Questions of Light and Space (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Saturday, October 09, 2010, 19:21 (5136 days ago) @ George Jelliss

George, -Let me start by saying welcome back! I hope to see you around more.-As to the thread here, there is a link in my first post regarding the fact that satellite clocks are NOT due to general or special relativity as suggested in the link you provided.-From Physicsforums.com:-Hi everybody-In his paper - "The Confrontation between General Relativity and
Experiment: A 1998 Update" - http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9811036
Clifford M. Will wrote on page 12 that
the Global Positioning System (GPS) provides absolute
accuracies of around 15 m (even better in its military mode)
anywhere on Earth, which corresponds to 50 nanoseconds in
time accuracy at all times. Yet the difference in rate between
satellite and ground clocks as a result of special and general
relativistic effects is a whopping 40 microseconds per day
(60micros. from the gravitational redshift, and -20micros. from
time dilation). If these effects were not accurately accounted
for, GPS would fail to function at its stated accuracy.-This seems to indicate that the GPS clocks are really affected by
motion. However, in their book "Spacetime Physics - Introduction to
Special Relativity" (W. H. Freeman and Company - 1992) Edwin F.
Taylor and John Archibald Wheeler write on page 77:
We conclude that free-float motion does not affect the
structure or operation of clocks.-I'm not sure what to believe now. Does motion affect the operation of
clocks or not? Can anybody enlighten me on this?-Thanks,-Andrew A. Harland-
This is a clear case of the data not supporting the theory.-
As for light bending because of gravitation pull etc:-If it is as you say, then all data on the CMBR is completely invalid and totally useless as any form of empirical evidence because their can be no good evidence as to where the energy originated from. Either we can measure and map it, or we can not. Either physicist are guilty of gross misrepresentation of their data, or the theory outlined above is possible. Either they are able to detect it accurately enough to determine that it is moving away from us at ' 3x the speed of light in every direction' as they claim, or they are misrepresenting their actual findings. It is a simple case of 'You can not have your cake and then say it is impossible to bake said cake or write a recipe.'