Some Contradictory Claims of SR. [Physics]

Prev: 9-11 Kooks - * Hates US * still afraid to post one single thing in his physically impossible claims that he wants to defend -- he can't and he won't because they're all lies
Next: Cosmic Blackbody Microwave Background Radiation proves Atom Totality and dismisses Big Bang Chapt 3 #149; ATOM TOTALITY

From: Michael Moroney on 6 Jul 2010 15:52

kenseto <kenseto(a)erinet.com> writes:

>On Jul 1, 10:29 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
>wrote:
>> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
>>
>> >but SR predicts that that the
>> >bug dies at two different instants of time due to length contraction
>> >and that is the source of contradiction.
>>
>> No it doesn't. Both observers agree that the bug dies, just once.

>Hey idiot....

Since it is you who is having such a tough time understanding this problem
yet you continue to refuse to learn SR, I'd say that you're the idiot
around here.

>1. both observers must agree that the bug dies at the instant when the
>tip of the rivet hits it.

Exactly correct.

>2. SR predicts that the bug dies at two different instants of time.

Wrong. SR predicts the bug dies when the rivet tip hits it, which happens
exactly once.

From: Michael Moroney on 6 Jul 2010 15:55

kenseto <kenseto(a)erinet.com> writes:

>On Jul 1, 11:49 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> But, of course. Seto, listen up, I have no qualms with Michael's
>> postings. He is just trying to get you to examine the folly of your
>> misunderstandings about relativity theory.

>So you now agree with him that the satllite sees the ground clock
>running 53us/day running slow??? Do you realize that this disagree
>with actual observation?

WHAT "actual observation" ? Give references. Remember, your assertions
are just assertions, not facts.

From: Michael Moroney on 6 Jul 2010 16:01

Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)gmail.com> writes:

>On 7/2/10 8:16 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>
>> So you now agree with him that the satllite sees the ground clock
>> running 53us/day running slow??? Do you realize that this disagree
>> with actual observation?
>>

> Seto do you have any idea how to calculate the time dilation as
> seen from the surface of the earth of a satellite clock in a
> circular orbit at an orbital altitude of 202 km?

> Relativistic Effects on Satellite Clocks
>
>http://relativity.livingreviews.org/open?pubNo=lrr-2003-1&page=node5.html

> shows you how. You couldn't get the right answer if your life
> depended on it!

Ken is actually asking about the reverse. What is the speed of the ground
clock as seen by an observer on a GPS satellite. But you're correct, the
math is beyond him.

From: Sam Wormley on 6 Jul 2010 17:33

On 7/3/10 10:53 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Jul 2, 9:54 am, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7/2/10 8:12 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>
>>> 2. SR predicts that the bug dies at two different instants of time.
>>
>>> Ken Seto
>>
>> Wrong, Seto -- One observer. SR is correct every time!
>
> ROTFLOL....wormy is an idiot runt of the SRians.

So you keep saying, Seto. However, I suspect this document
cited below is relevant to your misunderstandings concerning
relativity theory.

Student understanding of time in special relativity:
simultaneity and reference frames

Rachel E. Scherr, Peter S. Shaffer, and Stamatis Vokos
Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

This article reports on an investigation of student understanding of the
concept of
time in special relativity. A series of research tasks are discussed
that illustrate,
step-by-step, how student reasoning of fundamental concepts of
relativity was
probed. The results indicate that after standard instruction students at
all academic
levels have serious difficulties with the relativity of simultaneity and
with the role
of observers in inertial reference frames. Evidence is presented that
suggests
many students construct a conceptual framework in which the ideas of
absolute
simultaneity and the relativity of simultaneity harmoniously co-exist.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/physics/0207109

VII. CONCLUSION
This investigation has identified widespread difficulties that
students have with the definition of the time of an event and
the role of intelligent observers. After instruction, more than
2/3 of physics undergraduates and 1/3 of graduate students in
physics are unable to apply the construct of a reference frame
in determining whether or not two events are simultaneous. Many
students interpret the phrase �relativity of simultaneity� as
implying that the simultaneity of events is determined by an
observer on the basis of the reception of light signals. They
often attribute the relativity of simultaneity to the
difference in signal travel time for different observers. In
this way, they reconcile statements of the relativity of
simultaneity with a belief in absolute simultaneity and fail
to confront the startling ideas of special relativity.

From: kenseto on 7 Jul 2010 10:23

On Jul 6, 3:52 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
wrote:
> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> >On Jul 1, 10:29 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
> >wrote:
> >> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
>
> >> >but SR predicts that that the
> >> >bug dies at two different instants of time due to length contraction
> >> >and that is the source of contradiction.
>
> >> No it doesn't. Both observers agree that the bug dies, just once.
> >Hey idiot....
>
> Since it is you who is having such a tough time understanding this problem
> yet you continue to refuse to learn SR, I'd say that you're the idiot
> around here.

Hey idiot I am not trying to learn SR. I am pointing out that SR makes
contradictory claims.

>
> >1. both observers must agree that the bug dies at the instant when the
> >tip of the rivet hits it.
>
> Exactly correct.
>
> >2. SR predicts that the bug dies at two different instants of time.
>
> Wrong. SR predicts the bug dies when the rivet tip hits it, which happens
> exactly once.

Wron....the rivet frame claims that the bug dies before the head of
the rivet hits the wall of the hole and the hole frame calaims that
the bug dies after the head of the rivet hits the wall of the hole.