A Fatal Flaw In Relativity

[Humblemun]

The Hafele–Keating experiment was a test of the theory of relativity. In October 1971, Joseph C. Hafele, a physicist, and Richard E. Keating, an astronomer, took four cesium-beam atomic clocks aboard commercial airliners. They flew twice around the world, first eastward, then westward, and compared the clocks against others that remained at the United States Naval Observatory.

 

 

General relativity predicts an additional effect, in which an increase in gravitational potential due to altitude speeds the clocks up. That is, clocks at higher altitude tick faster than clocks on Earth's surface.

 

But there is a flaw to this logic. It works for atomic clocks, agreed, but it doesn't work for simple pendulum grandfather clocks. When these clocks are at a greater altitude close to space with a much lower gravitational field, they swing slower, giving a slower tick than grandfather clocks on Earth's surface. It's the opposite effect to atomic clocks.

 

Can anyone resolve this issue, or is it indeed a fatal flaw in Einstein's Relativity?

 

Edited August 28, 2013 by Humblemun

[Greg H.]

Gravity run grandfather clocks can be adjusted for changes in local gravity. But that's really beside the point.

 

For a gravity run grandfather clock, any kind of acceleration is enough to throw off the swing of the pendulum, affecting the time keeping. Additionally, they are affected by changes in temperature which affect the length of the pendulum through expansion and contraction. They are not what you'd call scientifically precise instruments.

 

So no, this is not a problem for GR. It's a problem with using the wrong tool.

 

---

See Pendulum Clock on Wikipedia for more information.

[Humblemun]

You've missed the point I think. I'd like to hear from some others first.

[Unity+]

You've missed the point I think. I'd like to hear from some others first.

But he is correct. If time dilation is based on the amount of gravity and the grandfather clock is a gravity-based clock, then the time dilation and the grand-father clock would coincide.

[krash661]

You've missed the point I think. I'd like to hear from some others first.

did you see greg's link ?

" See Pendulum Clock on Wikipedia for more information. ",

Pendulum clocks must be stationary to operate; any motion or accelerations will affect the motion of the pendulum, causing inaccuracies, so other mechanisms must be used in portable timepieces. They are now kept mostly for their decorative and antique value.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_clock#Local_gravity

Local gravity

Since the pendulum rate will increase with an increase in gravity, and local gravity varies with latitude and elevation on Earth,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pendulum_clock#Gravity-swing_pendulum

 

 

Gravity-swing pendulum

Schoolhouse regulator style pendulum wall clock

The pendulum swings with a period that varies with the square root of its effective length

Edited August 28, 2013 by krash661

[Greg H.]

You've missed the point I think. I'd like to hear from some others first.

You asked if the effect of local gravity on grandfather clocks was a fatal flaw for GR. It's not. In fact, it's expected behavior, and can be compensated for in the construction of the clock. I think I understood the point just fine.

[Humblemun]

Okay, the point I'm making is that the statement "time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" is incorrect, because grandfather clocks run slower whilst atomic clocks run faster.

[Unity+]

Okay, the point I'm making is that the statement "time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" is incorrect, because grandfather clocks run slower whilst atomic clocks run faster.

Besides the fact that grand father clocks don't work properly in moving areas, the relative increase or decrease in time-dilation is the same.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Unity+

[Humblemun]

It's a thought experiment. A pendulum in a perfect stationary geo-orbit above it'a counterpart on the Earth's surface will swing more slowly. Fact. Therefore the concept of 'time' in general mathematical equations is flawed. There is no known mechanism for the gravity force wrt relativity. If helical spinning Archimedes particles are imagined to be the mechanism to produce a force of attraction on a body in orbit, then the pendulum swinging slower makes sense. The atomic clock in the same orbit will tick faster. This is the anomaly. Extra force from gravitons decreases the speed of atomic clocks. Until we know the mechanics of how the electrons orbit the nucleus and why, this will always be a dilemma. When we do understand atomic physics in detail, I believe the spinning Archimedes screw particle will replace the currently accepted mathematical model which has no common sense mechanism.

 

I know no one here will agree with me, but wait until the Juno flyby on Oct 9th. Mainstream science predicts no anomaly, whilst I'm predicting a strong positive acceleration in addition to a lateral deviation to the left.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Humblemun

[Unity+]

It's a thought experiment. A pendulum in a perfect stationary geo-orbit above it'a counterpart on the Earth's surface will swing more slowly. Fact. Therefore the concept of 'time' in general mathematical equations is flawed. There is no known mechanism for the gravity force wrt relativity. If helical spinning Archimedes particles are imagined to be the mechanism to produce a force of attraction on a body in orbit, then the pendulum swinging slower makes sense. The atomic clock in the same orbit will tick faster. This is the anomaly. Extra force from gravitons decreases the speed of atomic clocks. Until we know the mechanics of how the electrons orbit the nucleus and why, this will always be a dilemma. When we do understand atomic physics in detail, I believe the spinning Archimedes screw particle will replace the currently accepted mathematical model which has no common sense mechanism.

 

I know no one here will agree with me, but wait until the Juno flyby on Oct 9th. Mainstream science predicts no anomaly, whilst I'm predicting a strong positive acceleration in addition to a lateral deviation to the left.

And what is this so called Archimedes particles?

[Humblemun]

And what is this so called Archimedes particles?

Thanks for asking. I submitted an essay to the FQXi physics competition which tries to explain my way of thinking as simply as I can: Reality Was Born Analog But Will Digital Die?

[timo]

I think the jump from realizing that a pendulum doesn't work without gravity to the conclusion that relativity was flawed is a bit over-ambitious. Especially if "relativity" is supposed to mean as "relativity according to an average physicist's understanding", not as "relativity according to your understanding". Precision was not the only reason why the original experiment used atomic clocks rather than sundials. You can measure process of time by growth of bacteria cultures and then claim that lower temperatures cause slower passing of time. But most people will still take the stance that lower temperature slows down bacteria growth.

Edited August 28, 2013 by timo

[Humblemun]

Doesn't the lack of a mechanism for the gravity force bother you at all?

[imatfaal]

Doesn't the lack of a mechanism for the gravity force bother you at all?

 

!

Moderator Note

 

That's a whole new question. Can we stay on topic please. Your specific question was regarding pendulum clocks and gravity

 

 

Couple of things - you can have pendulum clocks that do not rely on gravity - torsional pendulums of a sort are used in most mechanical watches and they have been to the moon and back. Omega wind up watches were the only watches in space for many missions - you might well be able to find out how they fared in lower gravity.

 

Can a pendulum clock ever be accurate enough to register time dilation due to either relative velocity or gravity. IIRC the simple harmonic oscillation model that allows you to predict a steady and unchanging "tick" is in fact only an approximation. It holds very very well for small angles of theta (ie where sin theta --> theta) but it is an approximation. That is a theoretical limitation. I dont know what that limit would be - but technology would also put a limit on it. FYG The most accurate pendulum clocks built before quartz were accurate to about 200 microsceonds per day. At about 20000km (GPS level) above the earth the time dilation due to change in gravitational potential is 45 microseconds per day.

[timo]

Doesn't the lack of a mechanism for the gravity force bother you at all?

I am not sure I really understand what you mean by that. General Relativity is a theory of gravity - and widely believed to be the most accurate one that we currently have, in fact. It actually does predict a change in gravitational effect ("force") as a result of distance from earth.

[Humblemun]

I am not sure I really understand what you mean by that. General Relativity is a theory of gravity - and widely believed to be the most accurate one that we currently have, in fact. It actually does predict a change in gravitational effect ("force") as a result of distance from earth.

But it belies common sense. There is no physical mechanism that can be imagined within the mind of a rational human being.

Okay, the point I'm making is that the statement "time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" is incorrect, because grandfather clocks run slower whilst atomic clocks run faster.

"time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" doesn't apply to pendulums. That's my point. Give me some slack please.

Edited August 28, 2013 by Humblemun

[John Cuthber]

A pendulum in a perfect stationary geo-orbit above it'a counterpart on the Earth's surface will swing more slowly. Fact.

A pendulum clock in a swimming pool also won't work. Fact.

So what?

 

"But it belies common sense. There is no physical mechanism that can be imagined within the mind of a rational human being."

But graviton exchange "can be imagined within the mind of a rational human being.".

Edited August 28, 2013 by John Cuthber

[timo]

Well, call me irrational: But in my mind I can well imagine that a swinging pendulum, a system whose dynamics is driven by the interplay of gravitational force an inertia, is affected by a change in gravitational force. Anyways: I believe our views on how a pendulum works are quite different, and that neither of us would benefit if I continued to contribute to this thread.

 

[Strange]

But it belies common sense. There is no physical mechanism that can be imagined within the mind of a rational human being.

 

The mechanism is the geometry of space-time. Obviously it is hard to imagine 4-dimensional curvature but that is why we use mathematics so we are not dependent on the limits of our ability to visualise.

 

But what does common sense or the ability to imagine have to do with it? There is no necessity for the universe to obey your personal concept of common sense. To others, it seems perfectly sensible.

[swansont]

Okay, the point I'm making is that the statement "time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" is incorrect, because grandfather clocks run slower whilst atomic clocks run faster.

GR doesn't predict that grandfather clocks run slow deeper in a gravitational potential. It predicts that time runs slower. To measure it you need a clock whose mechanism doesn't rely on the local value of g (and one with a much better stability that a grandfather clock can provide)

[Janus]

But it belies common sense. There is no physical mechanism that can be imagined within the mind of a rational human being.

"time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" doesn't apply to pendulums. That's my point. Give me some slack please.

 

But it does apply to pendulums. Assume you have two pendulums of identical construction. One is placed on top of a mountain and the other at sea level. Next to each pendulum is an accelerometer, a device that can measure the local strength of gravity.

 

Now let's say that the sea level observer compares his pendulum to the mountain top one. He has the accelerometer readings for both. It is a simple matter for him to calculate how much slower the mountain top pendulum should be compared to his own due to the weaker gravity at the top of the mountain. However, what he will actually note is that the mountain top pendulum will not swing as slow as he calculated it would. It still swings slower than his own, just not by as much. The difference between the pendulum's predicted rate due to local gravity and its actual rate, is the time dilation.

[John Cuthber]

If I get a nice, old fashioned (i.e. uncompensated) pendulum clock, and a modern quartz watch I can use the "clock" as a reasonable thermometer (provided I'm patient and not trying to measure rapid changes in temperature).

So, since pendulum clocks don't measure time (they measure temperature) it's no shock that they don't behave in the way that GR expects a clock to behave.

 

Equally, I could use the "clock" together with a means to measure the time, to measure the local value of g.

If I put the "clock" in orbit I could verify that it stops.

Big deal.

Edited August 28, 2013 by John Cuthber

[Delta1212]

You claim that GR provides no mechanism acceptable to a sensible, rational mind. You also claim that the inability to measure time dilation on a broken clock is a failure of GR.

 

Perhaps we have different ideas of what is sensible and rational.

[Mellinia]

Okay, the point I'm making is that the statement "time runs faster in a lower gravitational field" is incorrect, because grandfather clocks run slower whilst atomic clocks run faster.

My dear, clocks measure time, not produce it. You might want to google "second" for the accurate definition of a second.

[swansont]

I want a TOE that a layman can understand.

 

And I want a pony. Not going to happen. What we do have, in the context of this discussion, is relativity. Which is quite successful.