Hafele and Keating revisited: A novel interpretation of the results of the Hafele‐Keating experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Hafele‐Keating experiment showed the occurrence of time dilation in clocks placed on two airplanes, one moving eastward and one moving westward relative to the Earth’s rotation. However, the application of the special theory of relativity failed to account for the significant differences in the data. This problem is solved by a novel approach that focuses on the absolute velocities of the clocks with reference to the Earth’s rotation and uses space as a fixed reference point. The basic idea here is that time dilatation is an experimental fact and, therefore, independent from the theory behind it, so it is independent from relativism. Time dilatation also can occur under absolute conditions. Up until now, it is not clear if the concept of relativism is correct or not. The existence of time dilatation cannot be proofs for relativism as time dilatation also can occur under absolute conditions. Here, it is established that the eastbound plane had a higher absolute velocity than its westbound counterpart, resulting in time dilation figures of 50 and 140 ns, respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".