Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #615948 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2023-07-24 08:05 -0700 |
| Last post | 2023-07-28 21:42 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 167 — 31 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity
The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:05 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 17:27 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 08:44 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 18:30 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 10:39 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 20:38 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 12:06 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 21:25 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 09:56 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-01 22:47 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 17:14 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder) - 2023-08-02 11:51 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 16:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 11:14 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 02:54 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 12:06 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 03:18 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-06 17:24 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 11:55 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 11:28 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-08-07 15:03 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 15:17 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 23:53 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 21:18 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 11:13 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 21:17 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 16:57 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-07 15:25 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-07 23:59 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 06:43 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-09 12:28 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 09:50 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-15 01:03 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:21 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-16 01:05 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 22:09 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 07:54 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 19:04 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 10:15 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 09:52 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 19:01 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-15 01:06 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-14 23:42 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2023-08-15 16:17 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 17:28 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 20:55 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Lou <noelturntive@live.co.uk> - 2023-07-25 01:43 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-24 15:06 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-24 17:21 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 08:35 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-26 16:15 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 16:46 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 19:14 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Rasih Taube <eusr@rruietrt.as> - 2023-07-27 16:51 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-27 12:47 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Virgilio Fabri <iivf@valvoffb.af> - 2023-07-27 17:08 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Cortez Granat <enrn@oezarnca.rt> - 2023-07-27 23:04 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 12:57 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 13:05 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 14:25 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-28 13:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-27 20:01 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-27 21:40 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 08:58 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-28 16:46 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-28 15:25 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-28 21:26 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-29 17:03 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-29 22:38 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-29 16:07 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-29 23:31 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-29 21:46 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 09:51 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-30 10:04 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-30 20:59 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 22:10 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Emanuele Babloev <vloe@abeebevb.ab> - 2023-07-30 09:19 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-30 10:39 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-30 16:11 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 18:47 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-30 16:54 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-30 16:30 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Beau Yukhotsky <bteu@hthakbes.yy> - 2023-07-30 20:43 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-30 16:24 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Foster Bass <bstb@trfbsbss.bf> - 2023-07-30 22:09 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-30 17:42 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-30 11:10 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 20:23 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-30 11:44 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-30 14:36 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 18:54 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-30 22:14 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-31 09:38 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 06:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-07-31 18:40 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 10:09 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 10:20 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Richard Hachel <r.hachel@frite.fr> - 2023-07-31 20:17 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-31 23:21 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 22:07 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-01 07:09 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Paul Alsing <pnalsing@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 22:44 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 23:26 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-01 08:35 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 23:38 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-01 08:40 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 23:43 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Python <python@invalid.org> - 2023-08-01 08:55 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-08-01 02:51 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 09:24 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 06:56 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-01 10:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 10:54 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-08-01 11:03 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 18:30 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 09:07 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 00:55 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Athel Cornish-Bowden <athel.cb@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 10:16 +0200
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 01:55 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-31 10:05 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-31 08:15 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Edurardo Babadzhanov <aoba@oubraboh.da> - 2023-07-30 20:06 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-30 14:25 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Shaun Michudo <hdud@musnmcai.uu> - 2023-07-30 20:18 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-30 16:29 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Darbel Doich <bhcb@lbadical.cd> - 2023-07-30 22:15 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-28 15:17 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 13:16 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-28 14:55 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-28 23:59 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 23:04 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 09:38 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 10:05 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-29 14:23 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 13:10 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-29 14:29 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-28 13:46 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 19:12 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-07-25 11:10 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 11:31 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> - 2023-07-27 13:04 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 09:14 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Bunnie Belokhvostikov <kksb@ubsnonkk.hn> - 2023-07-24 17:02 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 19:34 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Alekzandr Billevich <ldni@leedahli.ah> - 2023-07-25 10:56 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-24 15:04 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-24 15:05 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-24 15:11 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-07-24 20:50 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-24 21:26 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 09:08 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-25 10:20 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2023-07-25 14:58 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 13:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 21:35 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> - 2023-07-25 16:15 -0500
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> - 2023-07-25 14:31 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 15:01 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> - 2023-07-25 10:48 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 18:49 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-08-01 23:08 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> - 2023-08-01 22:00 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2023-07-25 19:37 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Leeroy Babosoff <lolr@orolooof.bo> - 2023-07-26 10:46 +0000
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> - 2023-07-26 07:36 -0700
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Volney <volney@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-28 15:19 -0400
Re: The speed of light can't be a universal constant in all frames Parker Nasrutdinov <nkea@roatreru.ue> - 2023-07-28 21:42 +0000
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
| From | RichD <r_delaney2001@yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-27 13:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d09789c7-1b6f-4fad-b490-d3955af5193cn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616044 |
On July 25, patdolan wrote: > Two observers in relative motion "obviously" measure the same relative > velocity between them. If we take special relativity as a premise, symmetric relative velocity follows necessarily. But it's an empirical question. And we cannot test it directly. Let's ask: what if symmetric velocity doesn't describe our universe? Other effects would ensue; for instance, time dilation would also be asymmetric. We can't test that either. Reviewing the body of data of accelerator physics, are there any observations which would noticeably flag a deviation from symmetric relative velocity? It's subtle, one can easily fall into the circular reasoning pit - -- Rich
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 09:14 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9b9959ac-6846-4261-bacc-c5888cc82d5en@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615948 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > Why? > Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: > 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > 1 second in frame A=gamma second in frame B > Obviously these equations shows that there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the speed of light is a universal constant. Light has its own constant speed in dimension that the atom moves toward or away from.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bunnie Belokhvostikov <kksb@ubsnonkk.hn> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 17:02 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u9maqs$8d47$2@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #615955 |
mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: >> Why? >> Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) >> that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B 1 second in frame A=gamma >> second in frame B Obviously these equations shows that there is no >> clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the >> speed of light is a universal constant. > > Light has its own constant speed in dimension that the atom moves toward > or away from. as such, you can safely take the speed of light 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗱𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻, which not contracts nor time dilates. The space and time contracts and time dilates, at it. The speed of light is a dimension in hypersphere, whereas the space and time combines in 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄_𝗻𝗼𝘄 and the 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁_𝗯𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗻.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 19:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <20d8166a-113d-47e2-9bd9-bf6ebc49fac3n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615962 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 10:02:24 AM UTC-7, Bunnie Belokhvostikov wrote: > mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: > > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > >> Why? > >> Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) > >> that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B 1 second in frame A=gamma > >> second in frame B Obviously these equations shows that there is no > >> clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the > >> speed of light is a universal constant. > > > > Light has its own constant speed in dimension that the atom moves toward > > or away from. > as such, you can safely take the speed of light 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗱𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻, which not > contracts nor time dilates. The space and time contracts and time dilates, Speed is a quantity not a dimension. Light and atom move in it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Alekzandr Billevich <ldni@leedahli.ah> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 10:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <u9o9oi$h746$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #616011 |
mitchr...@gmail.com wrote: >> > Light has its own constant speed in dimension that the atom moves >> > toward or away from. >> as such, you can safely take the speed of light 𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗱𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻, which >> not contracts nor time dilates. The space and time contracts and time >> dilates, > > Speed is a quantity not a dimension. Light and atom move in it. we talk about the 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱_𝗼𝗳_𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁, fucking stupid, not 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱. Whereas the. 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗲𝗱_𝗼𝗳_𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 it's actually 𝗮𝗻_𝘂𝗻𝗶𝘁. An unit is part of a coordinate system, hence 𝗮_𝗱𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻. Kiss my ass.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 15:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <569fce4e-d7a5-4b24-a7a7-e7438d61d16an@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615948 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > Why? > Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: > 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > 1 second in frame A=gamma second in frame B > Obviously these equations shows that there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the speed of light is a universal constant. Yes, if the unit of time is different, the unit would have to be converted to compare the speeds giving a difference in speed across frames of reference. Arthur Otis pointed out they have to use different clocks for start and end times.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 15:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <10a903c3-cd89-49d7-921f-7102a42c0678n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615948 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > Why? > Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: > 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > 1 second in frame A=gamma second in frame B > Obviously these equations shows that there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the speed of light is a universal constant. Yes, it is obviously true unless you are hoodwinked by relativity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 15:11 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e19a0cd8-6b50-4faf-944b-da605dcba380n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #615948 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > Why? > Because a constant interval clock time unit ( including a clock second) that can claim to be constant in all frames For example: > 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > 1 second in frame A=gamma second in frame B > Obviously these equations shows that there is no clock time unit (including a clock second) that can claim that the speed of light is a universal constant. Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that ridiculous.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 20:50 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <bqqdnV3s1vjDtyL5nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #615997 |
On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of the ground state of Cs133. > Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in > one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the > speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that > ridiculous. This is just flat-out WRONG. Your FANTASIES are "that ridiculous". You REALLY need to learn basic physics before attempting to write about it. Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-24 21:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e86bee7d-0e5b-4705-94ad-e7888c8590bdn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616006 |
On Tuesday, 25 July 2023 at 03:50:35 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial > frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of > the ground state of Cs133. Enchanting the reality again, poor halfbrain. Anyone can check GPS and see we're not FORCED at all.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 09:08 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <997b021c-6c9a-4a16-bc83-209e791be734n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616006 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 9:50:35 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial > frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of > the ground state of Cs133. You assumed wrongly that a Cs transition in different frames requires the same amount of time (absolute time). It does not. A transition in different frames requires a different amount of absolute time > > Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in > > one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the > > speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that > > ridiculous. I didn't write that. > This is just flat-out WRONG. Your FANTASIES are "that ridiculous". You > REALLY need to learn basic physics before attempting to write about it. > > Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 10:20 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <77d76dd7-e3bc-4bec-b2a1-a32c4d012840n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616037 |
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 9:08:19 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 9:50:35 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote: > > On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > > Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial > > frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of > > the ground state of Cs133. > You assumed wrongly that a Cs transition in different frames requires the same amount of time (absolute time). It does not. A transition in different frames requires > a different amount of absolute time > > > Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in > > > one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the > > > speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that > > > ridiculous. > I didn't write that. > > This is just flat-out WRONG. Your FANTASIES are "that ridiculous". You > > REALLY need to learn basic physics before attempting to write about it. > > > > > > Tom Roberts Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one frame than another. Relativity flies in the face of basic physics.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tom Roberts <tjoberts137@sbcglobal.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 14:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <RpednedlI-PstF35nZ2dnZfqlJxh4p2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #616042 |
On 7/25/23 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one > frame than another. This is flat-out wrong. > Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. Nope. Do you seriously think that over >100 years and >50,000 physicists, nobody but you has noticed that? -- you are hopelessly deluded. Moreover, your fantasies and guesses do "fly in the fact of basic physics". Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 13:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <facadadb-2fae-4db1-90d0-a5238e040860n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616057 |
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 12:58:53 PM UTC-7, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/25/23 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one > > frame than another. > This is flat-out wrong. > > Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. > Nope. Do you seriously think that over >100 years and >50,000 > physicists, nobody but you has noticed that? -- you are hopelessly deluded. > > Moreover, your fantasies and guesses do "fly in the fact of basic physics". > > Tom Roberts Frames move in dimension just as light does. Atom's have their own motions toward or away from light...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Maciej Wozniak <maluwozniak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 21:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0bbeed34-10d0-47bc-9c56-5b3fd6493c48n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616057 |
On Tuesday, 25 July 2023 at 21:58:53 UTC+2, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/25/23 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one > > frame than another. > This is flat-out wrong. > > Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. > Nope. Do you seriously think that over >100 years and >50,000 > physicists, nobody but you has noticed that? - Come on, poor halfbrain - yes, the mumble of your idiot guru was obviously inconsistent, and yes, t over >100 years and >50,000 physicists nobody [of them] has noticed that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | whodat <whodaat@void.nowgre.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 16:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kiasb0FjmsgU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #616042 |
On 7/25/2023 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: <...> > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one frame than another. Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. Assuming for the sake of argument that's true, what makes the choice of "basic physics" as opposed to "advanced physics or relativity " the right one? Take your time, there's no rush for this answer. Rhetorical, I don't expect any rational answers. That's what happens every time you make a claim that you cannot back up. Onward to ever more ridiculous claims.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | patdolan <patdolan@comcast.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 14:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <70b82838-5ac6-4a30-8263-78d25918ff4dn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616063 |
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 2:15:18 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > On 7/25/2023 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > <...> > > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one frame than another. Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. > Assuming for the sake of argument that's true, what makes > the choice of "basic physics" as opposed to "advanced > physics or relativity " the right one? Take your time, > there's no rush for this answer. > > Rhetorical, I don't expect any rational answers. That's what > happens every time you make a claim that you cannot back up. > Onward to ever more ridiculous claims. I'll have a go at your question, whodat-a-cat. If we allow the definition of "basic physics" to be synonymous with the term "self-consistent physics" then I think we are off to the races with this dialectic. We all suspect, some of us still secretly, that advanced relativity physics is not self consistent. We first form our concrete suspicion in this regards when we first contemplate the Big Ben Paradox. It usually takes 6 mo to a year for one's concrete suspicions to harden into fully cured concrete doubt.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "mitchr...@gmail.com" <mitchrae3323@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 15:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <19885d60-33fa-4177-b742-a19a58608fedn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616064 |
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 2:31:18 PM UTC-7, patdolan wrote: > On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 2:15:18 PM UTC-7, whodat wrote: > > On 7/25/2023 12:20 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > > <...> > > > Time dilation involves using a different length for seconds in one frame than another. Relativity flies in the face of basic physics. > > Assuming for the sake of argument that's true, what makes > > the choice of "basic physics" as opposed to "advanced > > physics or relativity " the right one? Take your time, > > there's no rush for this answer. > > > > Rhetorical, I don't expect any rational answers. That's what > > happens every time you make a claim that you cannot back up. > > Onward to ever more ridiculous claims. > I'll have a go at your question, whodat-a-cat. > > If we allow the definition of "basic physics" to be synonymous with the term "self-consistent physics" then I think we are off to the races with this dialectic. > > We all suspect, some of us still secretly, that advanced relativity physics is not self consistent. We first form our concrete suspicion in this regards when we first contemplate the Big Ben Paradox. It usually takes 6 mo to a year for one's concrete suspicions to harden into fully cured concrete doubt. Why would an accelerating atom cause motion of another? And why is it always opposite and equal? Frames can only change their own motions and not the others. But they can converge and diverge.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laurence Clark Crossen <l.c.crossen@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-07-25 10:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <49839151-b159-4f54-91ff-643bc13c9587n@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616037 |
On Tuesday, July 25, 2023 at 9:08:19 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 9:50:35 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote: > > On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > > Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial > > frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of > > the ground state of Cs133. > You assumed wrongly that a Cs transition in different frames requires the same amount of time (absolute time). It does not. A transition in different frames requires > a different amount of absolute time > > > Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in > > > one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the > > > speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that > > > ridiculous. > I didn't write that. > > This is just flat-out WRONG. Your FANTASIES are "that ridiculous". You > > REALLY need to learn basic physics before attempting to write about it. > > > > > > Tom Roberts Jonathan Bains encountered this type of issue when he tried to develop special relativity software. http://flight-light-and-spin.com/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ken Seto <setoken47@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2023-08-01 18:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e52407e2-4784-40c3-94b4-ab2e9f275e5fn@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #616006 |
On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 9:50:35 PM UTC-4, Tom Roberts wrote: > On 7/24/23 5:11 PM, Laurence Clark Crossen wrote: > > On Monday, July 24, 2023 at 8:05:49 AM UTC-7, Ken Seto wrote: > >> 1 second in frame A /= 1 second in frame B > Except, of course, we do use the same unit of time in every inertial > frame: 1 second is 9,192,631,770 cycles of the hyperfine transition of > the ground state of Cs133. No matter how many cycles you use, 9,192,631,770 cycles will have a different Time (absolute time) connect in different frames. > > Time dilation involves using a different unit of measure for time in > > one frame than another without converting to a common unit or the > > speeds would differ due to relative motion. Relativity is that > > ridiculous. > This is just flat-out WRONG. Your FANTASIES are "that ridiculous". You > REALLY need to learn basic physics before attempting to write about it. > > Tom Roberts
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 8 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity
csiph-web