View Single Post
Old 09-20-2003, 09:09 AM   #12 (permalink)
CSflim
Sky Piercer
 
CSflim's Avatar
 
Location: Ireland
Quote:
Originally posted by John Henry
Although I accept the physical theory behind the atomic clock experiment, I am uncomfortable with the fact that the measurements taken were on such a small scale. If the difference was only nanoseconds, assuming this is within acceptable error for atomic clocks and that the experiment was proven to be rigourously repeatable, how do we know that the difference could not be accounted for by other effects of the differences in environment of the two clocks
First of all, two synchronised atomic clocks deviating by (say) 80 nanoseconds in the course of a few hours is a HUGE divergence given that they are usually accurate to one second in 20 million years.

Second of all, the theory doesn't predict that there will be "some" undefined divergence. It predicts very precise amount of divergence, and the these predicted results have been verified to be accurate to an extemely high level of precision. It would take one hell of a coincidence for a "random" deviation due to the effects of the environment to line up so perfectly with the predictions.

Thirdly, this experiment is not a once off thing. Relativity has been rigorously tested, and the theory has spectacularly held every time.

Fourth, relativity is a practical working theory, much the same as Newtonian mechanics. Relativistic effects have to be taken into account by NASA. Think about how GPS works. The satelites orbiting about the earth need to know precisely where they are. This requires their on board clocks to be precisely synchronised with earth time. The computers on board are programed to peridically readjust their clocks, to account for the relativistic divergence. (clocks on satelites are under a weaker gravitational field than those on the earth's surface).

Fifth, relativity also predicts other effects, than those to do with time. Most famously is the fact that we can see a star which should be obscured by the sun due to the bending of the light rays as predicted by general relativity.

links
Will an atomic clock on the International Space Station be slower than a synchronized atomic clock on the ground?

What is the experimental basis of Special Relativity?

Relativity Tutorial
This page looks good. I didn't read it, but it looks as though it will give a good solid, introduction to relativty, that it reasonably simple to understand.
__________________

Last edited by CSflim; 09-20-2003 at 09:15 AM..
CSflim is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360