Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #358800
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
| Subject | Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox |
| Date | 2015-07-27 09:38 -0500 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <mp5fos$t2e$3@speranza.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (13 earlier) <2418137.MYth0idrUK@PointedEars.de> <mnj75n$9p6$1@speranza.aioe.org> <1548498.GuHbTHe94j@PointedEars.de> <mp0hu3$hu$1@speranza.aioe.org> <5471228.zEIGGznA0A@PointedEars.de> |
On 7/25/2015 2:40 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: > Odd Bodkin wrote: > >> On 7/25/2015 7:40 AM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote: >>> Again, it was not debated that effects of special relativity come into >>> play even at relative speeds we can observe in everyday life. Instead, >>> your use and understanding of “relativistic speed” was debated. For if >>> you are saying that everything moves “at relativistic speed”, even >>> current “man-made interplanetary probes” which move at less than a >>> thousandth of the speed of light in vacuum (c), then the term >>> “relativistic speed” does not have a meaning different from “speed”, and >>> “relativistic speed” can be dropped without loss from the vocabulary of >>> science, which avoids any duplicates and ambiguities. >> >> That is EXACTLY the point. > > It is exactly *my* point; not yours. Well, perhaps we agree then. :) > >> As you said, relativistic speeds are those speeds that come into play, and >> those are speeds that occur in everyday life. > > I said the exact opposite. I quote you above: "Again, it was not debated that effects of special relativity come into play even at relative speeds we can observe in everyday life." But if this is not what you meant.... > Because in everyday life (that is, the life of > the *average* person, unaware of relativity) the effects predicted by > special and general relativity are *present* *but* *not* *significant*, Alright, then perhaps the boundary is what value you consider to be significant. What is the value where you would place the effects at being significant? > and > the relative speeds there are *too low* for them to become significant, i.e. > noticeable by those people (without instruments). > >> Therefore there IS NO line of demarcation between "relativistic >> speed" and "speed". > > Utter nonsense. And I am tired of explaining to you why. > >> [tl;dr] > > > PointedEars > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox udr310515@gmail.com - 2015-07-04 17:19 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-07-04 17:32 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox udr310515@gmail.com - 2015-07-04 17:40 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox "Dono," <sa_ge@comcast.net> - 2015-07-04 18:19 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2015-07-07 19:18 +0200
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-07-08 08:05 -0500
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Fritz Köhler <fritzk@notrenetwork.net> - 2015-07-25 16:41 +0000
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 12:44 -0500
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-07-25 21:40 +0200
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-07-25 20:30 -0500
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Ignorant Raving Crackpot <ignorantravingcrackpot@gmail.com> - 2015-07-25 23:50 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Ignorant Raving Crackpot <ignorantravingcrackpot@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 17:24 -0700
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-07-28 13:33 +0200
Re: On length contraction and the length contraction paradox Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-07-27 09:38 -0500
csiph-web