El sábado, 14 de julio de 2018, 11:17:42 (UTC-5), Ed Lake  escribió:   
   > On Friday, July 13, 2018 at 4:45:15 PM UTC-5, mr...@ing.puc.cl wrote:   
   >> El viernes, 13 de julio de 2018, 0:33:23 (UTC-5), Ed Lake  escribió:   
   >>> On Wednesday, July 11, 2018 at 8:31:48 PM UTC-5, Ed Lake wrote:   
   >>>> On Tuesday, July 10, 2018 at 12:56:03 PM UTC-5, Edward Prochak wrote:   
   >>>>> On Monday, July 9, 2018 at 3:11:05 PM UTC-4, Ed Lake wrote:   
   >>>>>> [Moderator's note:  Huge amount of quoted text deleted.  Please quote   
   >>>>>> only enough to provide sufficient context.  -P.H.]   
   >>>   
   >>> < snip >   
   >>>   
   >>>> [[Mod. note -- As Tom Roberts (& others) have pointed out, in order   
   >>>> to directly compare clocks A and B, A and B must be colocated for   
   >>>> the duration of the comparison, i.e., they must be at the same   
   >>>> position and (be observed by *all* observers to be) moving at the   
   >>>> same velocity.   
   >   
   >>> How can you compare a moving clock (B) to a "stationary" clock (A)   
   >>> if "A and B must be colocated for the duration of the comparison"?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> The moving clock is assumed to be moving at a very high speed (in order to   
   >> time dilation effects to be observed). So if clock A is moving at speed 0.6c   
   >> in order to measure the time dilation you need a set of Einstein   
   synchronized   
   >> clocks located along the path clock A is following.   
   >>   
   >> This is the only way to check the readings of clock A with the readings of   
   the   
   >> synchronized clocks, so the clock A reading is directly compared with a   
   given   
   >> synchronized clock B, as clock A passes through clock B location (at that   
   >> instant both clocks are colocated).   
   >>   
   >> Afterwards, the lectures of the synchronized clocks can be compared to   
   determine   
   >> the time dilation of clock A. The following diagram shows the setup.   
   >>   
   >> Clock A   
   >>   
   >> (*) --> v=0.6c   
   >>   
   >> (B1)....(B2)....(B3)....(B4)....(B5)....(B6)   
   >>   
   >> Synchronized clocks   
   >   
   > Sorry, but your beliefs conflict with reality.  In 1971, Joseph Hafele   
   > and Richard Keating performed a test where they flew 4 atomic clocks   
   > around the world twice, first flying them eastward, then westward.   
   > Before each trip they compared the clocks to a master atomic clock at   
   > the US Naval observatory.   
   >   
      
   Firstly, these are not my beliefs but facts of the SR model. Secondly, your   
   description of what Hafele and Keating did is correct.   
   But you have to understand that the comparison among clocks were performed   
   AFTER the experiment. The atomic clocks were flown around the world, as you say   
   but, obviously, they could not compare their clock readings with the readings   
   of the master atomic clock while they were flying (since the clocks were not   
   colocated).   
      
   And finally, what the comparison was about related to the ELAPSED time of the   
   different clocks. The elapsed time of a clock is not the tick rate of that   
   clock.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)