To Joe: I have heard from several sources that some kind of elaborate
experiment is being planned involving clocks in space and on the ground.
I have never heard it described or explained. Does anyone know about
this planned experiment? I can't imagine why existing GPS clocks are
not sufficient.

Daniel Weston wrote:
: To Joe: I have heard from several sources that some kind of elaborate
: experiment is being planned involving clocks in space and on the ground.
: I have never heard it described or explained. Does anyone know about
: this planned experiment? I can't imagine why existing GPS clocks are
: not sufficient.

Because the GPS clock is designed to run at
a different rate than the Earth clock, did you think
they are identical to Earth clocks?

Consider the tower experiment. And use four
identical clocks (made of the emitter material used
in the tower experiment.

Place two at the top and two at the bottom.
See that the frequency of the signals going up is
slowed toward the red, and the signals going down
are speeded toward the blue.
Bring one of the upper clocks down, and
take one up.
Now the same thing happens, yet all clocks
are identical.
It is not the clocks changing rate.

Joe Fischer

--
3

On 20 Aug 2003 18:10:23 -0400, Joe Fischer
wrote:

Daniel Weston wrote:
: To Joe: I have heard from several sources that some kind of elaborate
: experiment is being planned involving clocks in space and on the ground.
: I have never heard it described or explained. Does anyone know about
: this planned experiment? I can't imagine why existing GPS clocks are
: not sufficient.

Because the GPS clock is designed to run at
a different rate than the Earth clock, did you think
they are identical to Earth clocks?

Consider the tower experiment. And use four
identical clocks (made of the emitter material used
in the tower experiment.
The Pound and Rebka experiment did not test frequency, it did not test
wavelength, it tested for change in the speed of light, without their
saying so. They oscillated the source on a speaker cone, and used an
ultra sharp analyzer at top, trying to find an offset vs the velocity
of the cone. The excursion of the cone would be about 50 Bohr radii at
10 cps!!!!! to emulate the 1 in 10^15th part change in c. The filter
was sharp enough to give a "gain" of 10^12th, but pardon me for
doubting their claim of 1% accuracy.
You think, do this do that, compare frequencies. Most experiments are
at least 3 contrived stages away from such simplistic endeavors.
The GPS is the cleanest test we have. Higher clocks run faster.
snip

Joe Fischer

--
3


Mr. Dual Space
(If you have something to say, write an equation.
If you have nothing to say, write an essay).

"John C. Polasek" wrote in message
news:3f44db3f.2764906@news-server...
On 20 Aug 2003 18:10:23 -0400, Joe Fischer
wrote:

Daniel Weston wrote:
: To Joe: I have heard from several sources that some kind of elaborate
: experiment is being planned involving clocks in space and on the
ground.
: I have never heard it described or explained. Does anyone know about
: this planned experiment? I can't imagine why existing GPS clocks are
: not sufficient.

Because the GPS clock is designed to run at
a different rate than the Earth clock, did you think
they are identical to Earth clocks?

Consider the tower experiment. And use four
identical clocks (made of the emitter material used
in the tower experiment.

The Pound and Rebka experiment did not test frequency, it did not test
wavelength, it tested for change in the speed of light, without their
saying so. They oscillated the source on a speaker cone, and used an
ultra sharp analyzer at top, trying to find an offset vs the velocity
of the cone. The excursion of the cone would be about 50 Bohr radii at
10 cps!!!!! to emulate the 1 in 10^15th part change in c. The filter
was sharp enough to give a "gain" of 10^12th, but pardon me for
doubting their claim of 1% accuracy.

You think, do this do that, compare frequencies. Most experiments are
at least 3 contrived stages away from such simplistic endeavors.
The GPS is the cleanest test we have. Higher clocks run faster.

Yes, higher speed dilates the time up there. In my opinion, higher speed of
light in vaccuum slows down the atomic clocks physically not time itself.

snip

Joe Fischer

--
3

Mr. Dual Space
(If you have something to say, write an equation.
If you have nothing to say, write an essay).

That is what I have been doing. The equation is still making me excited.

m c'^2 = m c^2 + 2 m U, where

m = mass
c' = speed of light in vaccuum far away from gravitation
c = speed of light in vaccuum under gravitation
U = gravitational poential

There is no time dilation. There is no length contraction. The space is as
flat as we can observe that is totally Euclidean. The energy is conserved
up and down, right and left (any way you look at it without any doubts)
unlike General Relativity.

What about Black Holes? Since nothing can travel beyond the speed of light
in vaccuum locally, nothing would ever fall into and beyond the event
horizon. Black Holes would never exist. Matters that are near these
would-be Black Holes would be very innert due to very low speed of light
(lack of kinetic energy). These are the dark matters we are observing
indirectly. Also, don't forget the electromagnetic force would be a lot
stronger as well.

What about unification of all forces? Gravity affects the speed of light in
vaccuum by distorting the Aether around a massive object. Since every law
in physics has the speed of light in vaccuum stampped all over it, gravity
is thus related to all other forces unlike General Relativity which is an
odd man out.

The equation I have come up with is not a new theory. It is an extention to
the good old Newtonian Law of Gravity. This equation shall bury General
Relativotu for all.

How about gravity red shift?

h f = m c'^2 = m c^2 + 2 m U = h f' + 2 m U, where

h = Planck's constant
f' = frequency of this photon far away
f = frequency under gravity

m = h f / c'^2

f = f' / (1 - 2 U / c'^2), red shifted all right

How about the reflection of star light near a solar eclipse? And how about
the precession of Mercury's obrit?

Hint: force = d/dt( momemtum ) which a dc/dr term will come out on top of
dU/dr.

Australopithecus Afarensis wrote:
: What about unification of all forces? Gravity affects the speed of light in
: vaccuum by distorting the Aether around a massive object. Since every law
: in physics has the speed of light in vaccuum stampped all over it, gravity
: is thus related to all other forces unlike General Relativity which is an
: odd man out.

Instead of speculating at the grade school level,
why don't you go to

www.relativity.livingreviews.com

and read articles and book excerpts by people
who work on relativity and the GPS system.

The url may not be correct, check google.

Joe Fischer

--
3