What Experiments Demonstrate Time Dilation?

  • #36
FactChecker said:
how he must have reacted when he realized that GR explained the nature of gravity. I wonder if he expected that.
I'm not sure what you mean. Explaining gravity while being consistent with relativity was Einstein's primary goal in developing GR. He didn't have to "realize" that afterwards.
 
  • Like
Likes Vanadium 50 and FactChecker
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #37
narrator said:
I would love to have been in young Einstein's shoes just for that one moment when his new theory explained the precession period of Mercury. What a thrill.
He actually got that thrill twice--first when his initial version of the field equation (which turned out not to be quite correct) got the correct result, and second when he found the final (correct) version of the field equation and it still gave that result.
 
  • Like
Likes FactChecker and narrator
  • #38
FactChecker said:
PS. On the other hand, Einstein accomplished so many profound things that it might not have been so amazing to him.
PeterDonis said:
He actually got that thrill twice
I watched a video a while back. The presenter, Dr Harry Cliff, said that Einstein was so excited by his equation proving Mercury's orbit that it gave him heart palpitations. 😮
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur and FactChecker
  • #39
What happened to the Mods when we need them? We have spent 38 posts discussing that which we are just not allowed to discuss. I was wondering whether to start off a flat Earth discussion and see if I could get as many posts going.
I'd be 'dilated' to hear some comments. (From a Joan Rivers joke.)
 
  • #40
sophiecentaur said:
What happened to the Mods when we need them? We have spent 38 posts discussing that which we are just not allowed to discuss. I was wondering whether to start off a flat Earth discussion and see if I could get as many posts going.
I'd be 'dilated' to hear some comments. (From a Joan Rivers joke.)
A tangent plane is not a bad approximation for many applications :-p
 
  • Informative
Likes sophiecentaur
  • #41
You have my apologies if I've transgressed. It's been helpful to expand my knowledge of the topic in a positive way. So at least that's something, hey. I suppose I could have done so without the backstory.
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
  • #42
narrator said:
You have my apologies if I've transgressed. It's been helpful to expand my knowledge of the topic in a positive way. So at least that's something, hey. I suppose I could have done so without the backstory.
Hardly your fault if hordes of PF members want to contribute to a chat about your friend's nonsense. :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes narrator
  • #43
sophiecentaur said:
What happened to the Mods when we need them?
If you think a thread discussion violates the rules, report it.
 
  • #44
narrator said:
You have my apologies if I've transgressed. It's been helpful to expand my knowledge of the topic in a positive way. So at least that's something, hey. I suppose I could have done so without the backstory.
If you had transgressed unacceptably you would know about it. :)

We usually do not host discussions of crackpottery, even to debunk it because there is more crackpottery in the world then there is debunking bandwidth; and we usually do not allow arguments by proxy ("refute my friend...") because they are seldom advanced in good faith.

So far this thread has managed to remain productive and passes one of the basic tests: If three years from now a google search were to lead someone to it, would that be a good thing? But as it approaches the point of diminishing returns we will close it.
 
  • Like
Likes dextercioby, russ_watters, phinds and 2 others
  • #45
Nugatory said:
If three years from now a google search were to lead someone to it, would that be a good thing?
Do these things mature (or the reverse) with age?

I didn't consider reporting. I was just commenting on how members seemed attracted to this sort of thread 'like moths around a flame'. Nothing wrong with the content of the thread (except the "friend's" views) but I was a bit disappointed at the lack of self regulation.
 
  • #46
narrator said:
He reckons it's the different gravity on GPS satellites, not time dilation. I said yes, it's the different gravity, causing time dilation but he's not having it.

In addition to what others said:

esa said:
Relativistic Clock Correction

The rate of advance of two identical clocks, placed one in the satellite and the other on the terrestrial surface, will differ due to the difference of the gravitational potential (general relativity) and to the relative speed between them (special relativity).
Source:
https://gssc.esa.int/navipedia/index.php/Relativistic_Clock_Correction
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes narrator
  • #47
We seem to have reached the point of diminishing returns here, so the thread is closed.

If necessary, new threads can be started to cover anything raised by the discussion in this thread.
 
  • Like
Likes sophiecentaur and narrator

Similar threads

Replies
79
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
88
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
653
Replies
55
Views
3K
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
501
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top