Difference between revisions of "Hafele and Keating Tests; Did They Prove Anything?"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
==Abstract== | ==Abstract== | ||
| − | The original test results were not published by Hafele & Keating, in their famous 1972 paper; they published figures that were radically different from the actual test results which are here published for the first time. An analysis of the real data shows that no credence can be given to the conclusions of Hafele & Keating. | + | The original test results were not published by Hafele & Keating, in their famous 1972 paper; they published figures that were radically different from the actual test results which are here published for the first time. An analysis of the real data shows that no credence can be given to the conclusions of Hafele & Keating. |
| − | [[Category:Relativity]] | + | [[Category:Scientific Paper|hafele keating tests did prove]] |
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Relativity|hafele keating tests did prove]] | ||
Latest revision as of 19:36, 1 January 2017
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Hafele and Keating Tests; Did They Prove Anything? |
| Author(s) | Alphonsus G Kelly |
| Keywords | Hafele-Keating Experiment, Cesium Clocks, Relativity, Clock Accuracy, Drift Rate |
| Published | 2000 |
| Journal | None |
Abstract
The original test results were not published by Hafele & Keating, in their famous 1972 paper; they published figures that were radically different from the actual test results which are here published for the first time. An analysis of the real data shows that no credence can be given to the conclusions of Hafele & Keating.
