Summations Only

Wrong ICANT.There is no confict between the two. Time passes at different rates for the two diffeerent observers. If you don't understand what that, you are not going to understand the predictions of General Relativity.I would suggest re-reading that Ashby reference you cited. The reference explains the situation quite well. Perhaps the following will help if you make the attempt.Ashby acknowledges that the effect of gravity on clocks is through time dilation produced by the curvature of space. Son pointed to the relevant paragraphs. But just because Ashby does not repeat that statement every single time he talks about clock frequency is no reason to believe that he has changed his mind halfway through the reference about the cause.So cherry picking some sentence where time dilation is not mentioned, as you did, is a meaningless exercise. Perhaps if you go back to quoting Flanders, you can find something that would be helpful. Time runs faster in the satellite due to the decreased gravitational potential, which is due to the height of the satellite in the earth's gravitational field. The satellite clock remains synched up with the passage of time in the satellite, and accordingly runs faster as well. These answers are from the perspective of a person on the ground to whom information related to the satellite clock has been transmitted.On the other hand, if there were an astronaut observer in the satellite, he would observe the clock to be running at normal speed. Using any instruments on the satellite, the astronaut would measure the clock rate to be exactly the same as the ground observer determines for the ground clock.I'd appreciate hearing from anyone other than ICANT that still has a problem understanding this. I'd particular appreciate hearing from someone who like ICANT, does not accept time dilation.

I am not going to make further attempts to explain GR to you until you make some attempt to understand. I'm all out of spoons. All the information you need has been made available to you.

It's not even a matter of accepting what Son says as being reality. It is instead a matter of accepting that Son is right about what the theory General Relativity says, regardless of whether ICANT ends up believeing that General Relativity is actually correct.But ICANT refuses to even get to that point. As a result when he reads a paper saying that GR causes result X, he substitutes his nonsense in place for "GR" and then claims that the paper says something completely different from what the author intended.ICANT did the same thing in our past discussion of Special Relativity. He came up with his own goofy interpretation of what Einstein's postulates were, and attempted to use that interpretation to demonstrate that Special Relativity was inconsistent with Einstein's postulates.There is simply no fix for that kind of bull headedness. The best that can be done is to bring it to light and to them move on. I don't think ICANT appreciates how his behavior on this issue under cuts his credibility on other subjects, but others do.

No, they are not beginner level physics.The concpets associated with at least an introduction to special relativity is easily within the grasp of high school students. No math higher than algebra is required. It is certainly possible to grasp the basic concepts with an even smaller level of science background.Understanding general relativity is a bit more of an undertaking. Understanding some of the basic predictions of the theory is certainly within the grasp of a high school student.But no one should be surprised to find that you cannot understand the universe with only sixth grade math.

Roughly speaking here is what occurs. The frequency of the radiation emitted by the cesium atom (let's stop saying that cesium atoms vibrate) gets divided down to something like five or ten megahertz using a frequency divider circuit. This lower frequency is what is actually used as timing.The frequency divider circuit includes a counter. By changing the starting value (offset) for the counter, we can adjust the 5-10Mhz frequency generated by the atomic clock and its circuitry.In order produce a time signal that is at the same rate as the ground signal as measured in the ground reference frame, we can change the offset supplied to the satellite clock circuitry so that relativistic effects are countered. But as you have indicated, we don't have a crank to adjust the cesium frequency unless we resort to changing the satellite's orbit.The overall result is pretty funky, and we probably have not actually discussed it completely in this thread:Just as you stated, an observer on the satellite would measure the cesium frequency in the satellite clock to be the same value that the ground observer would measure for the ground clock. Each would measure the same 9+ gigaherts value. However, if the ground observer measured the satellite frequency, he would conclude that the cesium frequency on the satellite was higher than for his clock. That seeming conflict is the result of time proceeding at different rates in the two different locations.However, that 9 billion hz signal is not the actual clock signal. The clock signal is the 5-10Mhz lower frequency. Let's assume 5Mhz. After the clocks are synchronized, the satellite observer would measure his own clock rate to be something less than 5Mhz. However if the ground observer measured the satellite's clock signal, he would find that the signal measured exactly 5Mhz, the same as he masures for his ground clock. Again, the seeming contradiction is resolved by noting that time itself proceeds at different rates in the different locals.Of course the above neglects some other relativistic effects. We have ignored the rotation of the earth, and the fact that the satellite orbit is an elipse which creates time varying gravitational and velocity effects. In a real GPS system, the receivers can be moving too.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I still think the premise of this thread was a real hoot -- Type up your ideas on the origin of the universe or some related topic and have EvC's resident Arkham escapee grade your paper with incoherent remarks.At least some real physics was discussed when Son Goku showed up. I'm always down for that. But unlike Son I am under no illusion that ICANT learned anything. Don't really care about that. I did like the anecdote about Goku explaining Relativity to his uncles. Imagine learning physics from a Super Saiyan. What happens when you act up in class.