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: kenseto on 29 Jul 2010 09:52
On Jul 28, 3:30 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
wrote:
> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> >Sure IRT is a super set of SR. It includes the correct prediction of SR
> >that says that an observed clock can run slow. But it reject the
> >faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt the observer are
> >running slow.
>
> The first and third sentences here are in direct conflict with each other..
> Pick one or the other:
>
> 1) "IRT is a super set of SR."
> 2) "[IRT] rejects the faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt
> the observer are running slow."

Both of these sentences are correct. SR is a subset of IRT because it
does not include the possibility that an observed clock can run faster
than the observer's clock.
From: kenseto on 29 Jul 2010 10:02
On Jul 28, 9:05 pm, Sam Wormley <sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/28/10 9:58 AM, kenseto wrote:
>
> > Sure IRT is a super set of SR It includes the correct prediction of SR
> > that says that an observed clock can run slow. But it reject the
> > faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt the observer are
> > running slow.
>
> > Ken Seto
>
>    Then IRT has to also predict:
>
>    A and B are observers with identical clocks. That is A and B's
>    clocks ticked synchronously when they were together.
>
>    ∆t represent a time interval between tick of the clocks.
>
>    Special relativity predicts that observer A will measure that
>      ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_A

From A's point of view IRT predicts the following:
∆t_B' = γ ∆t_A
OR
∆t_B' = (1/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) .
>
>    Furthermore, special relativity predicts that observer B will
>    measure that
>      ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_B

From B's point of view IRT predicts the following:
∆t_A' = γ ∆t_B
OR
∆t_A' = 1/γ ∆t_B

As you can see IRT includes the predictions of SR and more and that's
why IRT is a super set of SR.

Ken Seto

>
>    Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of special relativity?
>      http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

From: Peter Webb on 29 Jul 2010 10:08

"kenseto" <kenseto(a)erinet.com> wrote in message
news:cf033934-4c4d-41f1-b322-42f0539c17b5(a)f33g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 28, 3:30 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney)
wrote:
> kenseto <kens...(a)erinet.com> writes:
> >Sure IRT is a super set of SR. It includes the correct prediction of SR
> >that says that an observed clock can run slow. But it reject the
> >faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt the observer are
> >running slow.
>
> The first and third sentences here are in direct conflict with each other.
> Pick one or the other:
>
> 1) "IRT is a super set of SR."
> 2) "[IRT] rejects the faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt
> the observer are running slow."

Both of these sentences are correct. SR is a subset of IRT because it
does not include the possibility that an observed clock can run faster
than the observer's clock.

__________________________________
If in your theory the twin paradox doesn't occur, then your theory is wrong,
as this is observed. So, does it?


From: Sam Wormley on 29 Jul 2010 10:30
On 7/29/10 9:03 AM, kenseto wrote:
> No idiot....it merely means that the SR interpretation of the SR math
> is wrong.

Talk about an illogical statement "SR interpretation of the SR math
is wrong"!

Here are the facts, Seto:

o Special relativity was proposed in 1905.
o Special relativity is mathematically self consistent.
o Special relativity makes predictions and the predictions are
confirmed by observation and experiment.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html

There has never been an observation that contradicts a prediction
of special relativity.

The only thing wrong is that you, Seto, have no understanding of
special relativity... not even the very basics.

Physics FAQ: Are There Any Good Books on Relativity Theory?
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/rel_booklist.html





From: Sam Wormley on 29 Jul 2010 10:40
On 7/29/10 9:02 AM, kenseto wrote:
> On Jul 28, 9:05 pm, Sam Wormley<sworml...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 7/28/10 9:58 AM, kenseto wrote:
>>
>>> Sure IRT is a super set of SR It includes the correct prediction of SR
>>> that says that an observed clock can run slow. But it reject the
>>> faulty SR assertion that all clocks moving wrt the observer are
>>> running slow.
>>
>>> Ken Seto
>>
>> Then IRT has to also predict:
>>
>> A and B are observers with identical clocks. That is A and B's
>> clocks ticked synchronously when they were together.
>>
>> ∆t represent a time interval between tick of the clocks.
>>
>> Special relativity predicts that observer A will measure that
>> ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_A
>
> From A's point of view IRT predicts the following:

> ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_A
> OR
> ∆t_B' = (1/γ)∆t_A

Seto, you consistently confuse observer and observed. Furthermore
you have no understanding of special relativity with says that
that A will observe time dilation is B's clock, ∆t_B' = γ ∆t_B .

You also ALTERED what I wrote in my posting. Utterly dishonest!
You did that above and you did that below. Despicable! How can
you stoop so low as a human being?

I originally posted:

A and B are observers with identical clocks. That is A and B's
clocks ticked synchronously when they were together.

∆t represent a time interval between tick of the clocks.

Special relativity predicts that observer A will measure that
∆t_B' = γ ∆t_B

where ∆t represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity
between A and B, and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) .

Furthermore, special relativity predicts that observer B will
measure that
∆t_A' = γ ∆t_A

Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of special relativity?
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html


>
>>
>> where ∆t represent a time interval, v is the relative velocity
>> between A and B, and γ = 1/√(1-v^2/c^2) .
>>
>> Furthermore, special relativity predicts that observer B will
>> measure that
>> ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_B
>
> From B's point of view IRT predicts the following:
> ∆t_A' = γ ∆t_B
> OR
> ∆t_A' = 1/γ ∆t_B
>
> As you can see IRT includes the predictions of SR and more and that's
> why IRT is a super set of SR.
>
> Ken Seto
>
>>
>> Physics FAQ: What is the experimental basis of special relativity?
>> http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/experiments.html
>

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
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