Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #18164

Re: C language paradox

Show all headers | View raw

On 2/29/2012 1:39 PM, Scott Fluhrer wrote:
> "James Kuyper"<jameskuyper@verizon.net>  wrote in message
> news:jil51r$m86$1@dont-email.me...
>>
>> Re: "anyway": strictly speaking, no pair of human twins have had
>> sufficiently large differences in their travelling speeds to produce a
>> detectable effect.

I suppose that we need more identical twins in the astronaut program.

>> However, for pairs of identical sub-atomic particles,
>> the experiment has been conducted and did produce results matching the
>> theory, rather than "common sense". Particles which naturally decay into
>> smaller particles take much longer to do so when accelerated to
>> relativistic velocities. It's difficult to accelerate anything much
>> larger than an entire molecule to high enough speeds to make the effect
>> measurable.

What about GPS satellites?  I think they are bit bit "larger than an entire 
molecule".  :-)

> Actually, it has been tested with atomic clocks and airplanes; see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hafele%E2%80%93Keating_experiment for a general
> overview.

I took a quick look at the mentioned article, but consider the entire GPS 
system, which needs to take this into account, lest the GPS be off by 10km 
per day.

   http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

> [From the 'Nits R Us' department; now, back to your regularly scheduled
> discussion of C]

:-)


-- 
Kenneth Brody

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

C language paradox pembed2012 <once@was.enough.invalid> - 2012-02-28 21:33 +0000
  Re: C language paradox Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-28 21:41 +0000
  Re: C language paradox Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 10:44 +1300
  Re: C language paradox Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-28 16:51 -0500
  Re: C language paradox Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-02-28 22:16 +0000
    Re: C language paradox Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 01:34 -0800
      Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-29 07:18 -0500
        Re: C language paradox "Scott Fluhrer" <sfluhrer@ix.netcom.com> - 2012-02-29 13:39 -0500
          Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-03 16:23 -0500
            Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-03-03 19:47 -0500
              Re: C language paradox Geoff <geoff@invalid.invalid> - 2012-03-03 18:05 -0800
                Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-05 15:41 -0500
                Re: C language paradox Robert Miles <milesrf@Usenet-News.net> - 2012-04-14 00:26 -0500
  Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-28 17:38 -0500
    Re: C language paradox Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-28 18:52 -0600
      Re: C language paradox James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-28 22:14 -0500
  Re: C language paradox James Dow Allen <jdallen2000@yahoo.com> - 2012-02-28 15:08 -0800
    Re: C language paradox "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-29 03:42 +0100
    Re: C language paradox Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-29 01:37 -0800
      Re: C language paradox jgharston <jgh@arcade.demon.co.uk> - 2012-03-03 16:17 -0800
        Re: C language paradox nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com - 2012-03-04 02:54 -0800
          Re: C language paradox "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2012-03-04 11:43 +0000
          Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-04 04:01 -0800
            Re: C language paradox Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2012-03-04 14:34 +0100
        Re: C language paradox Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-03-04 17:01 +0000
          Re: C language paradox Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-03-05 15:45 -0500
  Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-28 17:45 -0800
    Re: C language paradox army1987 <army1987@ask-for-it.invalid> - 2012-03-05 10:42 +0000
      Re: C language paradox army1987 <army1987@ask-for-it.invalid> - 2012-03-05 10:48 +0000
        Re: C language paradox Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-03-05 09:35 -0800
          Re: C language paradox 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-04-16 13:01 -0700
      Re: C language paradox China Blue Water Navy <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2012-03-05 04:24 -0800
      Re: C language paradox Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-03-05 07:49 -0500
  Re: C language paradox "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-29 03:42 +0100
  Re: C language paradox Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-02-28 21:46 -0500

csiph-web