Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!nntp.club.cc.cmu.edu!micro-heart-of-gold.mit.edu!newsswitch.lcs.mit.edu!nntp.TheWorld.com!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity Subject: Re: How atomic clocks measure time Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:26:44 +0000 (UTC) Organization: The World : www.TheWorld.com : Since 1989 Lines: 54 Message-ID: References: <4b588b0b-8133-4b13-8bb4-f666f2209b70@googlegroups.com> <13b242c2-a2fe-4484-bac1-aa45df7c7962@googlegroups.com> <8b86e8d3-b7ef-4d7b-aec0-606f86bf9159@googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shell01.theworld.com X-Trace: pcls7.std.com 1538756804 6609 192.74.137.71 (5 Oct 2018 16:26:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@TheWorld.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2018 16:26:44 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: nn/6.6.5 Xref: csiph.com sci.physics.relativity:474194 Ed Lake writes: >On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 7:46:29 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote: >> Ed Lake writes: >> >> >On Thursday, October 4, 2018 at 12:24:35 PM UTC-5, Paul Gish wrote: >> >> >> you got it upside down. There are no sensors in the world telling you are >> >> moving. It reveals severe unemployability. Please remove that pdf from >> >> that site. >> >> >Yes, you believe the same nonsense that a lot of others believe. In reality, >> >you CAN tell who is moving faster than the other by sending signals to one >> >another that are one second apart. The body that is moving the fastest will >> >measure seconds from the other body as being LONG. >> >> OK so when that is done, BOTH travelers say the received second pulse from >> the other is long. And by the same amount, too. >> >> So now what happens? Both say they are moving faster than the other. >They DON'T both "say that the received pulse from the other is long." That is your (incorrect) opinion, not fact. SR predicts that each detects the received pulse is longer. As I mentioned both the traveling twin situations and counter-rotating beam particler accelerator results verify that. > That has been EXPLAINED to you. No, you provided your opinions to me. > If you disagree, provide FACTS and references. >Don't just state your opinion. Yet YOU just state your opinion that seconds are longer for the "faster" moving object without any FACTS, but demand FACTS from others? Hypocrite! >FACT: Seconds are longer for the object (or clock) moving fastest. You state your opinion (not FACT) without evidence. Why do you call your opinion to be a FACT? >This thread is supposed to be about how atomic clocks show that. Atomic >clocks change the length of a second when raised or lowered or when moved at >high speeds. That opinion is an incorrect interpretation of the science of relativity and the Cs clock. >Therefore, if I am moving faster than you, my seconds are longer than yours. Declared without any FACTS to support it.