• Re: The HOAX of GR effects in GPS and other artificial satellites,

    From Paul.B.Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 15 14:31:29 2024
    Den 15.09.2024 03:26, skrev rhertz:

    As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
    since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
    BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.

    As they wrote here:

    https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-with-unprecedented-precision

    Didn't you notice the headline which is even in the link above?

    "First results from Microscope satellite confirm Albert Einstein’s
    theory of relativity with unprecedented precision.

    Quote:
    "Measurements of the equivalence principle had not been improved
    upon for 10 years, but now the first results from CNES’s Microscope
    satellite, equipped with accelerometers supplied by the French
    aerospace research agency ONERA, are 10 times better. They show,
    with an unprecedented precision of 2.E-14, that bodies in a vacuum
    fall with the same acceleration. The equivalence principle has so
    far proved unshakeable and this result simply reconfirms the theory
    of general relativity postulated by Albert Einstein over a century
    ago."

    Where did you read that
    "THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL"?

    Another quote:
    "A universal theory unifying gravitation and quantum physics is
    therefore the holy grail of physicists in the 21st century.
    Certain candidate theories predict that the principle of
    the equivalence between gravitation and acceleration, at
    the heart of the theory of general relativity, could be violated
    at very weak levels. Microscope is pushing this principle to its
    limits and yielding new indications to constrain the theory of
    general relativity."

    Note this!
    Certain candidate theories predict that the equivalence principle
    could be violated at very weak levels.

    These candidate theories are alternative theories to GR.

    QUOTE:

    «The satellite’s performance is far exceeding expectations. Data from
    more than 1,900 additional orbits are already available and more are to
    come, which should enable us to further improve the mission’s
    performance and approach its target of acquiring measurements with a precision of 10-15. This first result is going to shake the world of
    physics and will certainly lead to a revision of alternative theories to general relativity,» said the mission’s principal investigator Pierre Touboul.

    It is the alternative theories which predict that
    the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
    that have to be revised, not GR.

    Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
    is NOT violated at very weak levels.


    How is it possible to read a text, and believe that it says
    the exact opposite of what it says?

    You have yet again made a giant fool of yourself, Richard.

    Well done! :-D


    Enjoy slowly, relativists. Please don't choke on your stupidity, as you
    are allowed to fail for being just humans.

    Did you shoot yourself in the foot, Richard? :-D

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vfONckOPyaI

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Sun Sep 15 14:47:49 2024
    W dniu 15.09.2024 o 14:31, Paul.B.Andersen pisze:
    Den 15.09.2024 03:26, skrev rhertz:

    As if the above IS NOT ENOUGH, exhaustive experiments done by France
    since 2017 SHOWS (with error <10E-15) that THE EQUIVALENCE PRINCIPLE
    BREAKS AT QUANTUM LEVEL.

    As they wrote here:

    https://www.oca.eu/en/news-lagrange/1363-first-results-from-
    microscope-satellite-confirm-albert-einstein-s-theory-of-relativity-
    with-unprecedented-precision

    Didn't you notice the headline which is even in the link above?

    "First results from Microscope satellite confirm Albert Einstein’s
     theory of relativity with unprecedented precision.

    Quote:
    "Measurements of the equivalence principle had not been improved
     upon for 10 years, but now the first results from CNES’s Microscope
     satellite, equipped with accelerometers supplied by the French
     aerospace research agency ONERA, are 10 times better. They show,
     with an unprecedented precision of 2.E-14, that bodies in a vacuum
     fall with the same acceleration. The equivalence principle has so
     far proved unshakeable and this result simply reconfirms the theory
     of general relativity postulated by Albert Einstein over a century
     ago."

    And in the meantime in the real world - forbidden by
    your idiotic church "improper" clocks keep measuring
    improper t'=t in improper seconds.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Volney@21:1/5 to rhertz on Mon Sep 16 02:40:13 2024
    On 9/14/2024 9:26 PM, rhertz wrote:
    Since 1911, Einstein and relativistic heirs have been rotting physics
    with the fairy tale about gravity affecting time shown in any kind of
    clocks (mechanical, quartz based and atomic clocks).

    In particular, and derived from 110 years old Schwarzchild's solution to
    a VERY BASIC PROBLEM, it has been widely spread between relativistic
    circles that ANY CLOCK raised to ANY HEIGHT above ground presents a time
    or frequency difference (gravitational blue shift, from Schwarzschild
    metric) of:


    Δf/f = (GMe/c²) (1/R - 1/a) , where R is the Earth's radius and "a" is
    the height of the clock above ground.

    The above equation came from 1911 Einstein's paper, ratified later in
    1915 through GR, that THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL Φ = -GMe/R affects EM radiation by a factor Φ/c², increasing its energy (as the clock is
    raised) to a value of  Eo (1 + Φ/c²), where Eo is the energy at ground level.


    In simpler terms, the gravitational potential gained by a raised object
    is POTENTIAL ENERGY, which affects
    measured time (allegedly) if the object is a clock.


    Now, the AWFUL TRUTH that every single blind and deaf relativist CHOOSE
    TO IGNORE:

    1. EVERY SINGLE SATELLITE IN STABLE ORBIT (MANNED OR NOT) HAS
    MICROGRAVITY WITHIN IT, WHICH AFFECTS EVERYTHING INSIDE THE SATELLITE,
    EITHER LIVE FORMS OR ARTIFACTS.

    2, FOR ANY PRACTICAL CASE, ARTIFACTS LIKE CLOCKS OPERATE AS IF g = ZERO,
    DUE TO CENTRIPENTAL FORCES THAT ARE EQUAL TO GRAVITATIONAL FORCES (that
    would make them to fall to Earth).

    THIS IS PHYSICALLY EQUIVALENT TO THE CASE OF A MIRROR OF EARTH PLACED AT EQUAL DISTANCE FROM THE CENTER OF EARTH, BUT LOCATED ABOVE OF THE
    SATELLITE (R vs. -R, referenced to the satellite).

    THEREFORE, THE GRAVITATIONAL POTENTIAL ACTING UPON ANY ONBOARD CLOCK IS
    ZERO (MICROGRAVITY).

    Obviously, you don't know the difference between gravitational force and gravitational potential. With a "mirror earth" above the satellite, the gravitational force would be zero, but the gravitational potential would
    be a bit complicated, but still higher at that midpoint than at the
    surface of the earth. Without it but with the satellite orbiting, the
    net force would be zero but the gravitational potential still higher at
    the satellite orbital level than at earth's surface.

    You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
    don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
    OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
    I'm quite certain it's the latter.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Maciej Wozniak@21:1/5 to All on Mon Sep 16 09:22:45 2024
    W dniu 16.09.2024 o 08:40, Volney pisze:

    Obviously, you don't know the difference between gravitational force and gravitational potential. With a "mirror earth" above the satellite, the gravitational force would be zero, but the gravitational potential would
    be a bit complicated, but still higher at that midpoint than at the
    surface of the earth. Without it but with the satellite orbiting, the
    net force would be zero but the gravitational potential still higher at
    the satellite orbital level than at earth's surface.

    You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
    don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
    OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
    I'm quite certain it's the latter.


    Stupid Mike, poor halfbrain, according to the teachings of your moronic
    church there is no such thing as "gravitational force". It's just one of
    common sense prejudices refuted by your idiot guru.

    You need a new hobby. The physics of relativity just isn't for you. I
    don't know if you simply don't understand the physics or whether your
    OCD just fucks up your physics abilities when relativity is involved.
    I'm quite certain it's the latter.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul.B.Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Wed Sep 18 09:47:25 2024
    Den 18.09.2024 05:56, skrev ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog:
    On Sun, 15 Sep 2024 12:31:29 +0000, Paul.B.Andersen wrote:

    It is the alternative theories which predict that
    the equivalence principle could be violated at very weak levels
    that have to be revised, not GR.

    Because this experiment has shown that the equivalence principle
    is NOT violated at very weak levels.

    Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
    from when I first wrote them a decade ago:
    "Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
    theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
    equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
    with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
    that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
    in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
    "Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
    approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
    violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
    violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
    range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
    other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
    unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
    on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

    Interesting.

    Maybe gravity isn't quantized?

    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From gharnagel@21:1/5 to ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog on Wed Sep 18 13:06:56 2024
    On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 3:56:44 +0000, ProkaryoticCaspaseHomolog wrote:

    Two paragraphs that I wrote for Wikipedia which are nearly unchanged
    from when I first wrote them a decade ago:
    "Proposals that may lead to a quantum theory of gravity such as string
    theory and loop quantum gravity predict violations of the weak
    equivalence principle because they contain many light scalar fields
    with long Compton wavelengths, which should generate fifth forces and variation of the fundamental constants. Heuristic arguments suggest
    that the magnitude of these equivalence principle violations could be
    in the 10−13 to 10−18 range.
    "Currently envisioned tests of the weak equivalence principle are
    approaching a degree of sensitivity such that non-discovery of a
    violation would be just as profound a result as discovery of a
    violation. Non-discovery of equivalence principle violation in this
    range would suggest that gravity is so fundamentally different from
    other forces as to require a major reevaluation of current attempts to
    unify gravity with the other forces of nature. A positive detection,
    on the other hand, would provide a major guidepost towards unification."

    Well, it looks like 10^-13 to 10^-14 predictions are in very great
    doubt. Do you know which theories are predicting violations this big?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul.B.Andersen@21:1/5 to All on Sat Sep 21 13:15:11 2024
    Den 21.09.2024 01:10, skrev rhertz:
    Extract from the OP:

    And who might that be?

    Please:
    Quote what you are responding to with attributes! (Who you are quoting)

    And please mark the quotes in the way everybody else do!


    --
    Paul

    https://paulba.no/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From J. J. Lodder@21:1/5 to rhertz on Sat Sep 21 14:15:31 2024
    rhertz <hertz778@gmail.com> wrote:

    Extract from the OP:

    [snip incorrectly quoted material]

    Please repost, now correctly quoted,

    Jan

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)