Re: Relativity is a pseudoscience II. The Hafele-Keating HOAX,

It's incredible what I have to read from you and Paul.
It's like to discuss politics with fanatic democrats, or with right-wing
liberals here in Argentina.
You both DON'T THINK about the main problem to sustain your positions.
You both REPEAT what was written in a paper that tried to save face in
1971/72. Even facing ELEMENTARY INFORMATION about the impossibility of
establish a link over 15,000 miles (1971) between H-K and the USNO, you
both ARE IN FULL DENIAL.
Let me try one more time, explaining it to you AS IF YOU BOTH HAD 5
YEARS:
1) This document provides details about each segment of the flights:
https://www.masterclock.com/cmss_files/attachmentlibrary/Archived-papers/Performance-and-Results-of-Portable-Clocks-in-Aircraft-1971.pdf
2) Take the data of the eastward flights:
Day Location
04 USNO D
05 Dulles D (Pan Am 747)
   London A3 (*Pan Am 707)
   Frankfurt
   Istanbul
   Beirut
   Tehran
   New Delhi
06 Bangkok
   Hong Kong
   Tokyo  (*Pan Am 747)
   Honolulu
07 Los Angeles *AA 707)
   Dallas
   Dulles
   USNO return
Trip time 65.42 hours.
Rel time gain  -40 nsec (loss).
3) The eastward flight started and finished in Washington (USNO). In NO
CASE, any information was exchanged between the flights and the USNO.
Only when the eastward flight finished in the same place as it departed,
comparisons were made at the USNO.
The same thing happened with the westward flight.
3) The 40 nsec loss was accumulated DURING 65.42 hours. It´s about 0.61
nsec/hour, which accumulated during the entire path (USNO --> USNO).
There was NO TECHNOLOGY AVAILABLE TO SEND THE READINGS OF THE CLOCKS,
FROM THE DIFFERENT AIRPORTS TO THE USNO that could have the precision to
account for NANOSECONDS lost on each stage (about -8nsec/stage).
No HF link or satellite link could have provided such precision at each
stage, considering HOW PRIMITIVE were the communications in 1971.
Geostationary satellites were a novelty, and the delay involved using
them was no less than 240 milliseconds. With this level of delay for ONE
SATELLITE JUMP, considering other random delays, measuring remotely -8
nsec/segment WAS IMPOSSIBLE.
And even today, repeating the experiment using real time data exchange
is beyond the capabilities of current technology (forget using GPS).
4) So, the DIFFERENCES between USNO clocks and H-K clocks could be
measured ONLY once ALL THE CLOCKS were placed side by side in the USNO,
once each flight finished.
Read the Hafele paper that I cited above, and stop talking nonsense
about INTERMEDIATE data exchange with the USNO. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
If the above don't penetrate in your thick skulls, you both are beyond
cure. Find another hobby.
**************************************************************
There were 4 traveling clocks, identified by serial number in
Fig. 1 of H&K's results paper: 361, 408, 447 and 120.
From Fig 1, it should be obvious that while on the ground at
home, they continuously compared the clocks against USNO time
(as well as against each other). While in the air and during
short layovers in different cities of the world, they could
not compare against USNO, but they did continue the regular
inter-comparisons of the clocks against each other.
Most of what you have written about how you believe H&K
collected their data is sheer fantasy.
*************************************************************