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

Den 19.09.2024 07:27, skrev rhertz:

ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote
 

 ALL FOUR CLOCKS were used for both sets of flights. You need at least
three clocks, and preferably more, to perform correlated rate change
analysis.
  Haven't you read my description of the technique?
  Reread the papers. You've descended into complete fantasy here.
 

 Let me know HOW DID THEY SEPARATE THE DATA FROM EASTWARD AND WESTWARD
FLIGHTS by using the SAME clocks, without real time interconnection with
Washington?

Have you _still_ not read the paper, or is your problem that you are unable to read a text and understand what you read?
SEE FIG.1 and read the text:
https://paulba.no/paper/Hafele_Keating.pdf
Right before the Eastward trip, each of the four clocks were
compared to MEAN(USNO) and time and offset was measured.
During the trip none of the four clocks were compared to anything,
they were only measuring the proper duration of th trip.
The data collected during the trip were the velocity of the clocks
(speed and direction) in the ground frame, and the altitude of
the clocks, all as a function of time (measured with a 'normal' clock).
These are the necessary data to calculate the GR prediction for
the proper time of the trip.
Right after the Eastward trip  each of the four clocks were
compared to MEAN(USNO) and the time and offset offset was measured.
The same was repeated for the Westward trip.

 You HAVE TO think deeper about the complete setup for the experiment.
Your thinking fail at many levels: measuring each path separately and
the statistical manipulations that were used AFTER the experiment.
 If four clocks were used, how did they extract the data regarding
eastward and westward flights, if the separate path (east-west) CAN'T BE
DISTINGUISHED, because the four clocks accumulated the data of the whole
trip? Did they use some theoretical formulae to do so, plus the
statistical manipulation?

How confused is it possible to be?
Look at fig.1.
You can see the offset of the clocks as a function of time,
but the offset was _obviously_ not measured during the trips.
Do you have a problem with DISTINGUISH between the offsets before
and after the Eastward trip, and the offsets before and after
the Eastward trip?
In case it isn't obvious to you:
The 'offset' is the offset from MEAN(USNO).

 The experiment IS NOT CREDIBLE. It was a FRAUD, and relativists
celebrated it, because they are willing to buy anything that led to say
"Einstein was right".

You have now demonstrated in post after post that you still have
no clue of how the experiment was performed.
It is amazing to see how you can read a text and misunderstand,
or rather don't understand what you read.
You are not qualified to have an opinion about the validity
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/