sci.physics.relativity

kenseto wrote:
> Bryan Olson wrote:
>> kenseto wrote:
>>> Perhaps Roberts can comment on the following proposed experiments:
>>> Two observers A and B in relative motion SR claims that A predicts
>>> that B's clock is running slow by a factor of 1/gamma and B predicts
>>> that A's clock is running slow by a factor of 1/gamma.

>> More precisely, SR predicts that in A's frame B's clock is slow
>> by a factor of 1/gamma, and in B's frame A's clock is slow by a
>> factor of 1/gamma (assuming inertial motion, no significant
>> gravitational effects).
>
> Isn't that's what I said?

"I was trying to be more precise. The theory "predicts". The
observers observe.

> BTW, there is no such thing as an inertial frame on earth and the
> surface of the earth is in a gravitational field.....does this mean
> that SR is not valid on earth?

See GR if the gravitational effects are significant.

>>> The following proposed experiments are designed to test the validity
>>> of this claim:
>>> 1. A sends a TV picture of his clock to B and B sends a TV picture of
>>> his clock to A.
>>> 2. A determines the ratio of B's TV clock second to his actual clock
>>> second and call this ratio as R_ab.
>>> 3. B determines the ratio of A's TV clock second to his actual clock
>>> second and call this ratio as R_ba.
>>> 4. If mutual time dilation is true then R_ab=R_ba.

>> I think you'll have a hard time doing that exact experiment, and
>> worse, all it tests is whether symmetric motion has a symmetric
>> effect.
>
> Not hard at all. We can do these experiments with the clocks at the
> international space station and the ground clocks over a period of say
> 24 hours.

I'm not trying to stop you from doing your experiments, far from
it. The international space station is not such a good candidate
for a pure SR test, because the SR effects do not dominate the GR
effects.


--
--Bryan