Seems like measuring something FTL with non-FTL equipment is going to be a problem. At least on the scale of being stuck on the planet, and that tiny little distance, relative to C.
And you are correct. This is how science is supposed to work, completely unlike the warmists hocus pocus.
johnny
Seems like measuring something FTL with non-FTL equipment is going to be a problem.
It's easier than it sounds. Send a light signal down a path at the same time the >C signal flies down the same path. Measure the difference in arrival times. Light travels about a a foot per nanosecond (10E-9). Cheap lab equipment can easily measure down to a nanosecond. Of course, more bucks, more Buck Rogers.
There are lots of ways of synchronizing clocks using two way signal exchange, that calibrate out path delay and errors in propagation. The common software application NTP is one of them, though it is only intended to keep clocks approximately synchronized.
Say you want to synchronize two clocks, connected by a two communications channel. A sends B his time, then B echos it back to A. A timestamps the returned time and subtracts it from his clock and sends half the difference back to B with his time so B can advance his clock by that amount to account for delay. Reverse the process and repeat. Iterate until the mean squared difference stabilizes and you know you’ve converged to the best you can do.
GPS works on a slighly different principle, with both parties observing a number of synchronized clocks with pretty precisely known delays and adjusting their clocks to agree. This experiment depended on GPS. Even when everything is working perfectly, GPS is only good to about 28 nanoseconds RMS, but it is likely that the timing errors were highly correlated between the two stations, so they should have been able to acheive mutual synchronization down to the single nanosecond level.