Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #397225

Re: Why isn't ether confirmed

Show all headers | View raw

Am 26.10.2016 10:16, schrieb mlwozniak@wp.pl:

>>> If your concept of "local time" was somehow
>>> useful hypothesis, the clocks of GPS would
>>> be set to indicate it.
>>> But they aren't.
>>
>>
>> GPS satellites do not fulfil the requirement of being local.
>> 'Local' means 'near and at rest' and this is not, how satellites behave.
>
> Suppose you are one of the famous relativistic
> twins. Your brother isn't local, it seems?


My 'twin' is getting younger, while I grow older, since he moves into 
the opposite direction.

>>
>> Especially they are not at rest, since they fly around in Earth orbit.
>> I am at rest - at least in my personal experience.
>> So I say, I'm at rest and the universe circles around me.
>
> This is the most primitive approach possible.
> "Earth is at rest and universe circles around it"
> is far, far more advanced - but it's also obsolete.


I did not say, that Earth is at rest.

I wrote, that I am at rest - in my own frame of reference.

And I can fly to the moon and are still at rest. This is so, because I 
am the observer (of my universe).

Any other observer has the same right and is at rest in another FoR and 
would see a different universe from a different location.

And all of these universes are of equal rights, since any observer has 
the right to decide, whether he moves or not.

And the most simple case would be to stay at rest.

And any observer has also his special axis time along which he 'moves'.

So time for one observer is space for a different one, moving a long a 
different timeline.




TH

Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-19 03:35 -0700
  Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Alan Folmsbee <omnilobe@gmail.com> - 2016-09-19 09:12 -0700
  Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 11:05 -0700
  Re: Why isn't ether confirmed pcardinale@volcanomail.com - 2016-09-19 17:15 -0700
    Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-09-19 19:08 -0700
    Re: Why isn't ether confirmed kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-09-22 05:29 -0700
  Re: Why isn't ether confirmed numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2016-09-19 17:22 -0700
  Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 05:46 +0200
    Re: Why isn't ether confirmed "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-09-20 22:11 -0700
    Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-20 23:23 -0700
      Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-21 08:50 +0200
        Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-21 00:09 -0700
          Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-09-22 08:23 +0200
            Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-09-22 00:04 -0700
              Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-04 05:37 +0200
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-05 03:14 -0700
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-26 09:00 +0200
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-26 01:16 -0700
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2016-10-30 22:16 +0100
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed mlwozniak@wp.pl - 2016-10-31 00:24 -0700
                Re: Why isn't ether confirmed "David (Time Lord) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2016-10-31 11:17 -0700

csiph-web