Time dilation versus Speed=Distance over Time

[Harlequinne]

Maybe Einstein is incorrect. If I had digital clocks,what then?

[swansont]

Relativity has been confirmed many times over. The type of clock doesn't matter.

[Harlequinne]

Impossible.If two planes flew around the world at different speeds,one touches down first it shows a retarded time.By the same logic the rates the clocks move while the other plane is in the air touchING down the clock would show retarding in relation to the static clock aboard the plane that already landed and would show the same time when they met up.Einstein is wrong.I am sorry.

[insane_alien]

we actually went and tried that, einstein was right. it was digital clocks too.

 

we've also done it with satellites and subatomic particles. the evidence is overwhelming,

[ajb]

See Hafele, J.; Keating, R. (July 14, 1972). "Around the world atomic clocks:predicted relativistic time gains". Science 177 (4044): 166–168

 

The results have been tested to even more accuracy now. All support general relativity.

[swansont]

it was digital clocks too.

 

Well, sort of. Some of the HP5061 clocks actually had an analog display on them. And I don't think there was anything inherently digital in the electronics (though I could easily be missing something in my mental reconstruction) Of course, this is completely beside the point of the OP.

 

See Hafele, J.; Keating, R. (July 14, 1972). "Around the world atomic clocks:predicted relativistic time gains". Science 177 (4044): 166–168

 

The results have been tested to even more accuracy now. All support general relativity.

 

And the paper that follows, which gives the results.

[Janus]

Impossible.If two planes flew around the world at different speeds,one touches down first it shows a retarded time.By the same logic the rates the clocks move while the other plane is in the air touchING down the clock would show retarding in relation to the static clock aboard the plane that already landed and would show the same time when they met up.Einstein is wrong.I am sorry.

 

Sorry, no. This can be shown by considering two ships flying to Alpha Centauri. 1 at .866c and the other at .1c

 

The first takes 4.96 yrs Earth time to make the trip and records the trip as taking 2.48 years.

 

The second takes 43 years Earth time and records the trip as taking 42.78 years.

 

So when the first ship arrives it reads 2.48 yrs and the second ship has traveled 4.96 yrs of its 43 year long trip. Thus the first ship's clock will record an addtional 43-4.96 = 38.04 years while waiting for the second ship to arrive and will read a total of 38.04+2.48 = 40.52 yrs when the second ship arrives. As noted above, the second ship's clock records 42.78 years upon arrival, so there will be a 2.26 year difference between the clocks.

 

The same would be true of clocks in planes flying around the world at different speeds; the clocks would differ in the end.

[swansont]

The same would be true of clocks in planes flying around the world at different speeds; the clocks would differ in the end.

 

Which has been done, so this is not merely a theoretical prediction. It has experimental evidence to support it.

[Copernicus_Meme]

Impossible.If two planes flew around the world at different speeds,one touches down first it shows a retarded time.By the same logic the rates the clocks move while the other plane is in the air touchING down the clock would show retarding in relation to the static clock aboard the plane that already landed and would show the same time when they met up.Einstein is wrong.I am sorry.

 

Impossible? On the contrary, validated up the yin yang so to speak.

 

Here are a few sources on the experimental basis of SR (that's Special Relativity);

 

• The Michelson and Gale Experiment (Nature 115 (1925), pg 566; Astrophys. J. 61 (1925), pg 137.)
  
• g−2 Experiments as a Test of Special Relativity: Newman et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 no. 21 (1978), pg 1355. P.S. Cooper et al., Physical Review Letters 42 (1979), pg 1386. Farley et al., Nuovo Cimento Vol 45, pg 281 (1966). Bailey et al., Nuovo Cimento 9A, pg 369 (1972). Bailey et al., Phys. Lett. 68B no. 2 (1977), pg 191.
  
• The Brookhaven experiment to measure g−2 for muons, http://www.g-2.bnl.gov/
  
• The Fizeau Experiment: Bilger et al., Phys. Rev. A5 (1972) pg 591. James and Sternberg, Nature 197 (1963), pg 1192.
  
• Particle-Based Experiments: Nguyen, H.H., “CPT results from KTeV”, (2001). arXiv:hep-ex/0112046. Schwingenheuer, B. et al., “CPT tests in the neutral kaon system”, Phys. Rev. Lett., 74, pg 4376–4379, (1995). Carey, R.M. et al., “New Measurement of the Anomalous Magnetic Moment of the Positive Muon”, Phys. Rev. Lett., 82, pg 1632–1635, (1999). (Reinhardt's Ph.D. thesis, 2005)
  
• Calorimetric Test of Special Relativity: .R. Walz, H.P. Noyes and R.L. Carezani, Physical Review A29 (1984), pg 2110.
  
• Twin Paradox: C. Alley, “Proper Time Experiments in Gravitational Fields with Atomic Clocks, Aircraft, and Laser Light Pulses,” in Quantum Optics, Experimental Gravity, and Measurement Theory, eds. Pierre Meystre and Marlan O. Scully, Proceedings Conf. Bad Windsheim 1981, 1983 Plenum Press New York, ISBN 0-306-41354-X, pg 363–427. Bailey et al., “Measurements of relativistic time dilation for positive and negative muons in a circular orbit,” Nature 268 (July 28, 1977) pg 301.
  
• Doppler Shift Measurements: McGowan et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 no. 3 (1993), pg 251. Olin et al., Phys. Rev. D8 no. 6 (1973), pg 1633. Mandelberg and Witten, Journal Opt. Soc. Amer. 52, pg 529 (1962).
  
• Measurements of Particle Lifetimes: D. Frisch and J. Smith, “Measurement of the Relativistic Time Dilation Using Mesons”, Am. J. Phys. 31 (1963) 342. Ayres et al., Phys. Rev. D3 no. 5 (1971), pg 1051.
  
• The Ives and Stilwell Experiment: H.E. Ives and G.R. Stilwell, “An Experimental Study of the Rate of a Moving Atomic Clock”, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 28 pg 215–226 (1938); JOSA 31 pg 369–374 (1941).
  
• Other Experiments: Coleman and Glashow, “Cosmic ray and Neutrino Tests of Special Relativity”, Coleman and Glashow, “High-Energy Tests of Lorentz Invariance”
  
• The Trouton-Noble Experiment: Tomaschek, Ann. d Phys. 78 (1926), p743; 80 (1926), pg 509.
  
• Zhang, "Special Relativity and its Experimental Foundations".
  
• The Kennedy-Thorndike Experiment
  
• Wolf and Petit, “Satellite test of special relativity using the global positioning system”, Phys. Rev. A 56, p4405 (1997).
  

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

 

A couple of more articles:

*Relativity in the Global Positioning System

 

http://www.physorg.com/news9248.html

[D H]

Welcome to Science Forums, Copernicus_Meme!

 

You're off to a good start here. Nice post. Using references adds a lot of value.

[Copernicus_Meme]

Welcome to Science Forums, Copernicus_Meme!

 

You're off to a good start here. Nice post. Using references adds a lot of value.

 

I appreciate the heartfelt yet distinctly cerebral welcome, it's good to be here.