Temat: GPS a teoria względności
Jednym z argumentow wysowanych na poparcie tezy o empirycznej weryfikowalnosci i poprawnosci teorii względności jest rzekomo system GPS. Jest to bezmyslnie powtarzane, jak mantra, przez Tajnych Wyznawcow Teorii Wzglednosci, jako ich swoiste wyznanie wiary.
system GPS nie jest empirycznym potwierdzeniem poprawnosci teorii względności. Oto dlaczego:
"Hatch, a former president of the Institute of Navigation and current Director of Navigation Systems Engineering of NavCom Technologies, is an expert on the GPS. Concerning the question of whether the operation of the GPS proves the validity of SR, he has come to conclusions diametrically opposite from Clifford Will's. In Relativity and GPS (28), (29), he argues that the observed effect of velocity on the GPS clocks flat out contradicts the predictions of special relativity.
Hatch's proposed alternative to special and general relativity theory, Modified Lorentz Aether Gauge Theory (MLET), agrees with General Relativity at first order but corrects many astronomical anomalies that GRT cannot account for without ad-hoc assumptions, such as the anomalous rotation of galaxies and certain anomalies in planetary orbits. In addition, the force of gravity is self-limiting in MLET, which eliminates point singularities (black holes), one of the major shortcomings of GRT. One of the testable predictions of Hatch's theory is that LIGO, the Laser Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, will fail to detect gravity waves. As of July 2007, this prediction stands. (30) "
"One of Herbert Ives most telling comments on special relativity appears in his paper on the Sagnac Experiment. Ives wrote: “The performer of the experiment is thus left with the alternative of accepting the observed arrival times as a fact, or, if he must cling to a constant velocity of light, of putting his faith in carefully labeled clocks which tell him the signals arrive at the same time. But he must not look at both clocks at once! In short the physical fact cannot be evaded by juggling the measuring instruments.” In emphasizing this he includes in footnote 6 directly below the statement that “More than one 'time' at one place is a physical absurdity.” This explains why the relativist insists on “looking at only one clock” in an experiment, if he looks at more than one, he will get a different answer for the time that experimentally refutes his theory. So he is forced to insist upon only one clock as giving the correct and true answer. This explains McCrae's fourth objection to Dingle's refutation of relativity, discussed in section 4.1. McCrae says that Dingle is talking about two different times, that mean two different things, that is they do not represent the readings on two clocks that contradict each other. This must be because in relativity you can never compare two different clocks, because they will produce a contradiction if we do, so we must not compare them.
The advent of the modern GPS system has allowed the definition of a practical universal time (UTC) that is capable of measuring the velocity of light from any place on the earth, without contradiction. In this system there is one, and only one, universal time, and its validity is established for one and only one universal reference frame. Such a system violates the claim of relativity that there are multiple possible rest frames in relative motion that can be used. But as was definitely shown in this paper, the only way that such multiple frames can be made to produce a consistent physical reality, that is consistent clock measurements, is if there is one and only one rest frame, which is exactly the fundamental assumption of the GPS system."
http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Paper...