Search

The relativistic phenomenon of time dilation has been verified in countless experiments. This short paper examines this phenomenon from an engineering point of view; specifically, from the viewpoint of modern electronic communications. It is shown that Einstein's "grandiose view" about the nature of time has unnecessarily overshadowed what is in reality a very simple engineering problem. Accordingly, the dangerous path of thinking that physics has taken for the past 100 years -including such flawed ideas as the effect of travel on aging- will have to be reconsidered. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The case of two rockets approaching each other with constant velocity is used to underscore a common misconception in relativity theory. Since each rocket is an inertial system (IS), it has been argued that a clock located on either one of them must be running faster in each case than an identical clock on the other (symmetry principle). This conclusion is based on the Lorentz transformation (LT) of Einstein's special theory of relativity (STR). There has never been an experimental verification of this prediction, however. On the contrary, experiments with atomic clocks carried onboard airplanes and rockets have demonstrated that their rates can be computed in a simple manner just by knowing their speed relative to the Earth's non-rotating polar axis. After accounting for gravitational effects, it has always been found that the rates of these clocks are slower than those of identical counterparts located on the polar axis. These results can be predicted quantitatively by defining an objective rest system (ORS), the Earth's polar axis in the present case, from which to uniquely apply Einstein's time dilation formula for clocks moving relative to it. On this basis it is concluded that measurement is objective (rational) rather than symmetric, and that the LT therefore does not correctly predict the rates of atomic clocks on a sufficiently general basis. A key result of the ORS formulation is that the lifetime of meta-stable particles on the Earth's surface measured by an observer moving at high speed relative to them is shorter than the value he finds for the identical particles when they are at rest in his laboratory. More generally, this approach underscores the advantages of introducing a set of physical units that is dependent on the state of motion of the observer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are two factors responsible for the relativistic Doppler effect. One of these contributions is of first-order in the velocity of the light source relative to the observer and is nonrelativistic in nature, but there is also a second-order (transverse Doppler) effect caused by the difference in rates of clocks at the source and in the laboratory (time dilation). It is pointed out that the traditional derivation for the relativistic Doppler effect based on the assumed Lorentz invariance of the phase of light waves is too restrictive. According to the latter argument, when two observers in relative motion send out signals to one another employing an identical light source, their respective measured Doppler shifts should always be the same (totally symmetric). However, an alternative derivation can also be given which indicates that the second-order contribution should in fact be anti-symmetric, although this analysis agrees with the conclusion that the corresponding first-order Doppler effect is symmetric. This is because there is a reciprocal relation between the ratios of the rates of the moving and rest clocks for the two observers. Quantitative calculations of the amount of the predicted anti-symmetry in transverse Doppler shifts are made for several examples on the basis of experimental data reported for the rates of atomic clocks carried onboard airplanes and rockets. Because of the Earth's rotation about its polar axis, the Doppler shifts can be measured in principle by using exclusively land-based atomic clocks located at widely different latitudes. Verification that the transverse Doppler frequency shifts are indeed antisymmetric would be a definitive confirmation that the oftcited symmetry principle of Einstein's special theory of relativity (STR) is incorrect, namely the claim that two observers in relative motion should each find that his/her clocks run faster than the other's. Finally, changes in the formulation of relativity theory that bring it into agreement with modern-day observations of variations in the rates of clocks with state of motion are discussed with reference to the methodology of the Global Positioning System (GPS). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several paradoxical aspects of the twin problem of special relativity theory are reviewed, with the conclusion that none has been permanently resolved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Professor Herbert Dingle was a long-time critic of the special theory of relativity, who believed for many years that the theory was self-contradictory. Although he was unsuccessful in persuading the scientific world of the inconsistency of the theory, his questions and arguments were not satisfactorily answered during his life. Now, thirty years after his death, the subject is of historical interest. This paper examines two main problems that have contributed to the confusion that still surrounds this issue. The first problem is the fact that some scientists answered Dingle's Question, which is explicitly about the special theory, by invoking the general theory. It is argued that, if there is a valid answer to Dingle's Question, it would have been valid if the same question had been asked in 1905 before the general theory appeared. The second problem is that many scientists have claimed that Dingle's thesis has been refuted by experiment, although experimental results cannot disprove the existence of an internal contradiction. An answer to Dingle's Question is still wanting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present Note calls attention to an aspect of the special theory of relativity (SR) that has heretofore been ignored. An example of two observers approaching one another at uniform velocity is considered. It is shown that opposite predictions are obtained when different methods of applying the theory are used. It is pointed out that this contradiction necessarily invalidates the Lorentz transformation (LT) of SR, but in no way affects the viability of the corresponding velocity transformation (VT). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author shows in this article that a coherent description of the Sagnac effect for massive particles, which takes account of length contraction and time dilation can only be obtained with a so called "absolute" clock synchronization parameter. Any other synchronization leads to an incoherent description between the point of view of an observer on the rotating platform and a non-rotating observer. This demonstration generalises the one made by Selleri and the author for the Sagnac effect with electromagnetic waves. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is suggested that the persistence of the twin paradox within special relativity theory (SRT) results from a deficiency of physics in that theory, due to its granting priority to kinematics. The missing physics concerns all aspects of the problem bearing on how the relative motion of the twins is apportioned between them - that is to say, how it is caused. The foundational idea behind special relativistic kinematics, expressed in the symmetry of the Lorentz transformation (LT), is that only (symmetrical) relative motion matters. That is a bad idea, in that it misdirects attention away from the causal aspect of the physics (in the same way as does General Relativity Theory's exclusive focus on "geometry"). The mathematical symmetry of the LT and its inverse is spurious in the same sense that it would be spurious to assert a running rate symmetry of laboratory clocks and muon co-moving clocks in the 1977 CERN muon experiment. All time dilation experiments exhibit clock running rate asymmetry. SRT, which treats symmetrical relative velocity as the sole relevant parameter, is thus locked into wrong answers. It lacks both means and motivation to grasp the asymmetry of the physics. Supplying that missing information resolves the twin problem through explicit recognition of action asymmetry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The origin of the FitzGerald-Lorentz length contraction (FLC) hypothesis is discussed and attempts to verify it empirically are analyzed in detail. It is pointed out that the Lorentz transformation (LT) and the FLC not only rest on Einstein's two postulates of relativity, but also depend in a crucial way upon an additional assumption that was untested experimentally at the time. It is shown that replacing the latter assumption with another based on direct tests of the time-dilation phenomenon also explains the Michelson-Morley null result without invoking either the LT or the FLC but while still remaining consistent with the relativistic velocity transformation (VT). Moreover, an example is presented ("clock riddle") which demonstrates a lack of internal consistency in the LT formulation of relativity theory. Finally, it is shown that all confirmed experimental results that have hitherto been ascribed to the LT can be predicted equally well on the basis of an alternative Lorentz transformation (ALT) that avoids the above inconsistency. This discovery leads to a restatement of the relativity principle (RP) which not only recognizes that physical laws are the same in all inertial systems but also that the units in which they are expressed may differ in a systematic manner from one rest frame to another as a consequence of acceleration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Measurements of the transverse Doppler effect have provided important confirmatory evidence for the validity of Einstein's theory of special relativity (SR) as it pertains to time dilation. However, these investigations fall into two distinct categories depending on whether the light source or the detector is accelerated relative to the rest frame of the observer. In their original work employing a moving light source in the laboratory, Ives and Stillwell state explicitly that they observe a wavelength shift to the red, and therefore a slowing down of the initially accelerated clock, in complete agreement with Einstein's predictions. By contrast, although both Hay et al. and Kündig also report complete agreement with SR on the basis of their ultracentrifuge experiments in which the absorber/detector is under constant high acceleration, their theoretical discussion actually contradicts this assertion. For example, Kündig states that his work demonstrates "that the clock which experiences acceleration is retarded compared to the clock at rest," thereby giving unequivocal support to the conclusion that it is not just a matter of perspective which of two clocks runs slower at any given time, but rather that the measurement process is perfectly objective. This experience has generally been dismissed by SR proponents, arguing that the latter theory is only to be applied for objects in uniform motion, in which case measurement is definitely subjective. It is pointed out that this conclusion overlooks the fact that a version of the Lorentz transformation exists which is consistent with both sets of measurements while still satisfying Einstein's two postulates of SR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The prediction of retardation of an astronaut's clock during a round trip, compared to the clock of the stay-at-home, introduced by Einstein in his 1905 paper has been the most contentious issue for relativity. This resulted in a raging controversy in journals in the mid to late 1950s. There was no discussion about the physical nature of clocks. Some current writers still claim that it is necessary to use general relativity. We will show that this is not correct. Special relativity makes correct predictions in accord with experimental data. Here we examine this question using the physical behaviour of moving light clocks and gain insight into the returning astronaut experiment and a deeper understanding of the nature of space and time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]