Prev: NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist"
Next: If Economics is one of the "Soft Sciences" how can it be trusted
From: kenseto on 16 Jul 2010 10:34
Properties of a preferred frame:
1. The speed of light is isotropic.
2. The speed one-way or two way speed of light is constant and it is
not distance dependent....even if it is measured using physical meter
stick.
3. A clock at rest in the preferred frame is the fastest running
clock
in the universe....in other words, all the clocks moving with the
preferred clock are running slower.
4. The material length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
frame
is 1 meter long materially.
5. The material length of a meter stick moving wrt the perferred
frame is 1 meter long materially.
6. The light path length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
frame is the same as its materially length ....in other words, 1
meter
long materially
7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the preferred
frame is shorter than its material length.
8. There is only one preferred frame exists and no object in the
universe is at rest in this preferred frame.

Properties of an inertial frame in IRT:
1. The speed of light in any inertial frame is isotropic.
2. The actual measured value for the one-way or two-way speed of
light
is not a constant c in any inertial frame. It is a distance
dependent
quantity when length is measured using material meter stick.
3. An observed clock is predicted to run fast by a factor of gamma
or run slow by a factor of 1/gamma compared to the observer's clock.
The rate of a clock is dependent on its state of absolute motion.
4. The material length of the observer's meter stick 1 meter long
materially.
5. The material length of a meter stick moving wrt an observer is
also 1 meter long materially.
6. The light path length of the IRT observer's meter strick is
assumed to be its material length.
7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the observer is
predicted to be shorter by a factor of (1/gamma) or longer by a
factor
of (gamma) compared to the light path length of the observer's meter
stick which is assumed to be its material length.
8. Simultaneity is absolute....in other words if A sees two events to
be simultaneous then B will also see the same events to be
simultaneous but at different instants of time.
IRT is described in the following link:
http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf

Properties of an inertial frame in SR:
1. The speed of light is isotropic.
2. The one-way or two way speed of light is a defined constant ratio
of:
c=1 light-second/1 second
The defintion for a meter length is 1/299,792,458 light-second
3. Every SR observer claims that all the clocks in the universe moving
with respect to him are running slow....in other words every SR
observer claims that his clock is the fastest running clock in the
universe. This SR claim gives rise to the concept of mutual time
dilation.
4. Every SR observer claims that his meter stick is the proper length
and that all the meter sticks moving wrt him are contracted in the
direction of motion. However, length contraction in SR is not material
or physical contraction..... it is a geometric projection effect.
5. Simultaniety is relative.....if A sees two events to be
simultaneous then B will not see these same two events to be
simultaneous.


Ken Seto


From: PD on 16 Jul 2010 11:17
On Jul 16, 9:34 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
> Properties of a preferred frame:
> 1. The speed of light is isotropic.
> 2. The speed one-way or two way speed of light is constant and it is
> not distance dependent....even if it is measured using physical meter
> stick.
> 3. A clock at rest in the preferred frame is the fastest running
> clock
> in the universe....in other words, all the clocks moving with the
> preferred clock are running slower.
> 4. The material length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
> frame
> is 1 meter long materially.
> 5.  The material length of a meter stick moving wrt the perferred
> frame is 1 meter long materially.
> 6. The light path length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
> frame is the same as its materially length ....in other words, 1
> meter
> long materially
> 7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the preferred
> frame is shorter than its material length.
> 8. There is only one preferred frame exists and no object in the
> universe is at rest in this preferred frame.

This is not what is meant by a "preferred frame" in physics.

If you would like to use the above definition to define some kind of
frame, then you can feel free to do so, and give it a Seto-specific
name. Just don't call it a "preferred frame" and use that term in
conversation with physicists. It would be the same if you decided that
the properties of a zebra were that it was a black and white
flightless bird that lived in the Antarctic, and then talked about
zebras in the Antarctic with zoologists. They would think you were off
your nut.

>
> Properties of an inertial frame in IRT:
> 1. The speed of light in any inertial frame is isotropic.
> 2. The actual measured value for the one-way or two-way speed of
> light
> is not a constant c in any inertial frame. It  is a distance
> dependent
> quantity when length is measured using material  meter stick.
> 3. An  observed  clock is predicted to run fast by a factor of gamma
> or run slow by a factor of 1/gamma compared to the observer's clock.
> The rate of a clock is dependent on its state of absolute motion.
> 4. The material length of the observer's  meter stick 1 meter long
> materially.
> 5.  The material length of a meter stick moving wrt an observer is
> also 1 meter long materially.
> 6. The light path length of the IRT observer's meter strick is
> assumed to be its material length.
> 7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the observer is
> predicted to be shorter by a factor of (1/gamma) or longer by a
> factor
> of (gamma) compared to  the light path length of the observer's meter
> stick which is assumed to be its material length.
> 8. Simultaneity is absolute....in other words if A sees two events to
> be simultaneous then B will also see the same events to be
> simultaneous but at different instants of time.
> IRT is described in the following link:http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf
>
> Properties of an inertial frame in SR:
> 1. The speed of light is isotropic.

Yes.

> 2. The  one-way or two way speed of light is a defined constant ratio
> of:
> c=1 light-second/1 second
> The defintion for a meter length is 1/299,792,458 light-second

Yes.

> 3. Every SR observer claims that all the clocks in the universe moving
> with respect to him are running slow.

Yes.

>...in other words every SR
> observer claims that his clock is the fastest running clock in the
> universe.

No.

> This SR claim gives rise to the concept of mutual time
> dilation.

No.

> 4. Every SR observer claims that his meter stick is the proper length

No.

> and that all the meter sticks moving wrt him are contracted in the
> direction of motion.

Yes.

> However, length contraction in SR is not material
> or physical contraction.

No. It is not a material contraction but it is a physical contraction.

>.... it is a geometric projection effect.

Yes. And it is a physical contraction.

> 5. Simultaniety is relative.....if A sees two events to be
> simultaneous then B will not see these same two events to be
> simultaneous.

Yes.

So, all in all, you still have a lot of what SR says wrong. But you're
very slowly getting better. Do you think you'll understand SR by the
time you're 87?
From: kenseto on 17 Jul 2010 10:03
On Jul 16, 11:17 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 16, 9:34 am, kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Properties of a preferred frame:
> > 1. The speed of light is isotropic.
> > 2. The speed one-way or two way speed of light is constant and it is
> > not distance dependent....even if it is measured using physical meter
> > stick.
> > 3. A clock at rest in the preferred frame is the fastest running
> > clock
> > in the universe....in other words, all the clocks moving with the
> > preferred clock are running slower.
> > 4. The material length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
> > frame
> > is 1 meter long materially.
> > 5.  The material length of a meter stick moving wrt the perferred
> > frame is 1 meter long materially.
> > 6. The light path length of a meter stick at rest in the preferred
> > frame is the same as its materially length ....in other words, 1
> > meter
> > long materially
> > 7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the preferred
> > frame is shorter than its material length.
> > 8. There is only one preferred frame exists and no object in the
> > universe is at rest in this preferred frame.
>
> This is not what is meant by a "preferred frame" in physics.

So why don't you be specific and give us the specific properties of a
preferred frame in physics????

>
> If you would like to use the above definition to define some kind of
> frame, then you can feel free to do so, and give it a Seto-specific
> name. Just don't call it a "preferred frame" and use that term in
> conversation with physicists. It would be the same if you decided that
> the properties of a zebra were that it was a black and white
> flightless bird that lived in the Antarctic, and then talked about
> zebras in the Antarctic with zoologists. They would think you were off
> your nut.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Properties of an inertial frame in IRT:
> > 1. The speed of light in any inertial frame is isotropic.
> > 2. The actual measured value for the one-way or two-way speed of
> > light
> > is not a constant c in any inertial frame. It  is a distance
> > dependent
> > quantity when length is measured using material  meter stick.
> > 3. An  observed  clock is predicted to run fast by a factor of gamma
> > or run slow by a factor of 1/gamma compared to the observer's clock.
> > The rate of a clock is dependent on its state of absolute motion.
> > 4. The material length of the observer's  meter stick 1 meter long
> > materially.
> > 5.  The material length of a meter stick moving wrt an observer is
> > also 1 meter long materially.
> > 6. The light path length of the IRT observer's meter strick is
> > assumed to be its material length.
> > 7. The light path length of a meter stick moving wrt the observer is
> > predicted to be shorter by a factor of (1/gamma) or longer by a
> > factor
> > of (gamma) compared to  the light path length of the observer's meter
> > stick which is assumed to be its material length.
> > 8. Simultaneity is absolute....in other words if A sees two events to
> > be simultaneous then B will also see the same events to be
> > simultaneous but at different instants of time.
> > IRT is described in the following link:http://www.modelmechanics.org/2008irt.dtg.pdf
>
> > Properties of an inertial frame in SR:
> > 1. The speed of light is isotropic.
>
> Yes.
>
> > 2. The  one-way or two way speed of light is a defined constant ratio
> > of:
> > c=1 light-second/1 second
> > The defintion for a meter length is 1/299,792,458 light-second
>
> Yes.
>
he reason for the defined constant for the speed of light is because
the measured value (using physical meter stick)for the speed of light
is not a constant c....it is distance dependent.

> > 3. Every SR observer claims that all the clocks in the universe moving
> > with respect to him are running slow.
>
> Yes.
>
> >...in other words every SR
> > observer claims that his clock is the fastest running clock in the
> > universe.
>
> No.

????if he claims that all the clocks moving wrt him are running slow
then it follows that his clock is the fastest running clock in the
universe.
>
> > This SR claim gives rise to the concept of mutual time
> > dilation.
>
> No.

If every SR observer claim that all the clocks moving wrt him are
runing slow....why does that not give rise to the concept of mutual
time dilation? For example: A c;laims that B ic running slow and B
claims that A is running slow.
>
> > 4. Every SR observer claims that his meter stick is the proper length
>
> No.
>
ROTFLOL....so the SR observer's meter stick is not its proper length??
You truly are an idiot.


> > and that all the meter sticks moving wrt him are contracted in the
> > direction of motion.
>
> Yes.

Is this a material contraction or just a geometric projection effect?

>
> > However, length contraction in SR is not material
> > or physical contraction.
>
> No. It is not a material contraction but it is a physical contraction.

Physical is material.

>
> >.... it is a geometric projection effect.
>
> Yes. And it is a physical contraction.

But you said before that physical contraction is not geometric
projection effect.

>
> > 5. Simultaniety is relative.....if A sees two events to be
> > simultaneous then B will not see these same two events to be
> > simultaneous.
>
> Yes.

But this violates the isotropy of the speed of light in all inertial
frames.

Ken Seto

>
> So, all in all, you still have a lot of what SR says wrong. But you're
> very slowly getting better. Do you think you'll understand SR by the
> time you're 87?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

From: Inertial on 17 Jul 2010 10:16
"kenseto" wrote in message
news:bc9793f9-d2e3-4cef-a841-ef8888bb8191(a)q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>So why don't you be specific and give us the specific properties of a
>preferred frame in physics????

There is no preferred frame in SR or GR, so it makes no sense to talk about
specific properties of something that doesn't exist.

If there WAS a preferred frame, it would have at least SOME property that is
different and 'special' compared to every other frame which would make it
preferred.

As there is no preferred frame, we cannot say what particular properties it
has that is different to other frames.

If you want to talk about what other theories says about preferred frames,
then please specify what theories you are referring to.

From: kenseto on 17 Jul 2010 10:49
On Jul 17, 10:16 am, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote:
> "kenseto"  wrote in message
>
> news:bc9793f9-d2e3-4cef-a841-ef8888bb8191(a)q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >So why don't you be specific and give us the specific properties of a
> >preferred frame in physics????
>
> There is no preferred frame in SR or GR, so it makes no sense to talk about
> specific properties of something that doesn't exist.

Hey idiot...PD claimed that the properties I described are not the
properties of the preferred frame that's why I asked him for the
specific properties of the preferred frame.

>
> If there WAS a preferred frame, it would have at least SOME property that is
> different and 'special' compared to every other frame which would make it
> preferred.

So what are those special properties?
The preferred observer's clock is the fastest running clock in the
universe is not a preferred clock??

>
> As there is no preferred frame, we cannot say what particular properties it
> has that is different to other frames.

So assertion is your arguement?

>
> If you want to talk about what other theories says about preferred frames,
> then please specify what theories you are referring to.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: NYT - 7/13/10 - "Gravity Does Not Exist"
Next: If Economics is one of the "Soft Sciences" how can it be trusted