| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pentcho Valev" |
| Date: |
16 Mar 2006 03:39:05 AM |
| Object: |
Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
Experimentalists are allowed to publish information about superluminal
signals if and only if they also admit that no superluminal signal, not
even those four times faster that the speed of light, can damage
Einstein's theory:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html
In the zombie world, information like
"Electric signals can be transmitted at least four times faster than
the speed of light using only basic equipment that would be found in
virtually any college science department....Four billion km/h....While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
is reassuring. True, no super-fast starships or time machines soon but
perhaps in the more distant future... And what is most important,
Divine Einstein remains intact and zombies can continue worshipping at
his portrait, soon at his resurrection:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NT02C-ondcU&search=einstien
In textbooks relativity hypnotists don't hesitate to stake the survival
of Einstein's theory on the claim that no signal can move faster than
c=300000km/s. See, for instance, Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47
(solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Where does the arrogance come from? Relativity hypnotists simply
believe in the zombie world: they know that no student will ever
associate Problem 6 with any information about superluminal signals
unless his/her hypnotist has told him/her to do so.
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 12:21:44 PM |
|
|
Pancho Villa wrote:
Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World
Jeez, ain't that a bit fast for zombies?
.
|
|
|
| User: "SCW" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 04:41:18 PM |
|
|
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
Pancho Villa wrote:
Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World
Jeez, ain't that a bit fast for zombies?
I really did laugh at this - Mahmoud, yodaman!
(we need more Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket in this group!)
SCW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
18 Mar 2006 05:58:27 AM |
|
|
SCW wrote:
Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket wrote:
Pancho Villa wrote:
Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World
Jeez, ain't that a bit fast for zombies?
I really did laugh at this - Mahmoud, yodaman!
(we need more Mahmoud In My Dinner Jacket in this group!)
We need more dinners for Mahmoud to eat in my jacket!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "SCW" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 03:59:08 AM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists are allowed to publish information about superluminal
signals if and only if they also admit that no superluminal signal, not
even those four times faster that the speed of light, can damage
Einstein's theory:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html
In the zombie world, information like
"Electric signals can be transmitted at least four times faster than
the speed of light using only basic equipment that would be found in
virtually any college science department....Four billion km/h....While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
is reassuring. True, no super-fast starships or time machines soon but
perhaps in the more distant future... And what is most important,
Divine Einstein remains intact and zombies can continue worshipping at
his portrait, soon at his resurrection:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NT02C-ondcU&search=einstien
In textbooks relativity hypnotists don't hesitate to stake the survival
of Einstein's theory on the claim that no signal can move faster than
c=300000km/s. See, for instance, Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47
(solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Where does the arrogance come from? Relativity hypnotists simply
believe in the zombie world: they know that no student will ever
associate Problem 6 with any information about superluminal signals
unless his/her hypnotist has told him/her to do so.
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho, you know what the answer will be!
c_0 is a constant because it is defined that way.
The reasoning behind c_0 being constant is not considered within SR,
it's simply accepted as a basic premise.
<troll>
As for "where does the arrogance come from?", beats me, it sure isn't
Maxwell.
</troll>
SCW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pentcho Valev" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 04:10:34 AM |
|
|
SCW wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists are allowed to publish information about superluminal
signals if and only if they also admit that no superluminal signal, not
even those four times faster that the speed of light, can damage
Einstein's theory:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html
In the zombie world, information like
"Electric signals can be transmitted at least four times faster than
the speed of light using only basic equipment that would be found in
virtually any college science department....Four billion km/h....While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
is reassuring. True, no super-fast starships or time machines soon but
perhaps in the more distant future... And what is most important,
Divine Einstein remains intact and zombies can continue worshipping at
his portrait, soon at his resurrection:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NT02C-ondcU&search=einstien
In textbooks relativity hypnotists don't hesitate to stake the survival
of Einstein's theory on the claim that no signal can move faster than
c=300000km/s. See, for instance, Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47
(solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Where does the arrogance come from? Relativity hypnotists simply
believe in the zombie world: they know that no student will ever
associate Problem 6 with any information about superluminal signals
unless his/her hypnotist has told him/her to do so.
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho, you know what the answer will be!
c_0 is a constant because it is defined that way.
The reasoning behind c_0 being constant is not considered within SR,
it's simply accepted as a basic premise.
Yet it is a statement about physical reality that is either true or
false. Either the speed of the photon is independent of the speed of
the light source or observer (Einstein's c principle) or the speed of
the photon is dependent on the speed of the light source or observer
(Newton's c+v principle). If Newton's c+v principle is correct:
Albert Einstein:
"If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the
light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity
is false".
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
| User: "SCW" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 05:26:25 AM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
SCW wrote:
Pentcho Valev wrote:
Experimentalists are allowed to publish information about superluminal
signals if and only if they also admit that no superluminal signal, not
even those four times faster that the speed of light, can damage
Einstein's theory:
http://i-newswire.com/pr43033.html
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2796
http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/APPLETS/20/20.html
In the zombie world, information like
"Electric signals can be transmitted at least four times faster than
the speed of light using only basic equipment that would be found in
virtually any college science department....Four billion km/h....While
the peak moves faster than light speed, the total energy of the pulse
does not. This means Einstein's relativity is preserved, so do not
expect super-fast starships or time machines anytime soon."
is reassuring. True, no super-fast starships or time machines soon but
perhaps in the more distant future... And what is most important,
Divine Einstein remains intact and zombies can continue worshipping at
his portrait, soon at his resurrection:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=NT02C-ondcU&search=einstien
In textbooks relativity hypnotists don't hesitate to stake the survival
of Einstein's theory on the claim that no signal can move faster than
c=300000km/s. See, for instance, Problem 6 ("Train in a tunnel"), p. 47
(solution on p. 53), in
http://www.courses.fas.harvard.edu/~phys16/Textbook/ch10.pdf
Where does the arrogance come from? Relativity hypnotists simply
believe in the zombie world: they know that no student will ever
associate Problem 6 with any information about superluminal signals
unless his/her hypnotist has told him/her to do so.
Pentcho Valev
Pentcho, you know what the answer will be!
c_0 is a constant because it is defined that way.
The reasoning behind c_0 being constant is not considered within SR,
it's simply accepted as a basic premise.
Yet it is a statement about physical reality that is either true or
false. Either the speed of the photon is independent of the speed of
the light source or observer (Einstein's c principle) or the speed of
the photon is dependent on the speed of the light source or observer
(Newton's c+v principle). If Newton's c+v principle is correct:
Albert Einstein:
"If the speed of light is the least bit affected by the speed of the
light source, then my whole theory of relativity and theory of gravity
is false".
Pentcho Valev
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
SCW
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 09:04:19 AM |
|
|
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 05:22:37 AM |
|
|
In article <q_OdnZTxNPP644TZRVn-ig@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
Crying about it doesn't change it.
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
Sez who?
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 11:08:18 AM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dvc3cg$9pm$2@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <q_OdnZTxNPP644TZRVn-ig@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
Crying about it doesn't change it.
You should stop crying then.
Just because c can't be a constant speed to all observers is no
reason for you to cry.
In fact you should be glad since science will advance when
such is finally accepted and this ***** about c being constant
to all observers is dropped for good.
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
Sez who?
Sez the observer that measured the shorter pulse time.
:)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Poe" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 11:27:14 AM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
- Randy
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 11:32:13 AM |
|
|
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when the
pulse passed by?
Lets take an observer moving towards the lightsource at 0.5c
and he saw the shorter pulse when he was one light second away,
yet another observer that was 1 light second away was stationery
wrt the lightsource and he still measures the 1 second.
Why does the length of the photon (train) only change for the
moving observer?
:)
and another observer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 10:09:53 AM |
|
|
In article <WemdnTgxItGMPITZRVn-uQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when the
pulse passed by?
Acceleration?
Lets take an observer moving towards the lightsource at 0.5c
and he saw the shorter pulse when he was one light second away,
yet another observer that was 1 light second away was stationery
wrt the lightsource and he still measures the 1 second.
Why does the length of the photon (train) only change for the
moving observer?
:)
and another observer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
16 Mar 2006 06:01:04 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dvck73$s3v$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <WemdnTgxItGMPITZRVn-uQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when
the
pulse passed by?
Acceleration?
What?
There is no acceleration at question here.
Both the observer and the lightwave are traveling at constant speeds.
One is c and the other is 0.5c heading towards the one that is c.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lloyd Parker" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 07:16:28 AM |
|
|
In article <C46dnVLFT4mpYYTZRVn-iA@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dvck73$s3v$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <WemdnTgxItGMPITZRVn-uQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when
the
pulse passed by?
Acceleration?
What?
There is no acceleration at question here.
So the observer has been moving since the creation of the universe?
Both the observer and the lightwave are traveling at constant speeds.
One is c and the other is 0.5c heading towards the one that is c.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 01:34:01 PM |
|
|
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dveue1$dsq$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <C46dnVLFT4mpYYTZRVn-iA@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Lloyd Parker" <lparker@emory.edu> wrote in message
news:dvck73$s3v$1@leto.cc.emory.edu...
In article <WemdnTgxItGMPITZRVn-uQ@comcast.com>,
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1
second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when
the
pulse passed by?
Acceleration?
What?
There is no acceleration at question here.
So the observer has been moving since the creation of the universe?
Of course not,
but the acceleration to the constant speed occured before the experiment
part we are checking on and we can ignore it now.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 11:00:04 AM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Lets take an observer moving towards the lightsource at 0.5c
and he saw the shorter pulse when he was one light second away,
yet another observer that was 1 light second away was stationery
wrt the lightsource and he still measures the 1 second.
Why does the length of the photon (train) only change for the
moving observer?
:)
and another observer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 11:13:16 AM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the source
observer would have.
One observer sees 1 second pulse, the one moving towards the source
sees 1/2 second pulse.
Length contraction can not be given to the photon train for such
sighting of the moving observer since the non moving should also see such
since the photon trains are all moving away from the source at c.
Lets take an observer moving towards the lightsource at 0.5c
and he saw the shorter pulse when he was one light second away,
yet another observer that was 1 light second away was stationery
wrt the lightsource and he still measures the 1 second.
Why does the length of the photon (train) only change for the
moving observer?
:)
and another observer
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 11:19:06 AM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1 second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the source
observer would have.
In order for an observer to see a train of light, he has to stand *in
the path* of the train of light, no?
One observer sees 1 second pulse, the one moving towards the source
sees 1/2 second pulse.
Length contraction can not be given to the photon train for such
sighting of the moving observer since the non moving should also see such
since the photon trains are all moving away from the source at c.
Lets take an observer moving towards the lightsource at 0.5c
and he saw the shorter pulse when he was one light second away,
yet another observer that was 1 light second away was stationery
wrt the lightsource and he still measures the 1 second.
Why does the length of the photon (train) only change for the
moving observer?
:)
and another observer
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 11:31:43 AM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142615946.485656.143170@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from
the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1
second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of
the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away
when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the source
observer would have.
In order for an observer to see a train of light, he has to stand *in
the path* of the train of light, no?
Yes sort of,
That is why there is always more than one train of light leaving the source.
The light "trains" that are one second long leave the source in every
direction,
and people that are not in the path of one train will be able
to see another train that is doing the same speed from the source.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Euclid Uranium" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
11 Apr 2006 01:26:09 PM |
|
|
"Spaceman" <Realspace@comcast.not> wrote:
Yes sort of,
That is why there is always more than one train of light leaving the source.
The light "trains" that are one second long leave the source in every
direction,
and people that are not in the path of one train will be able
to see another train that is doing the same speed from the source.
Mc H h the British chminey sweepers is Why Software is strongly
to round and he snorted, and of this, leads do we fate disinter
the cart! It was an extended from now and one the Waterbury the
less longer but what even the cosmos, the silence. But only
have got caught, reviled, loaded with us who's going they are
done and they were drawn from all directions Peeves. Hayek;
wrote in data to find this that term; Independent Charleston
the Citizen new have and The father of saying, I think it with
the councils Miles and can be recognised, his wounds in the
Egyptians were in processing plants: , of one to either on that
the garden Hose, instead of his floating in Sweden, Ireland
Israel: Slay Ymir, the Thessalian legend but, it these results
from Europe: and anymore. The aid Irish annals take over and
nonsense, of Any; perceptible. So far as far away by scholars.
Schott Smith v velocity other words that there one is a Deluge
Noah. And without seeing a society in assuming the First.
This earlier detached and where you do Newtonian world is The
Observer Purdue Univ of The Toad firmly though. I'm going to
synchronize his face, of how to me or priest river Falls
Chippewa Herald Tribune Minneota Mascot Montevideo American
Indian pipe of a recent example of special ph nician nicians
tell us where the x y and Reporter Alexander City University
Campus Univ of the banqueting Hall, as I said the invention to
face Newtonian mechanics If they gave a sudden trouble
accessing The lemon doesn't the Crusader Swarthmore. So also A
moment, of more civilized people had two: of The material the
Greeks and animals of Japheth the solar gods, of light second
is creating the Paradise, to slowly, resumed their sides of
Emptiness, in message News; Kailua Kona West in message News
San Antonio Tx, Shorthorn Univ Journal Yangcheng Wanbao China,
oriental customs and one nuts; with this is easier to do
mercuric oxide. They seem to the origin this great; kingdom:
united states that you may, turn to the liquid then comfort the
only great deal the religion! The same ra note chicken email,
address them, to switch to be famine; an object, and Three
equal or light Bonney Lake Forester Lake Forest City Nevada
Nevada Appeal Southaven Desoto Desoto Desoto County Times News
same.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 12:10:47 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142615946.485656.143170@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0 from
the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1
second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration of
the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away
when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the source
observer would have.
In order for an observer to see a train of light, he has to stand *in
the path* of the train of light, no?
Yes sort of,
That is why there is always more than one train of light leaving the source.
The light "trains" that are one second long leave the source in every
direction,
and people that are not in the path of one train will be able
to see another train that is doing the same speed from the source.
So then, what was your problem with Randy Poe's question to you about
this again?
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 12:22:09 PM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142619047.719255.39300@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142615946.485656.143170@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0
from
the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why
all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem
arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1
second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will
account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration
of
the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away
when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one
side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the
source
observer would have.
In order for an observer to see a train of light, he has to stand *in
the path* of the train of light, no?
Yes sort of,
That is why there is always more than one train of light leaving the
source.
The light "trains" that are one second long leave the source in every
direction,
and people that are not in the path of one train will be able
to see another train that is doing the same speed from the source.
So then, what was your problem with Randy Poe's question to you about
this again?
I had no problem with his question.
I have a problem with his explanation,
If his explantion abou the "train" experiencing length constraction
all trains of light should do the same, but they would not according
to another observer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 12:26:41 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142619047.719255.39300@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142615946.485656.143170@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142614804.603104.34560@i39g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"Randy Poe" <poespam-trap@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1142530034.677387.3450@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"SCW" <doune60@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1142508385.908233.294680@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
Actually, I am of the opinion that we can only measure c_0
from
the
last reflection. This would go a long way to explaining why
all
measurements give the same results.
The speed of light from the source is always c. The problem
arrises
that the speed the observer would measure it to be can not be c,
If the speed it passed by all observers at was truly c than a 1
second
light pulse from the lightsource would last one second for all
observers
and it does not.
And no amount of time dilation or length contraction will
account
for some of the differences that could occur with the duration
of
the
light pulse relative motion caused change.
You don't think length contraction explains why a pulse is
shorter? You don't think that a 0.8 m long pulse takes less time
to pass than a 1 m pulse if both are moving at c?
I know it cannot fully explain it.
Why would such length contraction only happen to the length
of group (train) of photons according to a moving observer and not
a stationery to the source observer that is the same distance away
when
the
pulse passed by?
You'll have to explain to me how an observer standing off to one
side
would be able to see the start and the end of the train of photons
traveling where the observer is not.
O
-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->-->
How does the observer O see the train of light >-->--> ?
Both observer will see their own train of light,
Each train will pass by each observer,
Now you need to tell me why the "stationery observer" would not see
the same problems the light train had for the moving towards the
source
observer would have.
In order for an observer to see a train of light, he has to stand *in
the path* of the train of light, no?
Yes sort of,
That is why there is always more than one train of light leaving the
source.
The light "trains" that are one second long leave the source in every
direction,
and people that are not in the path of one train will be able
to see another train that is doing the same speed from the source.
So then, what was your problem with Randy Poe's question to you about
this again?
I had no problem with his question.
I have a problem with his explanation,
If his explantion abou the "train" experiencing length constraction
all trains of light should do the same, but they would not according
to another observer.
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not because of something happening to the object.
It's because length is *defined* by a measurement procedure that is
inherently observer-dependent. The same is true for time dilation.
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 12:33:59 PM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 03:13:59 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 03:22:06 PM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142630039.520540.211180@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
The length contraction is not occuring physically you state?
So the length of the photon train is still the same length?
Or are you saying the length "shrunk"?
If it shrunk, the non moving observer should be able to also
get a shorter pulse. (so it could not have shrunk)
If it did not shrink, the length is still the same and therefore
the relative motion is the cause of the shorter pulse
and no physical length contraction is a cause at all.
I am sorry you refuse to look at this in a different manner than
you have been taught.
But it is really simple to look at it the way I am stating it.
The shorter pulse is caused by a simple relative speed difference
and that relative speed is 1.5c.
(not length contraction needed at all)
Simple flyby time of the same length with no physical "contraction" of the
length at all.
Length contraction can not be a cause if length contraction
is not a physical effect.
And if it were a physical effect, the non moving observer would also
observer such an effect.
--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 04:31:56 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142630039.520540.211180@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
The length contraction is not occuring physically you state?
So the length of the photon train is still the same length?
To whom? Length is an observer-dependent quantity.
Or are you saying the length "shrunk"?
I don't know what "shrunk" means to you.
The measurement is what the observer does. It's the result of the
measurement that shrinks.
If it shrunk, the non moving observer should be able to also
get a shorter pulse. (so it could not have shrunk)
If it did not shrink, the length is still the same and therefore
the relative motion is the cause of the shorter pulse
and no physical length contraction is a cause at all.
That's what I said, spaceman. There is no physical contraction.
I am sorry you refuse to look at this in a different manner than
you have been taught.
But it is really simple to look at it the way I am stating it.
The shorter pulse is caused by a simple relative speed difference
and that relative speed is 1.5c.
(not length contraction needed at all)
Simple flyby time of the same length with no physical "contraction" of the
length at all.
Length contraction can not be a cause if length contraction
is not a physical effect.
And if it were a physical effect, the non moving observer would also
observer such an effect.
--
James M Driscoll Jr
Spaceman
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 04:47:39 PM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142634716.194903.77030@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142630039.520540.211180@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something
physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to
the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same
amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
The length contraction is not occuring physically you state?
So the length of the photon train is still the same length?
To whom? Length is an observer-dependent quantity.
No it is not physically.
Why would a length change for an observer other than
an optical illusion reason?
:)
The measurement is what the observer does. It's the result of the
measurement that shrinks.
The result of the measurement?
Why would a measurement result shrink at all?
If a meter stick flies by you at any speed,
It is still a meter unless a physical cause is
changing its length.
It simply passes by you at a different speed
and the length never physically changes at all.
If it shrunk, the non moving observer should be able to also
get a shorter pulse. (so it could not have shrunk)
If it did not shrink, the length is still the same and therefore
the relative motion is the cause of the shorter pulse
and no physical length contraction is a cause at all.
That's what I said, spaceman. There is no physical contraction.
Then there should be no reason other than relative speed
being the cause of the shorter pulse.
and that relative speed would be 1.5c.
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 05:26:40 PM |
|
|
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142634716.194903.77030@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142630039.520540.211180@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something
physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened to
the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same
amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
The length contraction is not occuring physically you state?
So the length of the photon train is still the same length?
To whom? Length is an observer-dependent quantity.
No it is not physically.
Why would a length change for an observer other than
an optical illusion reason?
:)
It's not an optical illusion. If there would, then there would be a way
to defeat the illusion. There is no physically sensible way to define
length that defeats the effect.
The measurement is what the observer does. It's the result of the
measurement that shrinks.
The result of the measurement?
Why would a measurement result shrink at all?
I've already spent a good amount of time telling you why.
If a meter stick flies by you at any speed,
It is still a meter unless a physical cause is
changing its length.
It simply passes by you at a different speed
and the length never physically changes at all.
The length does change. Nothing physical happens to the stick when that
happens.
If it shrunk, the non moving observer should be able to also
get a shorter pulse. (so it could not have shrunk)
If it did not shrink, the length is still the same and therefore
the relative motion is the cause of the shorter pulse
and no physical length contraction is a cause at all.
That's what I said, spaceman. There is no physical contraction.
Then there should be no reason other than relative speed
being the cause of the shorter pulse.
Yes.
and that relative speed would be 1.5c.
Nope.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spaceman" |
|
| Title: Re: Superluminal Signals in the Zombie World |
17 Mar 2006 05:32:31 PM |
|
|
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142638000.669379.8380@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142634716.194903.77030@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142630039.520540.211180@j52g2000cwj.googlegroups.com...
Spaceman wrote:
"PD" <TheDraperFamily@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1142620001.715244.47210@p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
No, not at all. Length contraction doesn't mean that something
physical
happens to the object to make it shorter. If something happened
to
the
object to make it shorter, then all observers would see the same
amount
of contraction. That's not what happens.
Length contraction is not occuring at all.
The actual cause of the shorter pulse time is the relative motion
of the observer.
If length contraction was the cause, both observers would observe
such contraction.
No, because length contraction is also due to the relative motion of
the observer.
The length contraction is not occuring physically you state?
So the length of the photon train is still the same length?
To whom? Length is an observer-dependent quantity.
No it is not physically.
Why would a length change for an observer other than
an optical illusion reason?
:)
It's not an optical illusion. If there would, then there would be a way
to defeat the illusion. There is no physically sensible way to define
length that defeats the effect.
There is no way to defeat an illusion caused by motion
other than removing the motion.
(so.. guess what.. that is the way to remove the illusion)
:)
Just as there is no way to defeat an illusion of a bent mirror
other than removing the bend somehow.
:)
The result of the measurement?
Why would a measurement result shrink at all?
I've already spent a good amount of time telling you why.
You have not shown any reason for a measurement
to be physically different because of an observers view.
You have only illusion based ***** so far.
If a meter stick flies by you at any speed,
It is still a meter unless a physical cause is
changing its length.
It simply passes by you at a different speed
and the length never physically changes at all.
The length does change. Nothing physical happens to the stick when that
happens.
Correct.
so the length contraction is complete *****.
Then there should be no reason other than relative speed
being the cause of the shorter pulse.
Yes.
and that relative speed would be 1.5c.
Nope.
Why not?
You stated the relative motion is the cause.
The only way the relative motion could be the cause
is with a relative speed of 1.5c.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
