanced
to 'explain' it.
Michelson himself for example thought that he had proved
complete aether dragging by the Earth.

Until Einstein 1905 put matters right of course,
and after that it had become a triviality,
not worth mentioning, because the answer is inmediately obvious,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 18.11.2024 o 17:46, J. J. Lodder pisze:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-17 21:45:06 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Mikko: Then a difference in arrival times should have been detected in
the MMX at 30km/sec.

According to some theories. Both special and general relavitiy predict
zero. But so does FitzGerald's contraction theory, so the experiment
does not tell about time dilation.

Right. MMX is a worthless experiment for learning about nature.
It's zero doesn't tell us anything much.
In the decades following it a great many theories were advanced
to 'explain' it.
Michelson himself for example thought that he had proved
complete aether dragging by the Earth.

Until Einstein 1905 put matters right of course,
and after that it had become a triviality,
not worth mentioning, because the answer is inmediately obvious,

Oh, correct answers are always soooo obvious
after correct brainwashing.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-17 19:03:25 +0000, J. J. Lodder said:

Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> wrote:

On 2024-11-15 21:52:05 +0000, LaurenceClarkCrossen said:

Time Dilation Can Only be Detected at Velocities Close to the Speed of >>> Light

Is one tenth of c close? At that speed time dilation is easy to observe. >>
Time dilation is observed at the speed of an aeroplane.

Oscillators currently studied in laboratories will in near future permit >> the detection of time dilation at walking speed.

Amost there:
0.3 meter of altitude is equivalent to about 9 km/h in speed.
More than walking, but already less than running,

Gravitational effect has already been demonstrated on smaller altitude difference:

https://www.snexplores.org/article/a-new-clock-shows-how-gravity-warps-time-ev

en-over-tiny-distances

Yes, that has been mentioned here several times already.
But that is inside one, not for an entire clock.

However, Experiments with moving things are harder. All moving parts
tend to generate noise. Clocks are easiest to compare when stationary
side by side but then at least one of them must be accerated between
the comparisons and one must ensure that the acceleration does not
affect the clocks rhythm.

Has also been done already, with a van-mounted strontium clock. <https://phys.org/news/2018-02-optical-clock-gravitation.html>

They don't talk about the Lorentz factors involved in driving the car,
but they must have compensated for them to get the gravity measurements
right.

One of the things the nutters here tend to forget
is that physicsts are not working all the time
to 'prove relativity right'.
Relativity is standard 'unproblematic background knowledge'.
It will be demonstated explicitly only when some parameter
can be pushed back by another decade.

They are out to do more interesting things.
Standard relativistic corrections are applied as a matter of course,
when and where needed,

Jan

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

W dniu 19.11.2024 o 09:41, J. J. Lodder pisze:

One of the things the nutters here tend to forget
is that physicsts are not working all the time
to 'prove relativity right'.
Relativity is standard 'unproblematic background knowledge'.

While in the real world - forbidden by
your bunch of idiots "improper" clocks
keep measuring improper t'=t in improper
seconds.

They are out to do more interesting things.
Standard relativistic corrections are applied as a matter of course,
when and where needed,

A lie, of course - no such things and
the whole ingeniopus concept of your
idiot guru was - forbidding corrections,
as they violate some moronic symmetry.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)