05-ilang-free-fall / 12-changing-field
12changing fieldverified
Determines what a body sees of a field that is not stationary, its fall in a gradient that changes with λ, and when this fall is the same for all clock levels.
# Review: 12-changing-field v2 - **Subproject:** 05-ilang-free-fall - **Package:** 12-changing-field - **Reviewed version:** v2 - **Date:** 2026-10-11 --- VERDICT: minor issues ## Issues ### I1. Ranges of a fixed start are quoted without all their conditions - **Location:** Step 6, the sentence after the three ranges of (12.18); Step 9, Result 3(b), first bullet; Step 12, table, row "Drift acceleration from rest"; Result, bullet for (12.14), (12.15), (12.19); JSON twin, key result (12.14) - **Severity:** minor - **Problem:** (12.18) gives the range of the drift of the velocity as $u\,w_g\ll\lvert\gamma_0\rvert/\Gamma_\lambda$ and $\lambda\ll(\lvert\gamma_0\rvert/\Gamma_\lambda)\,\lambda_g$. The sentence after the list and the table of Step 12 quote it as "$\lambda\ll\lambda_g$". For a gradient that mostly oscillates, $\lvert\gamma_0\rvert\ll\Gamma_\lambda$, the range $\lambda\ll\lambda_g$ does not make the error small against the drift, so the quoted form is not a sufficient range. In the same way the range of the growing part at resonance is derived in Result 3(b) with the two conditions $u\,w_g\ll\lvert\chi_g\gamma_1\rvert/\Gamma_\lambda$ and $\lambda\ll(\lvert\chi_g\gamma_1\rvert/\Gamma_\lambda)\,\lambda_g$, and the Result list and the twin call the second one alone sufficient. - **Fix:** Wherever a range of (12.18) or of Result 3(b) is quoted, give all its conditions with their factors, or refer to the display without restating a shortened form. State the comparison of $\lambda_a$ with the range of the drift with the factor $\lvert\gamma_0\rvert/\Gamma_\lambda$, or for the case in which this factor is of order one, named as such. ### I2. "Only" for the range of the bounded parts at resonance - **Location:** Step 9, Result 3(b), first bullet, the sentence "The bounded parts of (12.14) are described only for $\lambda\ll\lambda_a$" - **Severity:** minor - **Problem:** The sentence says that the bounded parts are not described beyond $\lambda_a$. What is derived is a sufficient range; Step 6 states that a longer range is not excluded. In addition $\lambda_a$ is defined from the bound $E_a$ of the acceleration, while the sentence covers the bounded parts of the velocity as well, whose range has to be taken from $E_v$ against their amplitude. - **Fix:** State, as sufficient ranges and one per quantity, the range in which the bounded parts of the velocity of (12.14) are described (from $E_v$ against their amplitude) and the range for the acceleration (from $E_a$), and say what is not derived beyond them.