Existence

from your link writes:Several relativistic effects are too small to affect the system at current accuracy levels, but may become important as the system is improved; these include gravitational time delays, frequency shifts of clocks in satellites due to earth's quadrupole potential, and space curvature.This system was intended primarily for navigation by military users having access to encrypted satellite transmissions which are not available to civilian users. Uncertainty of position determination in real time by using the Precise Positioning code is now about meters. Averaging over time and over many satellites reduces this uncertainty to the point where some users are currently interested in modelling many effects down to the millimeter level. Even without this impetus, the GPS provides a rich source of examples for the applications of the concepts of relativity.

fizz57102 writes:Hi F&L,
As others have pointed out, you've been a bit unfair to me Having done the maths (albeit a long time ago - I'm in a different branch of fizzix now) it's a bit difficult for me not to accept its validity - a scientific theory isn't something you "believe" in after all.And that's the problem with ICANT -hecant do the maths - through laziness, ignorance or sheer bloody-mindedness for all I know - and so doesn't see the inevitability of the conclusions. His only reply is his usual word salad which can be used to "prove" anything - after all, that's how it works in the field he considers to be his speciality!

Taq writes:The second, as a unit, is an arbitrarily agreed upon segment of time that can be defined by quite a few phsyical events such as the speed of light, oscillation of a cesium atom, etc. No matter what our units are the speed of light is the same (in a vacuum), as is the rate of oscillations within a cesium atom. Of course. It just so happens that the rate of chemical reactions are consistent so they could, conceivably, be used as a timer if you wanted. The passage of time, no matter the definition as measured by physical interactions, is relative between frames of reference. I defined it in my example with the satellite with the atomic clock.

SHIFTING THE ONUS OF PROOF: This is when your opponent makes a claim, provides no evidence for it, and then expects you to find evidence of it. Your opponent is making the claim, so he should logically have to provide evidence. Shifting the onus (or burden) of proof to you is a fallacy and a very low tactic to engage in. Often, a Creationist will make phantom claims and, then, act like they are common knowledge and he shouldn't have to back them up.EXAMPLE"The Earth was created in seven days by our loving father"
"Evidence?"
"Oh, come on! Everyone knows this, go look it up, if you don't."That is an example of shifting the onus of proof. The opponent wrongfully forces you to do his research for him. He is obviously too lazy to do it, himself.HOW TO SPOTWhen your opponent starts treating a claim that isn't common knowledge like it is something everyone should know, and you demand proof, only to have him put that task on you, you are having the onus of proof unjustly handed off to you.HOW TO COUNTERPoint out that your opponent is the one making the claim, not you. Demand that he provide evidence or conceed the point on the basis of zero evidence provided.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Look up dilate, dilation, or dilatation in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.Dilation (or dilatation) refers to an enlargement or expansion in bulk or extent, the opposite of contraction. It derives from the Latin dilatare, "to spread wide".Time dilation, the observation that another's clock is ticking at a slower rate as measured by one's own clock

The amount of geodetic precession measured on Gravity Probe B experiment will be 1/3 greater than predicted by the general theory.

May 4, 2011: Einstein was right again. There is a space-time vortex around Earth, and its shape precisely matches the predictions of Einstein's theory of gravity.Researchers confirmed these points at a press conference today at NASA headquarters where they announced the long-awaited results of Gravity Probe B (GP-B)."The space-time around Earth appears to be distorted just as general relativity predicts," says Stanford University physicist Francis Everitt, principal investigator of the Gravity Probe B mission.

Panda writes:I guess you did not read it the last time you presented it to you.Or are you cherry picking your evidence?

cavediver writes:Oh, ICANT, you have seen through our obscuring mist and revealed the truth that we have so sought to hide: that none of us physicists since Einstein have a clue as to what this relativity is about. We merely esteem Einstein beyond all others and simply hold his ideas and theories as truth. What is terrifying to us is when amateurs with barely any training are able to tie us in knots with their own mathematical chicanery, as you have done here. To be honest, I would much rather retire from this thread before you do further damage to my credibility.

tesla writes:The shortest distance between two points is a straight line.When light encounters matter it does not always take a straight line.Does this define straight line?