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

Den 20.09.2024 05:57, skrev rhertz:

 Hafele-Keating Experiment Reassessed
Preprint · September 2020
Gianni Casonato
European Organisation for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites
(EUMETSAT)
16 PUBLICATIONS 38 CITATIONS
 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344428119_Hafele- Keating_Experiment_Reassessed/link/5f74443f299bf1b53e002099/download? _tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIn19
 ********************************************************
 3 Conclusions
The HK experiment has been reproduced by recalculating the predicted
values using flight data provided in [HK-3] using the formulas described
in [HK-1] and [HK-4], and compared with expected values provided with HK
in their paper in [HK-1] and actual observations in [HK-2].

The H&K experiment was NOT reproduced!
Only the predicted values were recalculated.
The results are: (Casonato writes us when it should be ns)
Eastward trip: Δτ = -67.881 ns
Westward trip: Δτ = 265.763 ns
Note the ridiculous precisions without error bar!
H&K's predictions:
Eastward trip: Δτ = -40±23 ns
Westward trip: Δτ = 275±21 ns
Note that Casonato's prediction for the Eastward trip is just outside
H&K's error bar while Casonato's prediction for the Westward trip
is well within H&K's error bar.

 As final conclusion, it is noted that
 1. the accuracy of the clocks used for the experiment, namely the rms
of their measured times both on ground and in flight, looks of the same
order of magnitude of the effect to be measured. That raises doubts on
the possibility of using any type of result for the purpose of
the experiment’s objectives;

This is a strange conclusion. Gianni Casonato doesn't seem to have
understood or even read about how H&K compared the rate of the four
clocks to MEAN(USNO) before, between and after the trips, and
used the correlated rate change method during the trips.

 2. overall all analysed data, either predicted, recalculated and
observed, are within the same order of magnitude (tenths of nsecs for
Eastward case and hundreds of nsecs for Westward case), but the residual
differences as significantly high (up to 40%), meaning that the
accuracy of the experimental measurements was not good enough for
providing a conclusive answer to the objective of validating the SR/GR
model as the only one valid for time shift.

Gianni Casonato doesn't seem to know the scientific method.
"Validating the SR/GR model as the only one valid for time shift"
is obviously impossible.
H&K's measurements for the Eastward trip is ~45% above their prediction
but within the error bar, and  ~14% below Casonato's prediction.
H&K's measurements for the Westward trip is 1% below their prediction
and  2.7% above Casonato's prediction. (Spot on!)
The H&K experiment confirms GR and doesn't falsify GR.
--
Paul
https://paulba.no/