- #1
TK Wilson
Hi
This may have been discussed, but A.G. Kelly has criticised the Hafele and Keating experiment on the basis of the drift errors associated with the atomic clocks.
http://www.biochem.szote.u-szeged.hu/astrojan/hafele.htm#figure1
I know that relativity has been well tested, but did Dr Kelly have have a fair point? It's hard to tell from his site as when it comes to the crunch, he does not describe at all well how H&K analysed their results. A brief investigation would suggest that H&K knew the limitations of their experiment, and acknowledged this in their paper. I also understand that their experiment was not supposed to provide an exact prediction of numbers but demonstrate a more subtle point regarding inertial frames and relativity; viz One plane clock ran fast, one plane clock ran slow, because the relative motion is measured for all three clocks (2 plane, 1 ground) from respect to an inertial frame moving relative to the Earth.
While it is clear that Dr Kelly has an agenda with his anti-relativity site, I'd like to clarify the precision and conclusions of the H&K experiment from an objective view point, and whether their conclusions were correct. So rather than dismiss this as talking about crack pottery, could we see it as a discussion about the H&K experiment to inform my understanding.
Thanks
TK
This may have been discussed, but A.G. Kelly has criticised the Hafele and Keating experiment on the basis of the drift errors associated with the atomic clocks.
http://www.biochem.szote.u-szeged.hu/astrojan/hafele.htm#figure1
I know that relativity has been well tested, but did Dr Kelly have have a fair point? It's hard to tell from his site as when it comes to the crunch, he does not describe at all well how H&K analysed their results. A brief investigation would suggest that H&K knew the limitations of their experiment, and acknowledged this in their paper. I also understand that their experiment was not supposed to provide an exact prediction of numbers but demonstrate a more subtle point regarding inertial frames and relativity; viz One plane clock ran fast, one plane clock ran slow, because the relative motion is measured for all three clocks (2 plane, 1 ground) from respect to an inertial frame moving relative to the Earth.
While it is clear that Dr Kelly has an agenda with his anti-relativity site, I'd like to clarify the precision and conclusions of the H&K experiment from an objective view point, and whether their conclusions were correct. So rather than dismiss this as talking about crack pottery, could we see it as a discussion about the H&K experiment to inform my understanding.
Thanks
TK
Last edited by a moderator: