- Re: Notion of Absolute Clock Synchronization in SR
Gurcharn,
The relative simultaneity is a consequence of :
t'=\gamma(v)(t-vx/c^2) as in the Lorentz transforms
The above was necessary in order to insure the frame invariance of
Maxwell's em wave equation (see Lorentz' paper on the subject)
By contrast, "absolute synchronization" is a consequence of:
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
Sigh....you did not read what I said. The crate does not drop
verticlly down in a straight line.
Ken Seto
- A Challenge to mathematical physicists
In the next sentence, answer the first two questions and then
answer, if you can, the third and most significant one.
In Einstein's 1905 equation tau = a(t - vx'/{c^2 - v^2}), where did
the "a" come from and what does it signify; and IF it IS "a function
phi{v) at present unknown" WHAT is its value if, as he later
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Back to slurring Einstein, Lebau?
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
Why should I admit that I am wrong when I knew that I was not
wrong?????????????
- Hide quoted text -
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
<< If physicists understood the equations in segment 3 of Einstein's
1905 STR paper, they would KNOW the following things:
1. Einstein never did accurately derive the LTE.
2. He neither understood his own OR Poincare's equations.
3. Neither has any physicist then or now. (If they did, they would
- Re: Personal Ether Theory (PET Theory?)
<>
So as to be clear, the duration measured in earth time
============================== ===================
So as to be clear, duration measure in universal time, the only sort there
is.
============================== ===================
for the time it
takes for a signal to travel from the position at which the spacecraft
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
I didn't say that.
The length of the rod depends on simultaneity, and simultaneity is
frame-dependent. The pole fits in the barn in the barn frame because
the doors are shut simultaneously *in the barn frame*. But in the pole
frame, the doors are not shut simultaneously at all. So did the pole
"really" fit in the barn? Yes, according to the definition of "fit"
- Re: "The Missing Symbol' (the second of three parts)
Lebau, old fart
Are you still strugglng to understand Taylor expansion? After all
these years?
- Notion of Absolute Clock Synchronization in SR
As per Newtonian notion of absolute space and time, clocks can be
synchronized in absolute terms such that identical precision atomic
clocks located anywhere within the solar system and in any state of
motion, will read the same time t1 when a standard master clock reads
t1. This notion of absolute clock synchronization implies the notion
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
On Mar 11, 7:37 am, "Peter Webb"
[link]
This and the supporting links give some of the context here.
- Re: "The Missing Symbol' (the second of three parts)
½[tau(0,0,0,t) + tau(0,0,0,t + x'/{c-v} + x'/{c+v})]
= tau(x',0,0,t + x'/{c-v})
in which x' denotes the distance between clocks A and B of the moving
system k (xi, eta, zeta; tau) as measured by the stationary system K
(x, y, z; t). In order to examine the meaning of this and allied
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
First of all, let's establish what you think is paradoxical at all
about the description of the twins in the twin puzzle. Then let's see
whether this paradox is present in the case you mention.
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Start with "General Relativity from A to B" by R Geroch. There are a
couple others I can think of, but I'd like to check out which of them
is best before expanding the list. Penrose's book "The Road to
Reality" deals with it beautifully, but that's a big book.
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
This is precisely Ken's problem. He has NEVER been able to admit that
he is wrong about anything.
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
No, Ken it is not. A statement that is true in one frame is not
necessarily true in another. This is why I gave you several examples
from FRESHMAN physics to illustrate the same thing.
Hey, Ken, you asked the questions, and I answered them. If you don't
want to listen to the answers because you don't like the answers, this
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
Oh, come on, Ken. IN THE FRAME of the pilot of the plane, the crate
drops vertically down in a straight line. As he watches the crate
fall, it stays directly under the open hatch.
If you are having trouble understanding the basics of reference frames
even in classical, Newtonian, freshman physics, then it's time to
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Pathetic imbecile,
In SR, light speed is isotropic in ALL frames.
According to YOU, in LET light speed is isotropic ONLY in the "aether
frame". In all OTHER frames, according to YOU, the "real" light speed
(whatever the fuck that is) is anisotropic but, due to the combine
effects of "ruler contraction", time dilation, etc , the "measured"
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
In doing so, you are using the CONCLUION (what you were asked to
prove) in the demonstration.
So, you produced a fake "proof". Congratulations, idiot.
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
On Mar 11, 1:33 am, "Peter Webb"
Listen, dumbfuck
I asked you to solve the problem I gave Inertial or STFU.
You couldn't solve it. By giving out exercises I tell the real
scientists from the pretenders. You are the latter.
- Re: Riedt?s Trinity of c
No persistent imbecile, it was already shown to you that that's false
It is equivalent to claiming that :
sqrt(1-(v/c)^2)+sqrt(1+(v/c)^2 )=2
You are a cretin.
- Re: Complex number reality?
BURT schrieb:
Thats true, because the term 'quantum' stems from Latin for counting,
and means something like how much. But in nature we have a different
behavior and it takes observers to count. Nature 'multiplies'. That You
could imagine like a rotation of a state, that twists into another one.
This is a bit counter-intuitive, but not very much. I tried to show,
- Re: Personal Ether Theory (PET Theory?)
<>
So as to be clear, the duration measured in earth time for the time it
takes for a signal to travel from the position at which the spacecraft
was when the spacecraft emitted the signal...
Even if this were true, the weight of the billions of experiments make
it impossible to interpret this as anything but an anomaly, to be
- Re: Riedt?s Trinity of c
Riedt’s Trinity of c
A light source moves through space in direction LR. The speed of light
is c, when emitted from the light source perpendicular to the
direction. It is c' when emitted from the front of the source and c''
when emitted from the back of the source. This can be proven by a
three mirror interferometer experiment (the dots are placeholders):
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
OK so you are saying that there is real material contraction. But do
you know that real material contraction is a frame independent
concept?
Hey idiot the pole is moving at the same speed as before when it is
able to fit into the barn.
It appears that you don't know any physics and that you disagree with
- Re: Seeking a correct explanation for Stellar Abberation
How do you imagine that the c-v light is accelerated to c?
- Re: Radio Interferometry Proves Wilson's 'Photon Density Wave' Theory
Why aren't you ashamed of posting forged degrees?
- Re: On approaching quantizing G_uv=T_uv.
Spewing jackass. Nothing you wrote is a solution to the field equations, as
amply demonstrated by your years of inability to actually prove it.
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
No....from the point of view of the pilot he had to drop the crate
before he is direction over the target point on the ground. That means
that he knows that the crate is falling in a curved parabolic
trajectory.....gee you don't know any physics and you are a physics
professor????
Ken Seto
- Re: A better new definition for the real *single* photon energy emission plus a simple experiment
On Mar 11, 1:59 pm, "Y.Porat" > that th ereal singlwephoton is
muchless than a eecond defined
I know exactly what it is
Yes .. we use seconds as the unit for time in SI units.
Yes I do.
Of course .. that is what the unit of time is in SI units.
NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-------------------
- Re: Clocks in relative motion cannot remain synchronized for any length of time.
Sure it is a contradiction.....the pole can fit into the barn
materially is a frame independent concept and similarly the same
material pole cannot fit into the material barn is also a frame
independent concept.
The rest of your post is repeating the same nonsense. So I am not
wasting anymore time on it.
- Re: Personal Ether Theory (PET Theory?)
<>> by Train
OK
What do the >>> represent? Light?
What do the >>> represent? Light? Photons ???
T
- Re: Personal Ether Theory (PET Theory?)
With the source on board a train, say, and the observer on the tracks,
the train moving, yes I agree the observer will see source of light
moving.
If he sees the photon moving that means the photon has a sideways
velocity due to the motion of the source. Right?
T
- Re: Seeking a correct explanation for Stellar Abberation
Will go thru the links
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Perhaps that was what he said.
But now you know.
No leap ahead.
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Well, I never thought there was a paradox, and as you agree, I have to
wonder what you are going on about.
If you do still have a problem, then the easiest way is by drawing a diagram
like the ones on [link] . That is hard to
do on usenet.
The only other way of answering these questions is to use the equations of
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
On 11 Mar, 01:58, "Peter Webb"
wrote:
I'm merely going off what "experts" here say happens. I didn't say
there is a "leap ahead". Paul Draper (if I remember correctly) said
there is a "leap ahead". Now perhaps I misunderstood, but that is what
was said.
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
On Mar 11, 12:21 am, "Peter Webb"
And the aether exists in GR:
"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is
unthinkable" - Albert Einstein
And the aether exists in Einstein's 'first paper':
[link]
So, yes there is an aether in SR.
- EINSTEIN EXERCISING HIMSELF IN CRIMESTOP
[link]
George Orwell: "Crimestop means the faculty of stopping short, as
though by instinct, at the threshold of any dangerous thought. It
includes the power of not grasping analogies, of failing to perceive
logical errors, of misunderstanding the simplest arguments if they are
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Fine, remain ignorant about what Einstein meant by a superfluous
aether. How does this following quote fit with your misunderstanding
of Einstein saying the aether makes no difference?
"According to the general theory of relativity space without ether is
unthinkable" - Albert Einstein
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
On 11 Mar, 01:51, "Peter Webb"
wrote:
Let's just go through it step by step Peter, as we have been doing.
It's pointless spending 10 more postings arguing about how the
Wikipedia page does or does not answer the question, or how it is or
is not relevant. As I've just said in a post to Inertial, the only
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Why can't you measure the clocks at M and M' a second time?
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Yes, "as consisting of parts which may be tracked through time."
I understand you selectively cut-and-paste one particular line in
order to remain ignorant of what Einstein means by 'motion'. The idea
of motion may not be applied to the aether because the aether does not
consist of particles which can be separately tracked through time.
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Perhaps you should review the previous postings, but as a quick
summary, this scenario essentially involves *both* twins leaving
Earth, in diametrically opposite directions. Hence when the twins
return to Earth, they are the same age as each other (although both
younger than a third sibling who remained on Earth).
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Doesn't matter .. I'm inertial :):)
- Re: A better new definition for the real *single* photon energy emission plus a simple experiment
I know exactly what it is
Yes .. we use seconds as the unit for time in SI units.
Yes I do.
Of course .. that is what the unit of time is in SI units.
NO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It has nothing to do with a second. The UNITS have seconds in them. Just
like the units for speed (metres per second) have seconds in them . That
- Re: A constant speed of light in all reference frames? Surely you can't be serious.
Hadn't noticed the @rest. Makes it obvious, but now I have motion sickness.
Are you moving or stationary?
- Re: A better new definition for the real *single* photon energy emission plus a simple experiment
see the definition of f in Hertz
quote from Vikipedia :
Hertz
The hertz (symbol: Hz) is the SI unit of **frequency** defined as the
number of cycles per second ****of a periodic phenomenon
----------------------
end of quote
do you see that second there ??
(one second) again one second !!
so wil we admit at last that
- Re: *** *** Re: India - beggar nation, biggest recipient of foreign aid ever
What's the difference between "bundree" and "Banerjee"?
- Re: A better new definition for the real *single* photon energy emission plus a simple experiment
Yes .. I did. I also expressed it as E = Nhf where N is the total number of
photons arriving.
Wrong. This is all old old stuff .. physics have known this since Planck
when he found experimentally the E = hf is the energy of a single photon ..
and even earlier there was a corpuscular theory of light (but they didn't
|
Newsgroups