The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Down

FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?

  • 3 Replies
  • 4477 Views
  • 4 Tags

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline timey (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 2439
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 27 times
  • Self educated since age 11 at "University of Life"
FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?
« on: 05/06/2018 22:05:02 »
FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT

A further test of General Relativity can be conducted by comparing clocks that are ONLY experiencing a change in gravity.

So far precision testing of GR with clocks has been conducted concerning change in height in the gravity potential, where the clock is, in addition to a change in gravity, also experiencing a change in centripetal speed and centrifugal force.

And precision testing of GR has also been conducted concerning a change in relative motion, where the clock is not experiencing a change in gravity.

In Febuary this year portable precision clocks were tested for the first time.

https://www.sciencealert.com/portable-atomic-clock-measures-gravity-first-time-relativistic-geodesy

It is my suggestion that these portable clocks should be placed in circumstance where ONLY a change of gravity is occurring, in order to confirm that General Relativity is indeed correct in assuming that an increase in gravity slows time down.

This could be conducted by placing a clock at 2 different locations at same longitude, and at same height above sea level, where there is known density difference in the geology of the locations, and thus compare how they tick.
This will constitute only a difference in gravity

Or - much more simply, just place a clock at one of the gravity wave experiments and record how the clock ticks differently when a gravity wave hits, as compared to how it ticks normally.
This will also constitute only a change in gravity.

General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick slower.

My modification of General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick faster.*

*The consequences of the remit of my modification are, of course, extremely far reaching*

Now that these precision clocks are portable, I daresay that they are going to be used to further test the tenets of General Relativity.

I have voiced my suggestion, and will say no more.
« Last Edit: 06/06/2018 00:55:37 by timey »
Logged
Particles are very helpful, they lend themselves to everything...
 



Offline Bored chemist

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • 31101
  • Activity:
    13%
  • Thanked: 1291 times
Re: FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?
« Reply #1 on: 05/06/2018 23:41:39 »
Quote from: timey on 05/06/2018 22:05:02
I have voiced my suggestion, and will say no more.
That's an interesting assertion.
I'm fairly sure that the ensemble of clocks round the world already have to take local gravity into account.
I think the UK's are in Teddington which is near sea level. I believe that some of the best in the US are in Boulder Colorado which is at serious altitude.
In any event, there's no way they are all experiencing the same gravitational field.
If the"correction" for local g didn't work, they would know.
Logged
Please disregard all previous signatures.
 

Offline Colin2B

  • Global Moderator
  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ********
  • 6476
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 708 times
Re: FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?
« Reply #2 on: 06/06/2018 17:04:11 »
@timey
This seems a reasonable way to leave it at the moment. If the tests verify your prediction we can revisit your paper.
We would have to look carefully at the Shapiro delay because I did some back of packet calcs and they don’t give the results you were looking for.
Logged
and the misguided shall lead the gullible,
the feebleminded have inherited the earth.
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT?
« Reply #3 on: 07/06/2018 14:31:33 »
Quote from: timey on 05/06/2018 22:05:02
FALSIFIABLE PREDICTION FOR A DOABLE EXPERIMENT

A further test of General Relativity can be conducted by comparing clocks that are ONLY experiencing a change in gravity.

So far precision testing of GR with clocks has been conducted concerning change in height in the gravity potential, where the clock is, in addition to a change in gravity, also experiencing a change in centripetal speed and centrifugal force.

And precision testing of GR has also been conducted concerning a change in relative motion, where the clock is not experiencing a change in gravity.

In Febuary this year portable precision clocks were tested for the first time.

https://www.sciencealert.com/portable-atomic-clock-measures-gravity-first-time-relativistic-geodesy

It is my suggestion that these portable clocks should be placed in circumstance where ONLY a change of gravity is occurring, in order to confirm that General Relativity is indeed correct in assuming that an increase in gravity slows time down.

This could be conducted by placing a clock at 2 different locations at same longitude, and at same height above sea level, where there is known density difference in the geology of the locations, and thus compare how they tick.
This will constitute only a difference in gravity

Or - much more simply, just place a clock at one of the gravity wave experiments and record how the clock ticks differently when a gravity wave hits, as compared to how it ticks normally.
This will also constitute only a change in gravity.

General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick slower.

My modification of General Relativity predicts that a clock that experiences only a change (increase) in gravity will tick faster.*

*The consequences of the remit of my modification are, of course, extremely far reaching*

Now that these precision clocks are portable, I daresay that they are going to be used to further test the tenets of General Relativity.

I have voiced my suggestion, and will say no more.
A Caesium travelling West to East ''blue-shifts'' , A Caesium travelling East to West ''red-shifts''.

The curvature/circular  length contraction being directional relational to the Earths rotation and earth points.


* ew.jpg (31.12 kB . 848x652 - viewed 3015 times)

Just thought I would give you some thoughts to ponder over Timey.  I will step back out again now thanks.

Logged
 



  • Print
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: modification of gr  / testable theory  / general relativity  / time dilation 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.457 seconds with 35 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.