Wonderful!
in [Physics]
|
From: mpc755 on 21 Dec 2009 10:15 On Dec 21, 10:01 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 dic, 11:36, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 21, 9:32 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Why won't you answer the modified Einstein train thought experiment? > > What are you afraid of? > > > Water is at rest with respect to the embankment. The train is full of > > flat bed cars which have no effect on the state of the water. > > Lightning strike occurs at A/A' and B/B'. Does the light travel from > > A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'? > > I have, as many other, already answered your "thought experiment". You > either have a very short memory or you are a very dishonest person. > > Well, let us think positive so here we go....again: > > You say: "Water is at rest with respect to the embankment." Let us > interpret that assumption as saying that observer M, who is sitting > still on the embankment, is also at rest with respect to your water. > > Then you write: "The train is full of flat bed cars which have no > effect on the state of the water" We interpret this to mean you are > saying this "submarine train" is moving without any friction from the > water. Because, we are assuming you are still considering the train > moving at a speed v relative to the embankment, are you not? > > Then you write: "Lightning strike occurs at A/A' and B/B'. Does the > light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?" Again, we > assume you mean when the strikes hit, point A' on the train coincided > with point A on the embankment and the same with points B and B', > right? > If so, then sure enough, light signal fronts from the TWO hit points > (A/A' and B/B') expand on a spherical way. Those two light signal > fronts will eventually reach the location of observers M, on the > embankment, and observer M', on the train and, sure enough, while > observer M will observe TWO simultaneous light signals, observer M' > will observe TWO non simultaneous light signals. Note that the > converse and symmetrical case is also true, that is, if observer M' > sees TWO simultaneous light signals, then observer M will see TWO non > simultaneous light signals (this case will occur if observer M' > considers himself at rest with respect to the train and sees observer > M (and the embankment) moving at a speed v on the negative direction > of x. > > There you go > > Miguel Rios The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken where the water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?
From: paparios on 21 Dec 2009 11:10 On 21 dic, 12:15, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 21, 10:01 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken where the > water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the light travel > from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'? So you did not like my answer to your question, which was "Lightning strike occurs at A/A' and B/B'. Does the light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?", and now you are asking again....the very same question!!! Are you out of your mind???? Let us do it again!!! You ask: "The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken where the water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?" The answer is the same I gave you before which is the following: light signal fronts from the TWO hit points (A/A' and B/B') expand on a spherical way. Those two light signal fronts will eventually reach the location of observers M, on the embankment, and observer M', on the train and, sure enough, while observer M will observe TWO simultaneous light signals, observer M' will observe TWO non simultaneous light signals. Note that the converse and symmetrical case is also true, that is, if observer M' sees TWO simultaneous light signals, then observer M will see TWO non simultaneous light signals (this case will occur if observer M' considers himself at rest with respect to the train and sees observer M (and the embankment) moving at a speed v on the negative direction of x). Do you need a more detailed explanation? Miguel Rios
From: mpc755 on 21 Dec 2009 11:19 On Dec 21, 11:10 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 dic, 12:15, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Dec 21, 10:01 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken where the > > water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the light travel > > from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'? > > So you did not like my answer to your question, which was "Lightning > strike occurs at A/A' and B/B'. Does the light travel from A' and B' > to M' or from A and B to M'?", and now you are asking again....the > very same question!!! Are you out of your mind???? > > Let us do it again!!! > > You ask: "The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken > where the water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the > light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?" > > The answer is the same I gave you before which is the following: > > light signal fronts from the TWO hit points (A/A' and B/B') expand on > a spherical way. Those two light signal fronts will eventually reach > the location of observers M, on the embankment, and observer M', on > the train and, sure enough, while observer M will observe TWO > simultaneous light signals, observer M' > will observe TWO non simultaneous light signals. Note that the > converse and symmetrical case is also true, that is, if observer M' > sees TWO simultaneous light signals, then observer M will see TWO non > simultaneous light signals (this case will occur if observer M' > considers himself at rest with respect to the train and sees observer > M (and the embankment) moving at a speed v on the negative direction > of x). > > Do you need a more detailed explanation? > > Miguel Rios I agree with you in terms of what you have answered so far. If the Observer at M sees the light from A/A' and B/B' simultaneously, the Observer at M' will not see the light from A/A' and from B/B' simultaneously. That is NOT what I am asking. I am asking, in a modified Einstein train gedanken where the water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the light from the TWO lighting strikes, one at A/A' and the one at B/B', travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'.
From: PD on 21 Dec 2009 12:04 On Dec 16, 10:09 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 16, 11:06 pm, GogoJF <jfgog...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 10:01 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Dec 16, 10:32 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Dec 16, 10:08 pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) > > > > wrote: > > > > > > mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> writes: > > > > > >On Dec 16, 8:34=A0pm, moro...(a)world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > >> >> 1) What is the velocity of the light beam relative to the aether, when > > > > > >> >> it's still travelling through the train? > > > > > >> >Light travels at 'c' relative to the aether. > > > > > > >> OK. Since the angle is so small we can ignore the small effects of > > > > > >> sin/cos of it being different from 0/1. So... the platform observer will > > > > > >> see the light on the train moving at either 1.25 c or 0.75 c > > > > > >The platform observer does not 'see the light on the train'. That is > > > > > >one of the biggest misconceptions of light. You don't watch light > > > > > >propagate like a thrown baseball. What you 'see' is light when it hits > > > > > >your eye. > > > > > > That's why I added the 'dust' to the train. Some of the laser going from > > > > > the back to the front would be scattered by the dust, so that the > > > > > embankment observer could see the laser pulse propagate. > > > > > But the light which is reflected by the dust is still going to travel > > > > through the aether which is at rest relative to the embankment. You're > > > > still not 'seeing the light propagate on the train'. What you are > > > > 'seeing' is light reflected by dust particles traveling at 'c' > > > > relative to the aether. > > > > > > Or, to put it another way. A 1 light year long train, travelling at c/4. > > > > > When the front of the train is 1/4 light year away, the rear of the train > > > > > is 1 1/4 light year away. At that time, a laser is fired from the rear to > > > > > the front. One year later, the front of the train reaches the embankment > > > > > observer since it was travelling at c/4 and was 1/4 light year away. At > > > > > the same time, the laser pulse reaches the front of the train since it was > > > > > travelling a distance of 1 light year for one year. Therefore, as far as > > > > > the trackside observer is concerned, the light travelled 1 1/4 light year > > > > > in 1 year, or 1.25 c. > > > > > Again, this is incorrect. In your gadenken, I'm assuming the aether is > > > > at rest relative to the train. When the light reaches the Observer on > > > > the embankment, the light has traveled from where the back of the > > > > train *is*. The light has traveled 1 light year from where the back of > > > > the train *is* to where the Observer on the embankment is. > > > > > Since the aether is at rest relative to the train, where the lightning > > > > strike occurred in three dimensional space relative to the Observer on > > > > the embankment is meaningless. > > > > > Light travels at 'c' relative to the aether. > > > > > I don't know how else to explain this but with flashes of light in > > > > water. > > > > > There is a round pool on the train. The side of the pool is made of > > > > glass. There are Observers on the train with their faces pushed up > > > > against the glass. > > > > > There is an Observer on the embankment. > > > > > A flash goes off in the middle of the pool. > > > > > It just so happens when the flash travels through the water, travels > > > > through the glass, and is about to reach the Observers on the train, > > > > the pool is right next to the Observer on the embankment. > > > > > The Observer on the embankment presses his face against the glass just > > > > like the Observers on the train do. > > > > > The light travels the same distance to ALL of the Observers. > > > > > The light has traveled from where the center of the pool *is* to where > > > > the Observers on the train *are* when the Observers on the train see > > > > the light. > > > > > The light has traveled from where the center of the pool *is* to where > > > > the Observer on the embankment *is* when the Observer on the > > > > embankment sees the light. > > > > > The light has traveled relative to the water which is at rest relative > > > > to the train. > > > > > In your gadenken, since I am assuming the aether is at rest relative > > > > to the train, the light has traveled at 'c' relative to the aether > > > > which is at rest relative to the train. > > > > > In you gadenken, if an Observer on the embankment and an Observer on > > > > the train are standing side by side when the light reaches both of > > > > them, the light has traveled the same distance to each of them because > > > > the light is traveling relative to the aether, and besides the last > > > > instant where the light is no longer on the train but on the > > > > embankment right before it reaches the Observer on the embankment, the > > > > light had traveled through the aether which is at rest relative to the > > > > train. > > > > I have a better gadenken. A modified version of your gadenken. > > > > The 1 light year long train is full of water. > > > > The laser is fired at the back of the train in the water. > > > > The Observer at the front of the train has his face pushed up against > > > a plate glass which separates them from the water. > > > > Right when the light exits the glass and is about to reach the > > > Observer on the train, an Observer on the embankment stands right next > > > to the Observer on the train. > > > > Now, obviously the train is moving 1/4 the speed of light, so the > > > Observer on the embankment is in trouble, but right before the train > > > hits the Observer on the embankment the light from the laser reaches > > > both Observers. > > > > The light has traveled the same distance through the water to both > > > Observers. > > > Well, I certainly like the way you carry on your conversation. > > If I could only convince others light travels at 'c' relative to the > aether we might actually get somewhere. The way you do that is by conducting experimental tests that show that the predicted measurable behavior from SR is wrong and the predicted measurable behavior from aether displacement is correct. There is no other way to convince in science. By the way, this was true in the case of SR also. PD
From: paparios on 21 Dec 2009 12:04
On 21 dic, 13:19, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Dec 21, 11:10 am, "papar...(a)gmail.com" <papar...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > So you did not like my answer to your question, which was "Lightning > > strike occurs at A/A' and B/B'. Does the light travel from A' and B' > > to M' or from A and B to M'?", and now you are asking again....the > > very same question!!! Are you out of your mind???? > > > Let us do it again!!! > > > You ask: "The question is, in the modified Einstein train gedanken > > where the water is at rest with respect to the embankment, does the > > light travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'?" > > > The answer is the same I gave you before which is the following: > > > light signal fronts from the TWO hit points (A/A' and B/B') expand on > > a spherical way. Those two light signal fronts will eventually reach > > the location of observers M, on the embankment, and observer M', on > > the train and, sure enough, while observer M will observe TWO > > simultaneous light signals, observer M' > > will observe TWO non simultaneous light signals. Note that the > > converse and symmetrical case is also true, that is, if observer M' > > sees TWO simultaneous light signals, then observer M will see TWO non > > simultaneous light signals (this case will occur if observer M' > > considers himself at rest with respect to the train and sees observer > > M (and the embankment) moving at a speed v on the negative direction > > of x). > > > Do you need a more detailed explanation? > > > Miguel Rios > > I agree with you in terms of what you have answered so far. If the > Observer at M sees the light from A/A' and B/B' simultaneously, the > Observer at M' will not see the light from A/A' and from B/B' > simultaneously. > > That is NOT what I am asking. I am asking, in a modified Einstein > train gedanken where the water is at rest with respect to the > embankment, does the light from the TWO lighting strikes, one at A/A' > and the one at B/B', travel from A' and B' to M' or from A and B to M'. Well, quite easy. At the strike time of occurrence (say t_A=t0, as measured on the embankment frame of reference) points A and A' coincided (they shared the same physical location, with A on the embankment frame of reference and A' on the train frame of reference). The same is true for points B and B', also at time t_B=t0 (again measured at the embankment frame of reference). This is like droping a stone at the source point A/A', which will propagate in an expanding circle From that time t_A=t_B=t0, light signal fronts propagate (one is tranporting the information of the strike from the common source A/A', while the other is transporting the information of the strike from the common source B/B'). There are then two expanding circles on the water. These light signal fronts are not longer connected, at a given time, to the instantaneous location of A, A', B or B'. We do know that from the point of view of the observer M', both A' and B' remains at the same location they were before, while A and B, again from the point of view of observer M' have moved (into the negative direction of x). So when the aforementioned circles continue to propagate in the water, points A' and B' are not longer at their original location and observer M' is moving to reach the water circle coming from B/B' way before the water circle coming from A/A' reach him So does the light of the strikes travel from A' and B' to M'? Sure, they do that!! Does the light of the strikes travel from A and B to M'? Sure, they do that!! Does the previous assertion imply that the light signals get to observer M' simultaneously? No, actually quite the contrary, observer M' will observe the light signal from source point B/B' arriving before the light signal coming from source point A/A', while observer M will see two simultaneous light signals. Miguel Rios |