0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The observer at the station can somehow see a ray of light emitted in the carriage & watches its progress & can see when an observer in the carriage sees the ray.
Quote from: mad aetherist on 07/02/2019 22:05:19The observer at the station can somehow see a ray of light emitted in the carriage & watches its progress & can see when an observer in the carriage sees the ray. You do realise that, in a thought experiment, it doesn't matter if something is actually possible or not, don't you? So the point isn't that the passenger actually can see the light in progress, but that IF he could see it ...
In #8 notice that DePalma doesnt mention aether even tho he mentions aether in other sections of his articles. In #8 he doesnt mention aetherwind, nor Lorentz Ticking Dilation. It is interesting that he places the watch on the face of the clock.The electric clock is supposedly not affected by the spinning disc, alltho he doesnt actually say that. The clock of course ticks in response to the frequency of the electricity, & that frequency is generated by the power company at a distant location.DePalma says that the ticking dilation of the Accutron tuning fork watch depends on orientation, ie parallel to axis has less effect than perpendicular to axis. This smells fishy. Orientation shouldnt make a difference, according to my centrifuging of aether theory & its effect on the aetherwind & based on the standard parameters of the oldendays Lorentz Ticking Dilation equation for gamma where V is the aetherwind (kmps). The ticking dilation is affected by the speed of the aetherwind not the velocity. Lorentz Length Contraction of the tuning fork is of course affected by velocity, ie orientation of tuning fork makes a difference to the fork's actual length. But i will think some more re this.Ok i had a think. I am starting to think that ticking dilation is more complex than i thort. Mightbe the kind of clock has an effect on LTD. Still thinking. I will be back.
Massless things are not affected by centrifugal forces.You can't "centrifuge" them.
Nope. As a matter of fact, it was scientifically proven in repeatable experiments that light can stir condensate of sodium atoms, and cause quantized vortices to manifest, and they definitely centrifuge.
DePalma said that above the axle of his spinning wheel his tuning fork watch suffered a loss of 0.9 sec in 1000 sec
My macro TD doesnt i think apply to micro clocks, but it applies to all macro clocks.
It may have escaped your notice, but sodium atoms have mass
Red herring fallacy, nice try.
BTW, ever heard of a Bose-Einstein condensate of photons?
Quote from: mad aetherist on 09/02/2019 23:45:20DePalma said that above the axle of his spinning wheel his tuning fork watch suffered a loss of 0.9 sec in 1000 sec He should get a better watch.Obviously, a mechanical watch will struggle in some circumstances, notably if it's accelerating (that includes rotation or vibration)
Quote from: mad aetherist on 18/10/2018 23:02:35Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)A "modern precision wrist watch" keeps good time because it is worn on your wrist. The quartz oscillator is slightly temperature-sensitive and is calibrated for about 30 deg C. Vibration and even air pressure can alter the crystal frequency. If you compare it with a cesium frequency standard, it drifts all over the place and is therefore not a "measure" but a reasonably adequate "indicator" of time. Interestingly, however, the crystal frequency is independent of g.
Podkletnov used an ordinary modern precision wrist watch (how hard would it be?)
Quote from: mad aetherist on 09/02/2019 23:45:20 My macro TD doesnt i think apply to micro clocks, but it applies to all macro clocks.That's interesting. It seems to lead to a testable prediction. Macro clocks and micro clocks will sometimes run at different rates. So, for example the rotation of the earth shouldn't tally with atomic clocks. How big a change do you predict? A part in a million? More? Less?
OK, so the changes you are talking about are more than 1 part in a million.It's not clear exactly what you mean by a tuning fork, but you sometimes refer to a quartz watch.So, If I get a quartz clock and connect a couple of wires to it so it measures the rate of the flashing ":" in the middle of the display do you think the rate will change in a predictable way if I turn the clock through 90 degrees about some axis?And do you think that the changes will be more than 1 part in a million?Would you like to propose experimental details?I'm not promising to do the experiment but I know that some people here work in electronics labs where measuring time to a part in 10^9 is commonplace and 1 part in 10^12 is perfectly possible.
I would love it if someone could do the two experiments
Quote from: mad aetherist on 11/02/2019 23:18:54I would love it if someone could do the two experimentsAnd if the results came up null?
OK, say I get a test oscillator and set it running at (something close to) 10 MHzAnd I get a frequency counter and connect it up so it reads 10MHz.The frequency counter's pretty cheap. It has a quartz crystal oscillator in it and it compares the input frequency against that.So, if something alters the frequency of the quartz "clock" in the frequency counter, the reading will change.Are you saying that if I turn the counter on its side or on its end the display will no longer read 10MHz because the frequency of the quartz oscillator in it will be affected by the ether wind?
In principle, the frequency counter works like this (the details of the numbers etc may differ).It has a quartz crystal (mounted in a temperature controlled oven if it's an expensive one) which "rings" at exactly 1 MHzIt also has a set of dividers that each give a single pulse output for every 10 pulses fed to their input.The first of these is fed from the quartz oscillator. So it produces an output at 100 KHz.This 100 KHz signal is then fed to another divider which produces an output of 10KHz Another 4 dividers give a signal that is exactly 1 pulse per second.That signal is used to start and stop another counter which counts the pulses of the input signal.So, if the input signal is 12345 Hz the clock is set to zero, then set counting pulses from the input for exactly 1 second, then that count, which would be 12345, is copied to the display.Modern ones do have complicated computer driven tricks like automatic calibration to GPS etc.But mine is old + simple.How big a change in frequency should I expect?You mentioned "a difference equal to 1 sec in 2.77 days."That's about 1 in 240,000Would you expect that sort of change?So, with the "best" (or worst) alignment one clock would differ from the other by about 4 parts in a million?A change of about 40Hz if I was measuring a 10MHz signal?