Simultaneity of Relativity
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: A clock second is not a universal interval of time.
Next: Relativity ring problem - what shape is this?
From: mpc755 on 6 Nov 2009 08:36 On Nov 5, 9:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > There is only one aether. The aether is at rest relative to the train. > When a pebble is dropped into the pool, the center of the pool is at A/ > A'. When the wave reaches the Observer at M, the Observer at M > correctly measures the distance the wave traveled as the distance M > was from A' when the wave was detected. There is only one aether. If the aether is at rest relative to the embankment and a lightning strike occurs at A/A' the light wave propagates outward at 'c' from A. When an Observer, regardless of frame of reference, sees the light it has traveled from where A *is*. If Observers on the train or the embankment do not know their state of motion relative to the aether, they may approximate where the light originated from by measuring to marks left on the embankment or left on the train. If the Observer on the embankment concludes the lightning strikes occurred simultaneously and the Observer on the train concludes the lightning strike at B' occurred prior to the lightning strike at A', then one or both of the Observers is incorrect. Light does not travel at 'c' relative to frames of reference. Light travels at 'c' relative to the aether. When an Observer sees the light, the light wave will have traveled at 'c' to the Observer relative to the aether.
From: mpc755 on 6 Nov 2009 09:31 On Nov 6, 8:36 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 5, 9:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > There is only one aether. The aether is at rest relative to the train. > > When a pebble is dropped into the pool, the center of the pool is at A/ > > A'. When the wave reaches the Observer at M, the Observer at M > > correctly measures the distance the wave traveled as the distance M > > was from A' when the wave was detected. > > There is only one aether. If the aether is at rest relative to the > embankment and a lightning strike occurs at A/A' the light wave > propagates outward at 'c' from A. When an Observer, regardless of > frame of reference, sees the light it has traveled from where A *is*. > If Observers on the train or the embankment do not know their state of > motion relative to the aether, they may approximate where the light > originated from by measuring to marks left on the embankment or left > on the train. If the Observer on the embankment concludes the > lightning strikes occurred simultaneously and the Observer on the > train concludes the lightning strike at B' occurred prior to the > lightning strike at A', then one or both of the Observers is > incorrect. > > Light does not travel at 'c' relative to frames of reference. Light > travels at 'c' relative to the aether. When an Observer sees the > light, the light wave will have traveled at 'c' to the Observer > relative to the aether. The problem with Einstein's train thought experiment is in order for the Observer on the train to measure to A' and for the Observer on the embankment to measure to A and for both measurements to be accurate, the aether must be at rest relative to the train and at rest relative to the embankment which is physically impossible if both frames intersect and occupy the same three dimensional space.
From: mpc755 on 6 Nov 2009 10:45 On Nov 6, 9:31 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 6, 8:36 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 5, 9:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > There is only one aether. The aether is at rest relative to the train.. > > > When a pebble is dropped into the pool, the center of the pool is at A/ > > > A'. When the wave reaches the Observer at M, the Observer at M > > > correctly measures the distance the wave traveled as the distance M > > > was from A' when the wave was detected. > > > There is only one aether. If the aether is at rest relative to the > > embankment and a lightning strike occurs at A/A' the light wave > > propagates outward at 'c' from A. When an Observer, regardless of > > frame of reference, sees the light it has traveled from where A *is*. > > If Observers on the train or the embankment do not know their state of > > motion relative to the aether, they may approximate where the light > > originated from by measuring to marks left on the embankment or left > > on the train. If the Observer on the embankment concludes the > > lightning strikes occurred simultaneously and the Observer on the > > train concludes the lightning strike at B' occurred prior to the > > lightning strike at A', then one or both of the Observers is > > incorrect. > > > Light does not travel at 'c' relative to frames of reference. Light > > travels at 'c' relative to the aether. When an Observer sees the > > light, the light wave will have traveled at 'c' to the Observer > > relative to the aether. > > The problem with Einstein's train thought experiment is in order for > the Observer on the train to measure to A' and for the Observer on the > embankment to measure to A and for both measurements to be accurate, > the aether must be at rest relative to the train and at rest relative > to the embankment which is physically impossible if both frames > intersect and occupy the same three dimensional space. The aether is the preferred frame. The idea of motion may be applied to the aether.
From: PD on 6 Nov 2009 12:56 On Nov 5, 7:46 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 5, 8:30 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 5, 11:27 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 5, 12:53 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 5, 12:16 am, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Nov 4, 7:57 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 7:30 pm, Bruce Richmond <bsr3...(a)my-deja.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Nov 3, 11:38 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > This additional observer, which I will lable N, will se the flash when > > > > > > > M' sees it, but he will see it coming from a different direction. A' > > > > > > > is perpendicular to M' but A is not perpendicular to N, so he will > > > > > > > have to look back at an angle to see The flash which was perpendicular > > > > > > > to M in the track frame. > > > > > > > When the Observer at M sees the light from A and B his clock will read > > > > > > 12:00:01. When the Observer at M' sees the light from A' and B' his > > > > > > clock will read 12:00:01. Since the embankment frame of reference and > > > > > > the train frame of reference are equal in all respects, this means the > > > > > > Observer at M sees the light from A and B at the same time as the > > > > > > Observer at M' sees the light from A' and B'. How can the Observer at > > > > > > N be seeing the light from A and B at the same instant the Observer at > > > > > > M' is seeing the light from A' and B' if at this instant the Observer > > > > > > at M' clock reads 12:00:01 and the Observer at M clock reads 12:00:01 > > > > > > and the light from A and B has just reached the Observer at M? > > > > > > M and M' are at the same place at the same instant, so they see the > > > > > same light arive from A/A'. They see it coming from different > > > > > directions due to their different states of motion. They both > > > > > consider themselves to be at rest, but obviously they are moving > > > > > relative to each other so they will see things differently. When you > > > > > sit at rest in your moving car you see rain drops falling diagonally > > > > > while the person on the side of the road sees them falling > > > > > vertically. The same thing happens with sound waves. If there is a > > > > > loud bang of to the side as you ride by you will hear it comeing from > > > > > a different direction than a person standing on the side of the road. > > > > > > As for it being the same time at M and M', it's not really, any more > > > > > than x=1 and x'=1 are the same place. Relative simultanity makes time > > > > > position dependent. Look at the Lorentz transformation for converting > > > > > the time coordinate from one frame to another. It contains an x which > > > > > means the time depends on the position. > > > > > A/A' is a single event. B/B' is a single event. > > > > > In my train thought experiment the Observer at M' is not hastening > > > > towards B and away from A. The Observer at M' remains equidistant from > > > > A and B at all times. > > > > > A and M, B and M, A' and M', and B' and M' are equi-distant from each > > > > other. > > > > > In my train thought experiment, the light from a lightning strike at A/ > > > > A' must take the same amount of time to travel the same distance from > > > > A to M as it does from A' to M'. If the light does not take the same > > > > amount of time to travel from A to M as it does from A' to M', then > > > > the light has not traveled at 'c' in one or both frames. The same is > > > > true for the lightning strike at B/B' and the light that travels from > > > > B to M and the light that travels from B' to M'. It has to take the > > > > same amount of time to reach both Observers. > > > > > Now we have an Observer at N who is at the exact same location as M' > > > > is when the light from A' and B' reaches M'. > > > > > In order for the light from A and B to reach the Observer at N after > > > > the light from A and B reaches the Observer at M, the light from A and > > > > B must reach M prior to the light from A' and B' reaching M'. This > > > > means the lightning strike at both A and B in the embankment frame of > > > > reference occurred prior to the lightning strike at A' and B' in the > > > > train frame of reference. > > > > > If you consider that to be possible, we can continue with the > > > > analogy. > > > > > There is an Observer at N' who is at the exact same location as M is > > > > when the light from A and B reaches M. The Observer at N' is at rest > > > > relative to the train. > > > > > In the above scenario, since the light from A and B reaches M prior to > > > > the light from A' and B' reaching M', this means the light from A' and > > > > B' reaches N' prior to the light from A' and B' reaching M'. This is > > > > impossible. > > > > > You can try and coordinate the events anyway you want to, but with > > > > Observers at N and N', it is physically impossible. > > > > > And you do not have to use clocks or time. You just have to set when > > > > the events occur in terms of which lightning strike occurred prior to > > > > which lightning strike relative to both frames but the fact remains > > > > this cannot be resolved. > > > > > When the Observer at M' sees the light from A' and B', the Observer at > > > > N sees the light from A and B. This means the Observer at M had to > > > > have seen the light from A and B prior to the Observer at M' seeing > > > > the light from A' and B'. But this means the Observer at N' sees the > > > > light from A' and B' prior to the Observer at M' seeing the light from > > > > A' and B'. > > > > How this works in SR is the following. Since The Observer at M and the > > > Observer at N are in the same frame of reference, their clocks > > > maintain the same time. When the light from A and B reaches the > > > Observer at M, his clock reads 12:00:01:00. When the light from A and > > > B reaches the Observer at N, his clock reads 12:00:01:03. > > > > From the perspective of the train frame of reference, the Observer at > > > M is hastening away from the lightning strikes which occurred at A' > > > and B'. From the perspective of the train frame of reference, the > > > Observer at M' and the Observer at N see the light from the lightning > > > strike at A' and B' prior to the Observer at M seeing the light from > > > the lightning strike. From the perspective of the train frame of > > > reference, when the Observer at N sees the light, he looks at his > > > watch and it reads 12:00:01:03. From the perspective of the train > > > frame of reference, later on, when the Observer at M sees the light > > > from the lightning strikes he looks down at his watch and it reads > > > 12:00:01:00. I say this is physically impossible.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > Not even if the train frame considers the clocks at M and N to be out > > of sync? > > > I think you will agree that using just one coordinate system it is > > physically impossible for light to be measured as traveling at c with > > respect to both M and M'. That is why you wanted to add a second > > aether, or a pond, to provide a second reference point to use when > > measuring the speed of light with respect to M'. But if you use time > > and space the way it was used prior to SR you end up getting that > > light in the train frame can travel at c+v as measured in the track > > frame. And that does not agree with our previous claim that light > > always travels at c with respect to the track frame. > > I get around the c+v problem by realizing tying the emission point of > the light wave to a point in three dimensional space is incorrect. A > pebble is dropped into the pool on the train. If an Observer on the > embankment was unable to detect the moving water and was only able to > detect the wave in the water, he would conclude the wave originated > from where the center of the pool is when he detected the wave. This is rich. You really do that? Do all sounds appear to come from the middle of the room where you are standing? What about if your eyes are closed? > Any > Observer in any frame of reference who detects the wave will all > conclude the wave originated from where the center of the pool is when > they detect the wave. And all Observers will conclude the wave > traveled at the same speed from the center of the pool, thus 'c' is > maintained for light. > > > What SR/LET do to get around the problem is to give each frame their > > own time. The seconds in two different frames are different from each > > other in about the same way that 1 mile north is different from 1 mile > > east, but the Lorentz Transformations can be used to convert > > coordinates from one frame into those of another. When everything is > > done correctly it works. > >
From: mpc755 on 6 Nov 2009 13:02
On Nov 6, 10:45 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Nov 6, 9:31 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 6, 8:36 am, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 5, 9:07 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > There is only one aether. The aether is at rest relative to the train. > > > > When a pebble is dropped into the pool, the center of the pool is at A/ > > > > A'. When the wave reaches the Observer at M, the Observer at M > > > > correctly measures the distance the wave traveled as the distance M > > > > was from A' when the wave was detected. > > > > There is only one aether. If the aether is at rest relative to the > > > embankment and a lightning strike occurs at A/A' the light wave > > > propagates outward at 'c' from A. When an Observer, regardless of > > > frame of reference, sees the light it has traveled from where A *is*. > > > If Observers on the train or the embankment do not know their state of > > > motion relative to the aether, they may approximate where the light > > > originated from by measuring to marks left on the embankment or left > > > on the train. If the Observer on the embankment concludes the > > > lightning strikes occurred simultaneously and the Observer on the > > > train concludes the lightning strike at B' occurred prior to the > > > lightning strike at A', then one or both of the Observers is > > > incorrect. > > > > Light does not travel at 'c' relative to frames of reference. Light > > > travels at 'c' relative to the aether. When an Observer sees the > > > light, the light wave will have traveled at 'c' to the Observer > > > relative to the aether. > > > The problem with Einstein's train thought experiment is in order for > > the Observer on the train to measure to A' and for the Observer on the > > embankment to measure to A and for both measurements to be accurate, > > the aether must be at rest relative to the train and at rest relative > > to the embankment which is physically impossible if both frames > > intersect and occupy the same three dimensional space. > > The aether is the preferred frame. > > The idea of motion may be applied to the aether. This one is not mine: "Aether is the preferred relation to the frame considered" |