this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2024
872 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

59472 readers
5114 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] InnerScientist 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And further down:

Unfortunately, if the one-way speed of light is anisotropic, the correct time dilation factor becomes {\displaystyle {\mathcal {T}}={\frac {1}{\gamma (1-\kappa v/c)}}}, with the anisotropy parameter κ between -1 and +1.[17] This introduces a new linear term, {\displaystyle \lim \_{\beta \to 0}{\mathcal {T}}=1+\kappa \beta +O(\beta ^{2})} (here {\displaystyle \beta =v/c}), meaning time dilation can no longer be ignored at small velocities, and slow clock-transport will fail to detect this anisotropy. Thus it is equivalent to Einstein synchronization.

[–] ricdeh 1 points 5 months ago

Yes, I understand that part, but it doesn't disprove that such an experiment could show isotropy. Instead, it says that it would always indicate isotropy, which is not entirely useful either, of course. I'll dig deeper into the publication behind that section when I have the time. Nonetheless, my original point still stands. With a highly synchronised clock, you could measure the (an)isotropy of the one-way speed of light. To determine whether the time dilation issue is surmountable I'll have to look at the actual research behind it.