CMBR's motion wrt the Earth
in [Relativity]
|
From: mluttgens on 18 Sep 2009 19:28 On 18 sep, 21:59, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 18, 2:37 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Dirk Van de moortel wrote: > > > > Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote in message > > >  H9Nsm.55993$la3.20752(a)attbi_s22 > > >> mluttgens wrote: > > > >>> Let's consider two objects A and B in uniform > > >>> translatory motion. > > > >>> According to SR, if A moves at v toward B, > > >>> reciprocally, B moves at -v toward A. > > >>> SR obviously doesn't take into consideration > > >>> the velocities vA and vB of the objects relative > > >>> to the CMBR (sometimes rightly called the rest > > >>> frame of the universe). > > > >> I was going to reply similar to PD, for you are > > >> attributing concepts to SR that predate SR by > > >> millennia. > > > >> Time dilation from A's perspective: > > > >>   t_B' = γ (t_B - x v/c^2) > > > > That's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured > > > in B's frame. > > > >> Time dilation from B's perspective: > > > >>   t_A' = γ (t_A - x v/c^2) > > > > ... and that's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured > > > in A's frame. > > > >> where v is the relative velocity between A and B > > >> and γ = 1/â(1-v^2/c^2) . > > > > bit confused? > > > > Dirk Vdm > > >   No, just sloppy and in a hurry. > > > Time dilation from A's perspective: > > >   ât_B' = γ ât_B > > > Time dilation from B's perspective: > > >   ât_A' = γ ât_A > > > where ât represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity > > between A and B, and γ = 1/â(1-v^2/c^2) . > > And this is where Marcel will get confused, because he doesn't > understand that those time intervals are between TWO pairs of events, > not one pair. And so he tries to apply those equations, for example, > to the ONE pair of events that is associated with cosmic ray muons > (birth and decay). Rememember Paul B. Andersen's analysis of the cosmic muons. He considered only one pair of events. When the CMBR is taken into consideration, it is clear that time dilation is not mutual. Marcel Luttgens
From: doug on 18 Sep 2009 20:42 mluttgens wrote: > On 18 sep, 21:59, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>On Sep 18, 2:37 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>Dirk Van de moortel wrote: >> >>>>Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote in message >>>> H9Nsm.55993$la3.20752(a)attbi_s22 >>>> >>>>>mluttgens wrote: >> >>>>>>Let's consider two objects A and B in uniform >>>>>>translatory motion. >> >>>>>>According to SR, if A moves at v toward B, >>>>>>reciprocally, B moves at -v toward A. >>>>>>SR obviously doesn't take into consideration >>>>>>the velocities vA and vB of the objects relative >>>>>>to the CMBR (sometimes rightly called the rest >>>>>>frame of the universe). >> >>>>>I was going to reply similar to PD, for you are >>>>>attributing concepts to SR that predate SR by >>>>>millennia. >> >>>>>Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >>>>> t_B' = γ (t_B - x v/c^2) >> >>>>That's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >>>>in B's frame. >> >>>>>Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >>>>> t_A' = γ (t_A - x v/c^2) >> >>>>... and that's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >>>>in A's frame. >> >>>>>where v is the relative velocity between A and B >>>>>and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) . >> >>>>bit confused? >> >>>>Dirk Vdm >> >>> No, just sloppy and in a hurry. >> >>>Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >>> ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_B >> >>>Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >>> ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_A >> >>>where ∆t represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity >>>between A and B, and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) . >> >>And this is where Marcel will get confused, because he doesn't >>understand that those time intervals are between TWO pairs of events, >>not one pair. And so he tries to apply those equations, for example, >>to the ONE pair of events that is associated with cosmic ray muons >>(birth and decay). > > > Rememember Paul B. Andersen's analysis of the cosmic muons. > He considered only one pair of events. > When the CMBR is taken into consideration, it is clear that > time dilation is not mutual. The CMBR has nothing to do with the calculation. You keep wanting it to but that is not how it works. > > Marcel Luttgens > > >
From: Inertial on 18 Sep 2009 20:25 "mluttgens" <mluttgens(a)orange.fr> wrote in message news:756d9890-f435-4e91-b813-48c6c697cbc4(a)h30g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... > On 13 sep, 15:55, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> mluttgens wrote: >> >> > Special relativity theory should be called the Theory of Mutual >> > Time Dilation. Clearly, mutual time dilation is nonsensical. >> > SRists found a solution for the twin paradox, explaining why "both >> > twins cannot be younger than each other", but consider normal >> > that two clocks moving relative to each other, for instance on >> > a road, show the same time dilation. Contradiction doesn't bother >> > them. They don't even try to find a general solution for >> > the nonsense, and modify SR accordingly. >> >> > Marcel Luttgens >> >> Marcel, you should take some time to learn what special >> relativity really says. One cannot have more than one >> perspective simultaneously. There has yet to be an observation >> that contradicts a prediction of special relativity. > > Let's consider two objects A and B in uniform > translatory motion. Fine > According to SR, if A moves at v toward B, > reciprocally, B moves at -v toward A. That's not just SR .. its been known physics for hundreds of years. > SR obviously doesn't take into consideration > the velocities vA and vB of the objects relative > to the CMBR (sometimes rightly called the rest > frame of the universe). Why the fvck should it? It makes ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE to the relative speeds of A and B > Let v be the velocity of A wrt B. > From the dipole anisotropy it observes, B > determines that its velocity relative to the > CMBR is vB, whose direction is the same as v. No .. it wouldn't necessarily be in the same directions as v > According to the CMBR observer (using c=1), > vA = (v-vB)/(1-vB*v) > tB = tCMBR * sqrt(1-vB^2) > tA = tCMBR * sqrt(1-((v-vB)/(1-vB*v))^2) > = tCMBR * sqrt1-vB^2)*sqrt(1-v^2)/(1-vB*v) > Hence, tA = tB * sqrt(1-v^2) / (1-vB*v). > > Clearly, the SR formula tA = tB * sqrt(1-v^2) > is correct only when B is at rest in the CMBR > (vB = 0). > But even in this case, SRists falsely claim > that B moves at -v relative to A, It does. You just don't understand basic physics > and thus, that > tB = tA * sqrt(1-v^2). Simply by looking at the > CMBR, B knows that its velocity vB is a physical > fact, Of course it is. Just like B looking at A knows that v is a physical fact > which is of course independent of the hypothesis > that motion is relative and that the time dilation > effect is correlatively reciprocal. You're a complete idiot. Go learn some basic physics before you make such a fool of yourself again.
From: Inertial on 18 Sep 2009 20:26 "mluttgens" <mluttgens(a)orange.fr> wrote in message news:b2f8c0cf-e2a9-4186-8afc-2f21cb8cf002(a)h30g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... > On 18 sep, 21:59, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> On Sep 18, 2:37 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > Dirk Van de moortel wrote: >> >> > > Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote in message >> > > H9Nsm.55993$la3.20752(a)attbi_s22 >> > >> mluttgens wrote: >> >> > >>> Let's consider two objects A and B in uniform >> > >>> translatory motion. >> >> > >>> According to SR, if A moves at v toward B, >> > >>> reciprocally, B moves at -v toward A. >> > >>> SR obviously doesn't take into consideration >> > >>> the velocities vA and vB of the objects relative >> > >>> to the CMBR (sometimes rightly called the rest >> > >>> frame of the universe). >> >> > >> I was going to reply similar to PD, for you are >> > >> attributing concepts to SR that predate SR by >> > >> millennia. >> >> > >> Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >> > >> t_B' = γ (t_B - x v/c^2) >> >> > > That's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >> > > in B's frame. >> >> > >> Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >> > >> t_A' = γ (t_A - x v/c^2) >> >> > > ... and that's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >> > > in A's frame. >> >> > >> where v is the relative velocity between A and B >> > >> and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) . >> >> > > bit confused? >> >> > > Dirk Vdm >> >> > No, just sloppy and in a hurry. >> >> > Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >> > ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_B >> >> > Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >> > ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_A >> >> > where ∆t represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity >> > between A and B, and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) . >> >> And this is where Marcel will get confused, because he doesn't >> understand that those time intervals are between TWO pairs of events, >> not one pair. And so he tries to apply those equations, for example, >> to the ONE pair of events that is associated with cosmic ray muons >> (birth and decay). > > Rememember Paul B. Andersen's analysis of the cosmic muons. > He considered only one pair of events. > When the CMBR is taken into consideration, it is clear that > time dilation is not mutual. It is mutual between every pair of observers. Learn some physics.
From: Inertial on 18 Sep 2009 20:27
"mluttgens" <mluttgens(a)orange.fr> wrote in message news:89a0bc9f-ad91-4ca4-9a12-ef24fdd77416(a)q14g2000vbi.googlegroups.com... > On 18 sep, 21:37, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote: >> Dirk Van de moortel wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)mchsi.com> wrote in message >> > H9Nsm.55993$la3.20752(a)attbi_s22 >> >> mluttgens wrote: >> >> >>> Let's consider two objects A and B in uniform >> >>> translatory motion. >> >> >>> According to SR, if A moves at v toward B, >> >>> reciprocally, B moves at -v toward A. >> >>> SR obviously doesn't take into consideration >> >>> the velocities vA and vB of the objects relative >> >>> to the CMBR (sometimes rightly called the rest >> >>> frame of the universe). >> >> >> I was going to reply similar to PD, for you are >> >> attributing concepts to SR that predate SR by >> >> millennia. >> >> >> Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >> >> t_B' = γ (t_B - x v/c^2) >> >> > That's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >> > in B's frame. >> >> >> Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >> >> t_A' = γ (t_A - x v/c^2) >> >> > ... and that's only time dilation for x = 0 and x measured >> > in A's frame. >> >> >> where v is the relative velocity between A and B >> >> and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) . >> >> > bit confused? >> >> > Dirk Vdm >> >> No, just sloppy and in a hurry. >> >> Time dilation from A's perspective: >> >> ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_B >> >> Time dilation from B's perspective: >> >> ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_A >> >> where ∆t represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity >> between A and B, and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) > > And again, forgetting the CMBR! Because it doesn't make a fvck of difference to what happens. |