| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
15 May 2007 08:15:27 AM |
| Object: |
Question about the velocity addition |
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paper
http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
.
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 03:51:32 PM |
|
|
<vps137@yandex.ru> wrote in message
news:1179234927.898089.208430@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
: Is there any possibility to check the formula for
: the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
: of reference given by me in the paper
: http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
: It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
: the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
:
None whatsover
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:16:43 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paper
http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Given any achievable velocities V1 and V2 and any finite lightspeed,
the bound on the relative velocities of V1 and V2 as viewed by any
inertial observer cannot exceed
(V1 + V2)/[1 +(V1)(V2)/c^2]
This is transformation of velocities parallel to the direction of
motion (Lorentz Invariance). For velocities at an arbitrary angle
theta, Jackson gives
u_parallel = (u'_parallel + v)/(1+(v dot u')/c^2)
u_perp = u'_perp/(gamma_v(1+(v dot u')/c^2))
Any other answer arising from the same boundary conditions is wrong.
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
.
|
|
|
| User: "Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 03:51:32 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Al" <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message
news:4649CEDB.2D1D2B16@hate.spam.net...
[snip wet fart]
: (V1 + V2)/[1 +(V1)(V2)/c^2]
Ovine Imbecile.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/SR.GIF
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:07:44 PM |
|
|
On 15 อมส, 21:16, Uncle Al <Uncle...@hate.spam.net> wrote:
vps...@yandex.ru wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paper
http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Given any achievable velocities V1 and V2 and any finite lightspeed,
the bound on the relative velocities of V1 and V2 as viewed by any
inertial observer cannot exceed
(V1 + V2)/[1 +(V1)(V2)/c^2]
This is transformation of velocities parallel to the direction of
motion (Lorentz Invariance). For velocities at an arbitrary angle
theta, Jackson gives
u_parallel = (u'_parallel + v)/(1+(v dot u')/c^2)
u_perp = u'_perp/(gamma_v(1+(v dot u')/c^2))
Any other answer arising from the same boundary conditions is wrong.
--
Uncle Alhttp://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2
Thank you for answer. I considered only the case when velocity V1 is
parallel to V2 and got another formula. I'd like to know whether it
can
be checked by some experiment.
V.Skorobogatov
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:57:50 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paper
http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Physics FAQ: How Do You Add Velocities in Special Relativity?
http://edu-observatory.org/physics-faq/Relativity/SR/velocity.html
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 04:59:31 PM |
|
|
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:09:22 PM |
|
|
On 16 อมส, 03:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
But why?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 11:05:35 PM |
|
|
On May 15, 8:09 pm, wrote:
On 16 =CD=C1=CA, 03:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/article6a=
..html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
But why?
..=2E.because it is.
The velocity composition rule can be no other way. It is like asking
if there is any way your alternative definition for 2+2 could be right
- it cannot be, it is fixed via geometry.
Lorentz transformations are exactly equivalent to four dimensional
rotations via an imaginary angle - boosts. Boosts add - velocities do
not. Two boosts summed and expanded in velocity form is exactly equal
to the velocity addition rule. It cannot be any other way.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
16 May 2007 12:42:50 AM |
|
|
On 16 อมส, 10:05, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 8:09 pm, wrote:
On 16 IAE, 03:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
But why?
...because it is.
The velocity composition rule can be no other way. It is like asking
if there is any way your alternative definition for 2+2 could be right
- it cannot be, it is fixed via geometry.
Lorentz transformations are exactly equivalent to four dimensional
rotations via an imaginary angle - boosts. Boosts add - velocities do
not. Two boosts summed and expanded in velocity form is exactly equal
to the velocity addition rule. It cannot be any other way.
Yes, it is so for four dimensional spacetime and for the imaginary
angle
but I consider four dimensional space and the real angle alpha which
also plays the role of the boost as I tried to show. It operates into
Euclidian
but not into pseudo-Euclidian space and therefore gives another
result.
It seems can't be tested however on any experiment because of the
big velocity needed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Eric Gisse" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
16 May 2007 03:00:28 AM |
|
|
On May 15, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On 16 =CD=C1=CA, 10:05, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 8:09 pm, wrote:
On 16 IAE, 03:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/artic=
le6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
But why?
...because it is.
The velocity composition rule can be no other way. It is like asking
if there is any way your alternative definition for 2+2 could be right
- it cannot be, it is fixed via geometry.
Lorentz transformations are exactly equivalent to four dimensional
rotations via an imaginary angle - boosts. Boosts add - velocities do
not. Two boosts summed and expanded in velocity form is exactly equal
to the velocity addition rule. It cannot be any other way.
Yes, it is so for four dimensional spacetime and for the imaginary
angle
but I consider four dimensional space and the real angle alpha which
also plays the role of the boost as I tried to show. It operates into
Euclidian
but not into pseudo-Euclidian space and therefore gives another
result.
It seems can't be tested however on any experiment because of the
big velocity needed.
Whatever. You aren't talking about special relativity.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
16 May 2007 05:18:33 AM |
|
|
On 16 อมส, 14:00, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On 16 IAE, 10:05, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 8:09 pm, wrote:
On 16 IAE, 03:59, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
On May 15, 6:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paperhttp://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
Then it is wrong.
But why?
...because it is.
The velocity composition rule can be no other way. It is like asking
if there is any way your alternative definition for 2+2 could be right
- it cannot be, it is fixed via geometry.
Lorentz transformations are exactly equivalent to four dimensional
rotations via an imaginary angle - boosts. Boosts add - velocities do
not. Two boosts summed and expanded in velocity form is exactly equal
to the velocity addition rule. It cannot be any other way.
Yes, it is so for four dimensional spacetime and for the imaginary
angle
but I consider four dimensional space and the real angle alpha which
also plays the role of the boost as I tried to show. It operates into
Euclidian
but not into pseudo-Euclidian space and therefore gives another
result.
It seems can't be tested however on any experiment because of the
big velocity needed.
Whatever. You aren't talking about special relativity.
No, I am not. The model proposed is in the slight relations with it
because it has other space as an object of study. Namely speaking,
I consider 4D space as a space, a container. It must keep something
into itself to move and to penetrate the light. It may be called the
matter
but it evidently disagrees with the matter in 3D space.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Puppet_Sock" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:10:03 AM |
|
|
On May 15, 9:15 am, wrote:
Is there any possibility to check the formula for
the addition of the velocities in two inertial frames
of reference given by me in the paper
http://vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html/?
It slightly differs from that given by SR unless
the velocity values approach to the speed of light.
First a hint on showing links. Put the link inside <> like so.
<vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html>
Don't inlcude the http:// part, and don't put punctuation
or anything else behind it.
You are mixing things up. It might help you to take a couple
university classes in relativity. Preferably from a very patient
professor. Also, your post is off topic in this news group.
You want sci.physics.relativity.
Socks
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richard Tobin" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about the velocity addition |
15 May 2007 10:55:28 AM |
|
|
In article <1179241803.734703.293420@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
Puppet_Sock <puppet_sock@hotmail.com> wrote:
First a hint on showing links. Put the link inside <> like so.
<vps137.narod.ru/article6a.html>
Don't do that, it makes it harder for people using plain-text tools.
Use the complete URL (including http://) and leave spaces around it.
-- Richard
--
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
