147
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 456:
Line 456: + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Theory of relativity (view source)
Revision as of 18:57, August 2, 2007
, 18:57, August 2, 2007→Question about GPS: outlining facts; creationist dependence on relativity
:: If you don't want to call it a "relative proof", that's fine with me. I am just correcting errors. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 16:06, 1 August 2007 (EDT)
:: If you don't want to call it a "relative proof", that's fine with me. I am just correcting errors. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 16:06, 1 August 2007 (EDT)
::: Here are the facts:
:::*GPS satellite clocks have mechanisms to correct for frequency offsets caused by time dilation. I don't see how this can be disputed, unless you want to stubbornly deny that such devices exist, in which case you can claim that cars don't have engines.
:::*Newtonian mechanics does not predict ANY time dilation because it regards time as absolute, even in accelerating frames. Again, I don't see how this can be reasonably disputed, outside of winning a Noble Prize. There are no reputable sources that predict Newtonian time dilation because there is no Newtonian time dilation.
:::*Relativity does predict time dilation. All reputable physicists (not just a few obscure ones) can attest to that.
:::*The predictions of relativity are in good agreement with the frequency offsets on GPS satellite clocks. Several papers on the topic have been cited on this page.
:::If you want to flat-out deny the above, then I guess I shouldn't waste my time trying to improve the article. I'll also point out that some significant creationist ideas depend on relativity to explain the starlight problem (God creating the Earth inside a massive gravitational field), so it's not an amoral atheist conspiracy.--[[User:Bayes|Bayes]] 14:57, 2 August 2007 (EDT)