• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Theory of Relativity will begin to fall apart in 2016/2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bjarne: Still does not understand the ISS and Galileo 5 and 6 tests

Bjarne said:
You don't understand , it ...
Click to expand...
15 September 2016 Bjarne: You still do not understand the ISS and Galileo 5 and 6 tests :eye-poppi!
  • The upcoming Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space (the ISS test) is a test of General Relativity
    The Wikipedia article is outdated - launch in August 2017, not 2016: ISS Utilization: ACES (Atomic Clock Ensemble in Space) / PHARAO
    Launch: A launch of the ACES/PHARAO platform aboard a Dragon capsule of SpaceX (CRS-13) is scheduled for August 2017.

    Orbit: Near-circular orbit of the ISS, mean altitude of ~400 km, inclination of 51.6º, period of ~ 90 minutes.

    The planned duration of the mission is 18-36 months. First 6 months are reserved for functionality verification of instruments and performances evaluation. The first objectives are to study the performances of this first cold atom space clock and reach frequency accuracy lower than 3 x 10-16 (with a final goal at 10-16) and deliver a timescale with 25 ps/day stability. The microwave link will have to demonstrate the capability to perform phase comparisons between space and ground clocks with a resolution at the level of 0.3 ps over one ISS pass (300 s), 7 ps over 1 day, and 23 ps over 10 days.
    Click to expand...
  • The ongoing Galileo 5 and 6 test is a test of General Relativity. It does not measure any acceleration - not even "perigee acceleration".
15 September 2016 Bjarne: You still do not understand the real world where even if there are results that do not agree with GR, a delusion is still wrong :jaw-dropp!
 
Bjarne: This is a lie because there were no Galileo 5 and 6 navigation errors

Bjarne said:
For example take a look of Galileo 5 and 6.

It’s not a secret that there are many navigation errors.
Click to expand...
15 September 2016 Bjarne: This is a lie because there were no Galileo 5 and 6 navigation errors.
Galileo 5 and 6 arrived in the wrong orbits because their upper stage failed. That is 1 equipment failure. Galileo satellites set for year-long Einstein experiment
Galileos 5 and 6 were launched together by a Soyuz rocket on 22 August 2014. But the faulty upper stage stranded them in elongated orbits that blocked their use for navigation.
Click to expand...
 
Bjarne: A lie of "2. Synchronize the clock" for GPS satellites

Bjarne said:
I learned it all in the kindergarten.
Click to expand...
You learned to lie about science in the kindergarten, Bjarne :p?
15 September 2016 Bjarne: A lie of "2. Synchronize the clock" for GPS satellites.
GPS clocks are adjusted for SR and GR before launch.
 
Bjarne: A "many have begun to understand that something smells" lie

Bjarne said:
No no my friend, I think many have begun to understand that something smells.
Click to expand...
15 September 2016 Bjarne: A "many have begun to understand that something smells" lie.
No rational person thinks that there will be large differences between GR and the ACES and Galileo 5 & 6 experiments because they already know is that there is enormous evidence for SR and GR. Including existing GPS satellites already debunking your delusion that the results will be gigantic amounts different.

That does not mean that SR and GR are the final theory of relativity. It means that any better theory of relativity will have to match all of that enormous body of evidence. That better theory will also have to match new data better! That is why we need to test "the last digit on the minus 12 scale have to be 5 or 6" to expose the possibility of a better theory.
 
Bjarne said:
Soon hindsight can very well show that the almost the entire human race have been victims for scientific bungling.

I know now this is difficult to believe, but things can fast change
Click to expand...

Apparently not as at least one thing here has been wrong for almost seven years!!!!!!!!!:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp:jaw-dropp
 
Sort of Bjarne's version of Pascal's Wager: "You will feel so stupid if Bjarne turn's out to be right!"

.... Well, I suppose I will, but I can live with the risk.

Hans
 
Reality Check said:
You learned to lie about science in the kindergarten, Bjarne :p?
15 September 2016 Bjarne: A lie of "2. Synchronize the clock" for GPS satellites.
GPS clocks are adjusted for SR and GR before launch.
Click to expand...

Rubbish, if this was true you should forecast the exact time it take to launch satellites into orbit, as well as delay problems
You should also take into account several influences impacting aticking clock, such as different speed, - acceleration, - and different GR effect during all the time a launch takes.
 
Last edited:
Reality Check said:
15 September 2016 Bjarne: You still do not understand the ISS and Galileo 5 and 6 tests :eye-poppi!
15 September 2016 Bjarne: You still do not understand the real world where even if there are results that do not agree with GR, a delusion is still wrong :jaw-dropp!
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.
OK 2017
 
Reality Check said:
15 September 2016 Bjarne: A "many have begun to understand that something smells" lie.
No rational person thinks that there will be large differences between GR and the ACES and Galileo 5 & 6 experiments because they already know is that there is enormous evidence for SR and GR. Including existing GPS satellites already debunking your delusion that the results will be gigantic amounts different.

That does not mean that SR and GR are the final theory of relativity. It means that any better theory of relativity will have to match all of that enormous body of evidence. That better theory will also have to match new data better! That is why we need to test "the last digit on the minus 12 scale have to be 5 or 6" to expose the possibility of a better theory.
Click to expand...

Completely derailed
 
Bjarne said:
Rubbish, if this was true you should forecast the exact time it take to satellites into orbit, as well as delay problems
You should also take into account several influences of the ticking clock, such as different speed, - acceleration and different GR effect during all the time a launch takes.
Click to expand...
That only works if orbits are perfectly predictable post launch. They aren't. There is always some degree of uncertainty.
 
halleyscomet said:
When given the choice between actual work to prove your theory and Internet meme insults, you chose the insults.

That tells me more about YOUR faith in your ideas than I think you intended to reveal.
Click to expand...

Its not insulting anyone, but just a warning not blindly to follow the (m)asses
History shows how bad that can go
 
Bjarne said:
Rubbish, if this was true you should forecast the exact time it take to launch satellites into orbit, as well as delay problems
You should also take into account several influences impacting aticking clock, such as different speed, - acceleration, - and different GR effect during all the time a launch takes.
Click to expand...

Ah, good thinking, but wrong. The speed of the clock is adjusted, but the time is set after launch. A clock both has to keep time and show the correct time.

If you buy a Rolex Chronograph and set it ten minutes off, it will keep time perfectly, but it will stay ten minutes off.

If you buy a watch for a dollar at a flea-market that does not work at all, it will show the correct time twice a day.

Hans
 
Last edited:
MRC_Hans said:
Ah, good thinking, but wrong. The speed of the clock is adjusted, but the time is set after launch. A clock both has to keep time and show the correct time.

Hans
Click to expand...
Rubbish, do you really believe you can set the speed of a atomic clock ?
 
Bjarne said:
Rubbish, do you really believe you can set the speed of a atomic clock ?
Click to expand...

The read-out, you mean? Of course you can.

A Cesium clock runs at 9 192 631 770 Hz, which is obviously of little practical use, so you have to have a frequency division device. And that can be adjusted.

Hans
 
MRC_Hans said:
The read-out, you mean? Of course you can.

A Cesium clock runs at 9 192 631 770 Hz, which is obviously of little practical use, so you have to have a frequency division device. And that can be adjusted.

Hans
Click to expand...

Read out is adjusted all the time
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom