Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #363546
| Newsgroups | sci.physics.relativity |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-09-09 02:41 -0700 |
| References | (12 earlier) <i86dnVvdIfd4RHTInZ2dnUU7_81i4p2d@giganews.com> <26506f61-1eb2-4658-aefb-a759fcddb73c@googlegroups.com> <261c2afe-b427-4c49-b230-46983aa75488@googlegroups.com> <9346f390-4018-4217-b955-951f38b37c32@googlegroups.com> <ace67307-b980-40bd-80cf-76176e0cde73@googlegroups.com> |
| Message-ID | <89e012d2-bcfb-417c-bb52-03fd8eb16c3f@googlegroups.com> (permalink) |
| Subject | Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... |
| From | Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> |
On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 9:30:08 AM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
> On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 12:04:16 PM UTC-4, Robert Winn wrote:
> > On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 5:49:17 AM UTC-7, rotchm wrote:
>
> > > Say, you bring a clock from x=0 to x = D at speed v. What value
> > > will *it* indicate on arrival at D ? Does you eqs give the correct value?
> > >
> > Yes, the Galilean transformation equations give the correct value.
>
> Prove it.
>
>
> > Suppose that the clock slows down as Einstein predicted in
> > Special Relativity.
>
> Irrelevant. This is not about E's SR, but *your* model, your eqs.
>
> <mumbojumbo snipped>
>
> So, no answer to my question? Here it is again: Say, you bring a
> clock from x=0 to x = D at speed v. What value will *it* indicate
> on arrival at D ?
>
> Express your answer as a function T_val = F(D,v)
>
>
> > > But the LT's do! So they are more useful, no?
> > Scientists seem to think so.
>
> Well, they are useful since they directly predict the value(s) on clocks (and energies, frequencies etc...)
>
> > The difference between the Lorentz equations and the Galilean
> > transformation equations is that the Lorentz equations claim
> > that if a clock in S' is slower than a clock in S,
>
> But the LT's dont predict that; SR doesnt say that.
>
> > the times of both clocks still result in a speed of v between the
> > frames of reference of the clocks.
>
> Not sure what you are geting to with that. Yes, "v" is defined via time, or clocks. "v = dx/dt". In practice, "v" also has operational procedures/definition.
>
> > But suppose Hafele and Keating had used the time of their
> > clock on an airplane to calculate the speed of the airplane.
>
> How would they do that? They would need a distance. Their distance is always zero wrt themselves. Its <>0 wrt the ground. Its <>0 wrt the sun. "speed" is defined wrt a given frame; its defined via "x and t" of that frame, not of a mixture of frames.
>
> > Would they get the same speed for the airplane if the clock on
> > the airplane was slower than a clock on the ground?
>
> The plane observers measure the speed of the "traveling ground". Ground observers measure the speed of the plane. Experimentally, these give the same value and is what SR predicts too. So plane observers just say "our plane has speed v" when technically it should be understood as "the ground has speed v".
>
>
> > The Galilean transformation equations are the correct equations,
>
> Then continue to use them to your liking.
>
>
> > The never once considered using the Galilean transformation
> > equations... with Newton's absolute time interpretation.
> > Nobody did for more than a hundred years until I did it.
>
> It was done many times throughout history. And note that your derivations also use the constancy of speed of light postulate. Basically, you are combining two models together, using twice as many equations, all to get no answers (you havent answered my question, remember?). Your approach is not very useful it seems.
>
> > The Lorentz equations give correct answers to some problems because
> > of the velocity transformations.
>
> The velo.trans come from the LT's which come from the relativity principle. Its not something extra added to SR. In your approach, you add so many extra "things" to get no answers; hardly useful.
It was answered in the equations I posted. The Galilean transformation equations show reality. If you have a clock with some other rate of time, you use a different set of Galilean transformation equations with different variables for velocity and time. That is the correct way to do it. If a clock in S shows light traveling at c, and a slower clock in S' shows light traveling at c, Then x=ct and x'=c(t2)'. What I showed with the velocity transforms was that
dx'/dt' in the Lorentz equations = dx'/d(t2)' in the Galilean transformation equations.
But since you say that is wrong, go ahead and prove it.
Back to sci.physics.relativity | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Bell's spaceship paradox... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-02 20:32 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... "Paul B. Andersen" <relativity@paulba.no> - 2015-09-03 11:27 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 08:32 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 09:44 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 10:23 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 12:07 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 12:13 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 12:39 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-03 19:45 +0000
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 12:47 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-03 19:52 +0000
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 13:58 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-03 22:03 +0000
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 16:52 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 12:55 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 13:59 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 17:05 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-04 09:55 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 10:04 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-04 12:50 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:48 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Koobee Wublee <koobee.wublee@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 12:44 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 13:55 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-09-05 15:09 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 11:51 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... kefischer <emoneyjoe@iglou.com> - 2015-09-04 16:22 -0400
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 21:59 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 05:49 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 09:04 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 09:30 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Robert Winn <rbwinn3@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 02:41 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 04:16 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-04 12:11 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 12:45 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-04 13:14 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-05 10:30 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... "Lleyton H. Bellucci" <lleyb@stratospheree.org> - 2015-09-05 15:47 +0000
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-05 09:48 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-05 09:30 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 11:50 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-05 12:05 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 12:14 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-05 12:36 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 14:11 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-06 09:35 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-06 11:04 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-06 18:07 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:35 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2015-09-05 06:12 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-04 11:34 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-09-03 14:51 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-04 11:11 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 11:14 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... mabel <wugi@scarlet.be> - 2015-09-04 20:52 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 11:14 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-04 12:53 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 22:52 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-06 09:42 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-09 15:07 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-09-09 15:33 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-11 09:08 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 12:52 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-09-11 22:45 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:16 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-09-12 12:10 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-11 13:55 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 15:13 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-13 09:19 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:01 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-14 09:12 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-03 12:47 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 11:51 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... JanPB <filmart@gmail.com> - 2015-09-03 12:41 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-03 13:00 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Maciej Woźniak <mlwozniak@wp.pl> - 2015-09-03 21:48 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-09-07 18:30 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-09-07 12:50 -0500
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... alsor@interia.pl - 2015-09-07 12:55 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... wugi <brol@brol.be> - 2015-09-12 17:17 +0200
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-04 17:49 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... John Gogo <jfgogo22@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-04 19:09 -0700
Re: Bell's spaceship paradox... rotchm <rotchm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 20:53 -0700
csiph-web