A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
in [Relativity]
|
From: mpc755 on 13 Mar 2010 01:42 On Mar 13, 1:19 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 12, 7:56 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 12, 9:02 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 11, 7:42 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 10, 11:30 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mar 10, 9:18 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 8:45 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 8:10 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 7:45 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 9:36 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 10, 8:05 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > > > >news:4b970c19$0$8039$afc38c87(a)news.optusnet.com.au... > > > > > > > > > > > > > I know I still have a long way to go but my goal here is to truely > > > > > > > > > > > > understand SR, not to just parrot explainations. LET helped me see > > > > > > > > > > > > that the math of SR is correct, but I also realize it has become a > > > > > > > > > > > > hiderence in understanding SR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > > > > > > Good. There is one key insight which makes the jump from LET to SR a > > > > > > > > > > > > little easier (in my opinion). > > > > > > > > > > > > > For all the talk of relative motion against the ether in LET, the > > > > > > > > > > > > equations work out exactly the same whatever you choose as the rest frame > > > > > > > > > > > > of the ether. So the actual rest frame of the ether cannot be detected > > > > > > > > > > > > within LET. > > > > > > > > > > > > That's right. That's what Dono doesn't get. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Its only a small hop, skip and jump from saying that "it cannot be > > > > > > > > > > > > detected" to "it doesn't exist". > > > > > > > > > > > > Or at least 'it doesn't matter'. > > > > > > > > > > > > Once you go beyond just the aether frame, and relating frames directly to > > > > > > > > > > > it, LET becomes more of a hinderance than a help > > > > > > > > > > > > LET tells you (for instance) that even though objects at rest in frame A may > > > > > > > > > > > be more length compressed and time slowed than those in frame B (where A > > > > > > > > > > > moves faster in the aether frame than B) .. yet A will see objects at rest > > > > > > > > > > > in B as being more contracted and time dilated than its own. Which really > > > > > > > > > > > confuses those who use the simple 'motion in the aether shrinks and slows > > > > > > > > > > > things' idea of LET as a way to 'understand' into a spin. You end up with a > > > > > > > > > > > strange combination of real compression and apparent contraction, real > > > > > > > > > > > slowing and apparent time dilaton. Its not really helpful :):) > > > > > > > > > > > It is helpful in that it gets 'us' closer to understanding what occurs > > > > > > > > > > to objects as they move with respect to the aether. > > > > > > > > > > > The issue with LET is everything is relative. > > > > > > > > > > > For example, "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by > > > > > > > > > > connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring > > > > > > > > > > places" - Albert Einstein. > > > > > > > > > > You like Einstein quotes about the ether so try this one: > > > > > > > > > >http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Extras/Einstein_ether.html > > > > > > > > > > "We may assume the existence of an ether; only we must give up > > > > > > > > > ascribing a definite state of motion to it" - Albert Einstein. > > > > > > > > > "If the existence of such floats for tracking the motion of the > > > > > > > > particles of a fluid were a fundamental impossibility in physics - if, > > > > > > > > in fact nothing else whatever were observable than the shape of the > > > > > > > > space occupied by the water as it varies in time, we should have no > > > > > > > > ground for the assumption that water consists of movable particles. > > > > > > > > But all the same we could characterise it as a medium." > > > > > > > > > "[extended physical objects to which the idea of motion cannot be > > > > > > > > applied] may not be thought of as consisting of particles which allow > > > > > > > > themselves to be separately tracked through time." > > > > > > > > > "The special theory of relativity forbids us to assume the ether to > > > > > > > > consist of particles observable through time, but the hypothesis of > > > > > > > > ether in itself is not in conflict with the special theory of > > > > > > > > relativity. Only we must be on our guard against ascribing a state of > > > > > > > > motion to the ether." > > > > > > > > > "But this ether may not be thought of as endowed with the quality > > > > > > > > characteristic of ponderable media, as consisting of parts which may > > > > > > > > be tracked through time. The idea of motion may not be applied to it." > > > > > > > > > Once you are willing to understand how Einstein defined motion, as > > > > > > > > particles which can be separately tracked through time, maybe you can > > > > > > > > advance from your statement. > > > > > > > > > p.s. You still haven't answered how it is the train is length > > > > > > > > contacted because it is moving relative to the aether and the > > > > > > > > embankment is more at rest with respect to the embankment but at the > > > > > > > > same time LET has everything being relative. The answer is both the > > > > > > > > Observer at M and the Observer at M' will determine the train to be > > > > > > > > length contracted and for the clocks on the train to be ticking slower > > > > > > > > than the clocks on the embankment. > > > > > > > > > > > This means the aether is more at rest with > > > > > > > > > > respect to the embankment than it is with respect to the train. The > > > > > > > > > > train is moving relative to the aether so it will be length contracted > > > > > > > > > > while the embankment will not. The ruler the Observer on the > > > > > > > > > > embankment uses to measure the length of the train is not length > > > > > > > > > > contracted. The ruler the Observer on the train uses to measure the > > > > > > > > > > length of the embankment is length contracted. The Observer on the > > > > > > > > > > embankment and the Observer on the train conclude the embankment is > > > > > > > > > > longer than the train. > > > > > > > > > > > The same holds true for the clocks on the train and on the embankment. > > > > > > > > > > Since the train is moving relative to the aether while the embankment > > > > > > > > > > is more at rest with respect to the aether there will be a greater > > > > > > > > > > pressure associated with the aether on the clock on the train causing > > > > > > > > > > it to tick slower. If the Observers on the embankment and on the train > > > > > > > > > > where able to 'see' each others clocks as the M and M' pass each other > > > > > > > > > > both the Observer on the train and the Observer on the embankment > > > > > > > > > > would conclude the clock on the train ticks slower than the clock on > > > > > > > > > > the embankment. > > > > > > > > You know for a while you were making progress. (I'm sure some here > > > > > > > are thinking the same about me ;) You managed to get away from each > > > > > > > frame having its own ether to having them share a single ether (for EM > > > > > > > waves anyway). Now if you could just get away from trying to attach > > > > > > > one of the frames to the ether... > > > > > > > > Did you ever get anywhere with that diagram I made to explain RoS to > > > > > > > you. Einstein presented the train experiment from the point of view > > > > > > > of the tracks, but he never said that the tracks were at rest WRT the > > > > > > > ether. > > > > > > > > - Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > According to both SR and LET there is no experiment that can reveal > > > > > > > > > which frame is at rest WRT the ether, so there is no way to know which > > > > > > > > > frame is more at rest WRT the ether. > > > > > > > > > The clock which ticks the fastest is most at rest with respect to the > > > > > > > > aether. > > > > > > > > But you have no way of knowing which clock is ticking faster. To > > > > > > > measure the tick rate of a moving clock requires more than one clock > > > > > > > at rest. And then you end up making assumptions to sychronize them. > > > > > > > Those assumptions affect your measurements. > > > > > > > The two clocks are synchronized at some point in time. Then the clock > > > > > > at M and the clock at M' travel past one another. The Observer on the > > > > > > train and the Observer on the embankment have enough time to determine > > > > > > which clock is ticking faster. The clock which is ticking faster when > > > > > > M and M pass each other is the clock most at rest with respect to the > > > > > > aether.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > You need at least one more clock to measure a tic rate. Given clock > > > > > B, you compare the time on clock M to that on clock M' when they > > > > > pass. You cannot compare them a second time because M' is moving. So > > > > > you compare M' to B when they pass. With that comparison you can > > > > > decide whether the clock at M' has gained or lost time, but that > > > > > calculation assumes the clocks at M and B read the same. And > > > > > assumptions were required when those clocks were synchronized. > > > > > Why can't you measure the clocks at M and M' a second time?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > M'-----> > > > M > > > > M'-----> > > > M > > > > If M' just went by M when do you think they are going to be facing > > > each other a second time? > > > T1: > > > M'--------> > > -\ > > --\ > > ---\ > > ----\ > > -----M > > > T2: > > > -----M'--------> > > -----| > > -----| > > -----| > > -----| > > -----M > > > T3: > > > ----------M'--------> > > ---------/ > > --------/ > > -------/ > > ------/ > > -----M > > > There is no difference between the clocks being directly across from > > each other and one clock approaching, and then being directly across > > from, and then moving past the other clock.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > If two ships flow through space at near light speed next to each other > light will be left behind as it has to travel accross space to the > next ship. Each will see the other ship slightly behind because light > gets left behind in space. > > Mitch Raemsch Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. It might be more informative to discuss the light from lightning strikes on the train at A' and B' and on the embankment at A and B. Let's assume the train is full of flat bed cars and the lightning strikes occur above the flat bed cars on the train at A' and B'. Let's also assume the lightning strike occur above A and B on the embankment. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"- Albert Einstein This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment than the aether is at rest with respect to the train. The light travels from A and B to M and the light travels from A and B to where M' is when the light reaches M'. The light travels from where A' and B' were with respect to the Earth at the time of the lighting strikes to M'. Measuring to A' and B' on the train in order to determine how far the light travels to M' does not accurately reflect how far the light traveled in nature from the lightning strikes at A' and B' to M'. A' and B' have moved with respect to the aether between the time of the lightning strikes and the time the light reaches M'.
From: mpc755 on 13 Mar 2010 01:46 On Mar 13, 1:19 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 12, 7:56 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > T1: > > > M'--------> > > -\ > > --\ > > ---\ > > ----\ > > -----M > > > T2: > > > -----M'--------> > > -----| > > -----| > > -----| > > -----| > > -----M > > > T3: > > > ----------M'--------> > > ---------/ > > --------/ > > -------/ > > ------/ > > -----M > > > There is no difference between the clocks being directly across from > > each other and one clock approaching, and then being directly across > > from, and then moving past the other clock.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > If two ships flow through space at near light speed next to each other > light will be left behind as it has to travel accross space to the > next ship. Each will see the other ship slightly behind because light > gets left behind in space. > > Mitch Raemsch Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. It might be more informative to discuss the light from lightning strikes on the train at A' and B' and on the embankment at A and B. Let's assume the train is full of flat bed cars and the lightning strikes occur above the flat bed cars on the train at A' and B'. Let's also assume the lightning strike occur above A and B on the embankment. "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"- Albert Einstein This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment than the aether is at rest with respect to the train. The light travels from A and B to M and the light travels from A and B to where M' is when the light reaches M'. The light travels from where A' and B' were with respect to the Earth at the time of the lighting strikes to M'. Measuring to A' and B' on the train in order to determine how far the light travels to M' does not accurately reflect how far the light traveled in nature from the lightning strikes at A' and B' to M'. A' and B' have moved with respect to the aether between the time of the lightning strikes and the time the light reaches M'.
From: BURT on 13 Mar 2010 01:53 On Mar 12, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Mar 13, 1:19 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 12, 7:56 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > T1: > > > > M'--------> > > > -\ > > > --\ > > > ---\ > > > ----\ > > > -----M > > > > T2: > > > > -----M'--------> > > > -----| > > > -----| > > > -----| > > > -----| > > > -----M > > > > T3: > > > > ----------M'--------> > > > ---------/ > > > --------/ > > > -------/ > > > ------/ > > > -----M > > > > There is no difference between the clocks being directly across from > > > each other and one clock approaching, and then being directly across > > > from, and then moving past the other clock.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > If two ships flow through space at near light speed next to each other > > light will be left behind as it has to travel accross space to the > > next ship. Each will see the other ship slightly behind because light > > gets left behind in space. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. It might be more > informative to discuss the light from lightning strikes on the train > at A' and B' and on the embankment at A and B. Let's assume the train > is full of flat bed cars and the lightning strikes occur above the > flat bed cars on the train at A' and B'. Let's also assume the > lightning strike occur above A and B on the embankment. > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"- > Albert Einstein > > This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment > than the aether is at rest with respect to the train. The light > travels from A and B to M and the light travels from A and B to where > M' is when the light reaches M'. The light travels from where A' and > B' were with respect to the Earth at the time of the lighting strikes > to M'. Measuring to A' and B' on the train in order to determine how > far the light travels to M' does not accurately reflect how far the > light traveled in nature from the lightning strikes at A' and B' to > M'. A' and B' have moved with respect to the aether between the time > of the lightning strikes and the time the light reaches M'.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Light flows through space pushed by time. Space has its own aether that is the main "push" to matter behind all of physics. The strength of gravity does not require this aether to push. Since space flow push is what God is doing in physics. The rest of the pushes are from space's aether. Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 13 Mar 2010 02:00 On Mar 12, 10:53 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 12, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Mar 13, 1:19 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 12, 7:56 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > T1: > > > > > M'--------> > > > > -\ > > > > --\ > > > > ---\ > > > > ----\ > > > > -----M > > > > > T2: > > > > > -----M'--------> > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----M > > > > > T3: > > > > > ----------M'--------> > > > > ---------/ > > > > --------/ > > > > -------/ > > > > ------/ > > > > -----M > > > > > There is no difference between the clocks being directly across from > > > > each other and one clock approaching, and then being directly across > > > > from, and then moving past the other clock.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > If two ships flow through space at near light speed next to each other > > > light will be left behind as it has to travel accross space to the > > > next ship. Each will see the other ship slightly behind because light > > > gets left behind in space. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. It might be more > > informative to discuss the light from lightning strikes on the train > > at A' and B' and on the embankment at A and B. Let's assume the train > > is full of flat bed cars and the lightning strikes occur above the > > flat bed cars on the train at A' and B'. Let's also assume the > > lightning strike occur above A and B on the embankment. > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"- > > Albert Einstein > > > This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment > > than the aether is at rest with respect to the train. The light > > travels from A and B to M and the light travels from A and B to where > > M' is when the light reaches M'. The light travels from where A' and > > B' were with respect to the Earth at the time of the lighting strikes > > to M'. Measuring to A' and B' on the train in order to determine how > > far the light travels to M' does not accurately reflect how far the > > light traveled in nature from the lightning strikes at A' and B' to > > M'. A' and B' have moved with respect to the aether between the time > > of the lightning strikes and the time the light reaches M'.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Light flows through space pushed by time. Space has its own aether > that is the main "push" to matter behind all of physics. Space has its own aether but space is doing the pushing of matter. > The strength > of gravity does not require this aether to push. Since space flow that pushes > is what God is creating in physics. The rest of the pushes are from > space's aether. > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: mpc755 on 13 Mar 2010 02:00
On Mar 13, 1:53 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Mar 12, 10:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Mar 13, 1:19 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Mar 12, 7:56 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > T1: > > > > > M'--------> > > > > -\ > > > > --\ > > > > ---\ > > > > ----\ > > > > -----M > > > > > T2: > > > > > -----M'--------> > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----| > > > > -----M > > > > > T3: > > > > > ----------M'--------> > > > > ---------/ > > > > --------/ > > > > -------/ > > > > ------/ > > > > -----M > > > > > There is no difference between the clocks being directly across from > > > > each other and one clock approaching, and then being directly across > > > > from, and then moving past the other clock.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > If two ships flow through space at near light speed next to each other > > > light will be left behind as it has to travel accross space to the > > > next ship. Each will see the other ship slightly behind because light > > > gets left behind in space. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > Light travels at 'c' with respect to the aether. It might be more > > informative to discuss the light from lightning strikes on the train > > at A' and B' and on the embankment at A and B. Let's assume the train > > is full of flat bed cars and the lightning strikes occur above the > > flat bed cars on the train at A' and B'. Let's also assume the > > lightning strike occur above A and B on the embankment. > > > "the state of the [ether] is at every place determined by connections > > with the matter and the state of the ether in neighbouring places"- > > Albert Einstein > > > This means the aether is more at rest with respect to the embankment > > than the aether is at rest with respect to the train. The light > > travels from A and B to M and the light travels from A and B to where > > M' is when the light reaches M'. The light travels from where A' and > > B' were with respect to the Earth at the time of the lighting strikes > > to M'. Measuring to A' and B' on the train in order to determine how > > far the light travels to M' does not accurately reflect how far the > > light traveled in nature from the lightning strikes at A' and B' to > > M'. A' and B' have moved with respect to the aether between the time > > of the lightning strikes and the time the light reaches M'.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Light flows through space pushed by time. Space has its own aether > that is the main "push" to matter behind all of physics. The strength > of gravity does not require this aether to push. Since space flow push > is what God is doing in physics. The rest of the pushes are from > space's aether. > > Mitch Raemsch 'Time' is not a physical force capable of 'pushing'. Time is a concept. The rate at which a clock 'ticks' has nothing to do with time. The pressure associated with the aether determines the rate at which a clock ticks. |