The 1971 experiment has been replicated. The only reason you don’t accept Special Relativity is because you are scientifically illiterate. If you were willing to employ a little effort and actually investigate what ratification there is for Special Relativity, you could remedy that, but you’re not, you’d rather deliver the sermon on the moral highground from a flood plain of unadulterated ignorance.
I’m just about done even reading any more posts from you…
Then read one of mine. I am fully behind JohnDamian. And John, Moonstruck’s ‘The only reason you don’t accept Special Relativity is because you are scientifically illiterate,’ is par for the course.
I was at that lecture at Trinity College in Dublin in 1996 when engineer A. G. Kelly PhD read a paper that, while speculative itself, did show the STR had been empirically falsified many times. Nevertheless, within the audience there were professors who were employed by that same university to teach this nonsense to students. Within minutes of Kelly’s unassailable thesis, these same Relativists were up on their feet telling all and sundry that Kelly ‘really didn’t fully comprehend’ the theory he had just falsified. I have no doubt the next day Kelly was history and the STR was being taught to a new batch of physics students in that same world-renowned university in whose lecture hall the Special Theory was seen for what it really is, patent intellectual nonsense, mathematical magic.
Kelly later died and his relatives had his thesis printed up in a book. They sent me a copy.
The Clock Fraud
‘Experiments carrying atomic clocks around the earth on jumbo jets have verified this scenario [Relativity].’ — Pratchett, Stewart and Cohen
‘The clock in the aircraft flying towards the west records more time than the twin travelling in the opposite direction.’ — Stephen Hawking.
Now look up Paul Davies’s How to Build a Time Machine and one will find the same old story about the supposed verification of the Special Theory attained in 1971 when they placed clocks in aeroplanes and pitted them against each another. Elsewhere we find assertions that the Special Theory has been proven many times in a laboratory, but the truth is something else:
‘Tests that purported to confirm the requirement of Special relativity, that moving macroscopic clocks run slow, were carried out by Hefele & Keating by flying atomic clocks in opposite directions around the earth. These tests have been shown to be seriously flawed and to provide no such evidence (Kelly 1995). That paper relied on estimates derived from the graphs published in 1972 by Hafele and Keating. The original test results, contained in an internal report (Hafele, 1971) have now been obtained direct from the United States Naval Observatory (USNO). These confirm that the conclusions in Kelly (1995) are correct. Hafele, in that report stated: “Most people (including myself) would be reluctant to agree that the time gained by any one of the clocks is indicative of anything” and “the difference between theory and measurement is disturbing.” A full analysis of the shortcomings of the tests is given in a separate paper (Kelly, 1996). This shows that a test, with an accurate improvement of two orders of magnitude, would be required before any credence could be placed in the results of such a test… Further practical proof of the Sagnac effect is in the measurement of the relative time keeping of standard clock-stations around the earth. It is found that, when signals are sent from one station to another, allowance has to be made for the fact that the signals do not travel at the same speed Eastward and Westward around the globe (Saburi et al, 1976) —Y. Saburi, M.Yamamoto and K. Harada, 1976 IEEE Trans. 1M25 No 4 473-7."— A.G. Kelly, A.G. Kelly: A New Theory on the Behaviour of Light, The Institution of engineers of Ireland, Feb. 1996., pp.7-8.
