Is Length Contraction in SR physical??
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Simultaneous events and Einstein's absolute time
Next: New Theory --- The Theory of Quantum Wave Sources
From: Ste on 7 Feb 2010 22:55 On 7 Feb, 22:48, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:807a38a6-210c-4b5a-9ae0-388f623f391a(a)b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On 7 Feb, 07:08, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> > > wrote: > >> "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >> >> _________________________________ > >> >> Lots of ways. Normally I measure length by puting a ruler next to an > >> >> object. > > >> > And by looking at the readings with your eyes no doubt - so we've gone > >> > back to a measurement mediated by light? > > >> No, I feel the edges with my fingers. Blind people can still measure > >> things. > > > Ain't that the truth about physicists! But seriously, yes you can > > feel, but the fact remains that no "feeling" experiment has ever been > > done. > > Huh? > > Your complaint about SR is that the experiments have never been conducted by > a blind person using touch alone? No, my complaint is about the people who keep insisting that SR represents something more fundamental than a description of the behaviour of EMR.
From: mpalenik on 7 Feb 2010 22:56 On Feb 7, 10:55 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > On 7 Feb, 22:48, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> > wrote: > > > > > > > "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:807a38a6-210c-4b5a-9ae0-388f623f391a(a)b10g2000yqa.googlegroups.com.... > > > > On 7 Feb, 07:08, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> > > > wrote: > > >> "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > >> >> _________________________________ > > >> >> Lots of ways. Normally I measure length by puting a ruler next to an > > >> >> object. > > > >> > And by looking at the readings with your eyes no doubt - so we've gone > > >> > back to a measurement mediated by light? > > > >> No, I feel the edges with my fingers. Blind people can still measure > > >> things. > > > > Ain't that the truth about physicists! But seriously, yes you can > > > feel, but the fact remains that no "feeling" experiment has ever been > > > done. > > > Huh? > > > Your complaint about SR is that the experiments have never been conducted by > > a blind person using touch alone? > > No, my complaint is about the people who keep insisting that SR > represents something more fundamental than a description of the > behaviour of EMR.- Hide quoted text - > This is exactly what the paper I linked to in the other thread tested and it was found that no, it is not simply an electromagnetic phenomenon.
From: Ste on 7 Feb 2010 23:16 On 7 Feb, 22:51, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> wrote: > "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:55e684ae-d818-408f-8f9b-edabe36ed71e(a)d27g2000yqn.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On 7 Feb, 08:44, "Peter Webb" <webbfam...(a)DIESPAMDIEoptusnet.com.au> > > wrote: > >> "Ste" <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >> No it hasn't Paul. The experiment you describe, or anything like it, > >> has not been carried out, and the literature makes this clear that > >> physical length contraction has not been observed experimentally. > > >> _________________________________ > > >> I already gave you a direct link to where the effect is observed > >> experimentally hundreds of times a day: > > >>http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/theory/relativity.html > > > I'm afraid I do not see any link to research on that site. > > You don't think SLAC conduct research, and you couldn't find any on their > website? I didn't look. If you know of the research, then identify it. These arguments can't just keep coming back to you wafting your hand in the direction where you believe evidence exists. > The link I gave you above explains exactly what would happen in SLAC if the > length of the accelerator was not foreshortened by SR, ie it wouldn't work. > It does work, almost every day. The only "evidence" on that page is that when tauons move at speed, they appear to travel further before decaying, an appearance which no one denies. It then goes on to speculate what the tauon would "see" from within its own reference frame. But let me ask you, how is the decay event detected?
From: mpalenik on 7 Feb 2010 23:29 On Feb 7, 11:16 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > But let me ask you, how is the decay event detected?- Hide quoted text - > Is it really that hard to click the link? http://www2.slac.stanford.edu/vvc/detectors.html Just so you know, it's not done by sending a beam of light at the particle or anything like that, which would be nearly impossible to do anyway.
From: Ste on 8 Feb 2010 00:19
On 8 Feb, 03:16, mpalenik <markpale...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Feb 7, 9:59 pm, Ste <ste_ro...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > 3 dimensional geometry does need a physical explanation, and it's very > > easy to provide one that appeals to our most obvious intuitions. > > I just wanted to say "it appeals to our most obvious intuitions" is > not a physical reason. Yes it is, because what we observe *is* physical reality. > Part of your problem is that you do treat that > as if it's a physical reason. Obvious intuitions can be wrong--such > as Aristotle's obvious intuition that objects need a force acting on > them to keep them in motion, which was the prevailing thought in > physics for over 1000 years. That is not an intuition. That is a child with a hammer trying to say that everything is nails. |