Two clocks; one moving past the other at high speed
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: "The Impossibility of Measuring the Velocity of Light"
Next: The Quantum Geometry of the Spacetime
From: BURT on 5 Nov 2009 00:29 On Nov 4, 8:54 pm, xxein <xx...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > On Nov 4, 2:44 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Nov 2, 2:54 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > "BURT" <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > >news:0d4fefb0-ed41-45e3-b67f-694d1fab63ba(a)x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com.... > > > > > If the trains clock is the only one going slow then it will be seen as > > > > the only one going slow. The train will see fast clocks passing around > > > > it. What is not seen is each going slower than the other. This > > > > contradiction is dumb science. > > > > So speaks the dumb non-scientist. > > > If only one clock is the one going slow it can only be seen that that > > clock is running slower than the other in every frame. It can't be any > > other way. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > xxein: If you are stupid, it can only be seen that you are stupid for > every case. It can't be any other way.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I see you are talking about yourself. I am an aether scientist. Even Einstein brought back the aether after he developed General Relativity. Mitch Raemsch
From: nuny on 5 Nov 2009 02:29 On Nov 4, 9:29 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Nov 4, 8:54 pm, xxein <xx...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > > > > On Nov 4, 2:44 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Nov 2, 2:54 pm, "Inertial" <relativ...(a)rest.com> wrote: > > > > > "BURT" <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:0d4fefb0-ed41-45e3-b67f-694d1fab63ba(a)x5g2000prf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > If the trains clock is the only one going slow then it will be seen as > > > > > the only one going slow. The train will see fast clocks passing around > > > > > it. What is not seen is each going slower than the other. This > > > > > contradiction is dumb science. > > > > > So speaks the dumb non-scientist. > > > > If only one clock is the one going slow it can only be seen that that > > > clock is running slower than the other in every frame. It can't be any > > > other way. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > xxein: If you are stupid, it can only be seen that you are stupid for > > every case. It can't be any other way.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > I see you are talking about yourself. > > I am an aether scientist. Even Einstein brought back the aether after > he developed General Relativity. Answer my question, Mitch. One train is stationary with respect to the Earth, but the Earth is rotating with an equatorial velocity of ~1000 mph eastward. The other train is traveling westward at 1000 mph, cancelling the Earth's rotation velocity. Which train's clock runs slow? Mark L. Fergerson
From: rotchm on 5 Nov 2009 10:36 > Einstein brought back the aether Einstein NEVER "discarded" the ether. Find an official reference where Einstein said that the etherer does not exist. Post 1905 scientits claimed that Einstein claimed that, but without reference. > If the trains clock is the only one going slow then it will be > seen as the only one going slow. But SR does not say that the clocks go slow, nor does it say that an observer will "see" clokcs go slow.
From: BURT on 5 Nov 2009 12:09 On Nov 5, 7:36 am, rotchm <rot...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Einstein brought back the aether > > Einstein NEVER "discarded" the ether. Find an official reference where > Einstein said that the etherer does not exist. Post 1905 scientits > claimed that Einstein claimed that, but without reference. > > > If the trains clock is the only one going slow then it will be > > seen as the only one going slow. > > But SR does not say that the clocks go slow, nor does it say that an > observer will "see" clokcs go slow. Eiisntein said that by his SR theory no aether was necesary for calculation. This people believed was the disproof of its existence. Later he brought it back. Mitch Raemsch
From: rotchm on 5 Nov 2009 12:20
> Eiisntein said that by his SR theory no aether was necesary for > calculation. Exactly. >This people believed was the disproof of its existence. People believe what they want. The "ether" was never proven to unexist. |