| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Pentcho Valev" |
| Date: |
12 Jan 2007 01:04:30 AM |
| Object: |
TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
The miraculous corollary of Einstein's false principle of constancy of
the speed of light - time dilation - implies that, if a single clock
belonging to the inertial system K consecutively meets clocks belonging
to the inertial system K', and if at every meeting the two readings are
compared, the single clock in K turns out to run SLOWER than clocks in
K'. That is, the difference in reading between clocks in K' and the
single clock in K gradually increases with the number of meetings. Yet
in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Einstein says the opposite: the clock
in the system at rest K runs FASTER than clocks placed on the periphery
of the rotating disc K'. True, the periphery of the rotating disc K' is
not an inertial system but does that justify the transition from SLOWER
to FASTER? Moreover, by increasing the diameter of the disc and keeping
the linear speed of the periphery constant one can convert the
periphery of the disc into an INERTIAL system: clocks on the periphery
would experience no gravitational field while meeting consecutively the
single clock from K. For such cases all textbooks say Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light predicts that the
difference in reading between clocks in K' and the single clock in K
must gradually INCREASE with the number of meetings. Then why does
Einstein say the opposite in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity"?
The radical solution to the problem involves abandoning Einstein's
false principle of constancy of the speed of light. This solution is
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
There is also a partial solution: The single clock in the system at
rest K runs both SLOWER and FASTER than clocks in the system K' and
Einstein was free to choose. He chose FASTER.
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
| User: "Bruce Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 01:47:08 AM |
|
|
"Pentcho Valev" <pvalev@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1168585470.222703.229550@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The miraculous corollary of Einstein's false principle of constancy of
the speed of light - time dilation - implies that, if a single clock
belonging to the inertial system K consecutively meets clocks belonging
to the inertial system K', and if at every meeting the two readings are
compared, the single clock in K turns out to run SLOWER than clocks in
K'. That is, the difference in reading between clocks in K' and the
single clock in K gradually increases with the number of meetings. Yet
in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Einstein says the opposite: the clock
in the system at rest K runs FASTER than clocks placed on the periphery
of the rotating disc K'. True, the periphery of the rotating disc K' is
not an inertial system but does that justify the transition from SLOWER
to FASTER? Moreover, by increasing the diameter of the disc and keeping
the linear speed of the periphery constant one can convert the
periphery of the disc into an INERTIAL system: clocks on the periphery
would experience no gravitational field while meeting consecutively the
single clock from K. For such cases all textbooks say Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light predicts that the
difference in reading between clocks in K' and the single clock in K
must gradually INCREASE with the number of meetings. Then why does
Einstein say the opposite in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity"?
The radical solution to the problem involves abandoning Einstein's
false principle of constancy of the speed of light. This solution is
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
There is also a partial solution: The single clock in the system at
rest K runs both SLOWER and FASTER than clocks in the system K' and
Einstein was free to choose. He chose FASTER.
Pentcho Valev
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
Yet he has to use this in his proof of relativity giving S ownership of the
light and stating that it travels at c + v and c - v in S'
Although Einstein's logic is faulse and the academic world has been taken
over by those too blinded to see it; the nature of the universe is such that
it supports the equations of relativity.
Light travels through space because nature obeys Maxwell's laws. Lorentz
proved that the same actions at work in the propogation of light are at work
within matter causing a real contraction in length and increase in mass.
These two effects cause clocks and all time dependent process to run slow.
They also affect our attempts to synchronise clocks. The result is that our
observations of position and time of events obey the Lorentz transforms.
I have set out the full mathematical proofs of this in
http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/Relff.pdf , but you will need to be
good at 1st year university maths and willing to devote a week or two to its
studdy.
Einstein's false principle of constancy of the speed of light
The speed of light is not constant, but any attempt to measure it locally
will give the same answer.
The correct statement is: "The locally measured speed of light is a
constant"
and we should understand that it results from a combination of factors
affecting the lengths of rules, rates and synchronisations of clocks.
regards Bruce Harvey
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 04:31:21 AM |
|
|
"Bruce Harvey" <bruce@bearsoft.co.uk> wrote in message =
news:newscache$fawqbj$bpl$1@news.powernet.co.uk...
Although Einstein's logic is faulse and the academic world has been =
taken=20
over by those too blinded to see it; the nature of the universe is =
such that=20
it supports the equations of relativity.
HAHAHAHA!
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/PoR/PoR.htm
Light travels through space because nature obeys Maxwell's laws.=20
Yes Mr. Maxwell sir, anything you say, Mr. Maxwell, sir.
Your humble servant, Nature.
Lorentz
proved that the same actions at work in the propogation of light are =
at work=20
within matter causing a real contraction in length and increase in =
mass.=20
These two effects cause clocks and all time dependent process to run =
slow.=20
They also affect our attempts to synchronise clocks. The result is =
that our=20
observations of position and time of events obey the Lorentz =
transforms.
=20
I have set out the full mathematical proofs of this in=20
http://users.powernet.co.uk/bearsoft/Relff.pdf ,
HAHAHAHA!
"If one admits the validity of the Lorentz transforms,"
I don't admit the validity, Brummie, because you can't derive them.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Rocket/Rocket.htm
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Smart/Smart.htm
but you will need to be=20
good at 1st year university maths and willing to devote a week or two =
to its=20
studdy.
HAHAHA! "studdy".
=20
=20
Einstein's false principle of constancy of the speed of light
=20
The speed of light is not constant, but any attempt to measure it =
locally=20
will give the same answer.
HAHAHAHA!
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Sagnac/Sagnac.htm
Is within a laser gyroscope local enough, Brummie moron?
=20
The correct statement is: "The locally measured speed of light is a=20
constant"
and we should understand that it results from a combination of factors =
affecting the lengths of rules, rates and synchronisations of clocks.
=20
regards Bruce Harvey=20
Drooling idiot.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 11:34:30 AM |
|
|
"Sorcerer Androcles" <Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_j> wrote in message news:ZrJph.39021$MO2.28253@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
[snip]
HAHAHAHA!
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
MMX for idiots who can't even properly set up the mirrors:
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/Fumbles/AndroMMX.html
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 12:07:25 PM |
|
|
"Dirk Van de moortel" <dirkvandemoortel@ThankS-NO-SperM.hotmail.com> =
wrote in message news:GEPph.286944$is5.5815345@phobos.telenet-ops.be...
=20
"Sorcerer Androcles" <Headmaster@hogwarts.physics_j> wrote in message =
news:ZrJph.39021$MO2.28253@fe3.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
=20
[snip]
=20
HAHAHAHA!
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
[anip]
http://users.telenet.be/vdmoortel/dirk/Physics/TwinsEvents.html
"We use 3 inertial reference frames" [because Dorks can't get the result =
they want in two]=20
"In neither of these frames any form of acceleration is felt" [neither =
one of all three].
"In order for the travelling twin to make HIS trip, SHE must be in frame =
S'
while going away"
"if T =3D 5 years and v =3D 0.8c, then the stay at home twin will have =
aged 10 years"
Belgium is where the farts blow.
Didn't they teach you to write English in Belgium?
How old are you?=20
"Your conclusion is dead wrong.
Start over, but skip the first part and the conclusion." -- Dork Van de =
fuckhead.=20
"You made a mistake" -- Dork Van de psychotic fumble mumbler
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 06:57:39 AM |
|
|
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the first
bloody place.
R U BLIND ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Spirit of Truth" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
14 Jan 2007 03:19:05 AM |
|
|
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message
news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the first
bloody place.
Yes, and no.
"Spirit of Truth" <juneharton@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:<EwMgh.25688$9v5.8679@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>...
I have long been concerned with Einstein's ''Time dilation"
and "Lack of simultaneity".
After a lot of help and much enquiry into these matters from
many many works I have deduced the following:
Time dilation is synonymous with speed of process change
e.g. aging at a slower rate and is not a slowing down of "Time"
in a so-called time dimension. After all, if something went
slower in classical-sense time it would disappear out of
our now flowing existence!
Lack of simultaneity is incorrect. There no length contraction
contrary to such ideas in relativity (both SR and GR), and
it's counterpart the Ether length contraction concept.
The actual answer is as follows:
Time dilation is spherical....
Time dilation is spherical, greatest in the direction of motion, least in
the transverse direction, and opposite in the reverse direction to the
motion, where change is speeded up.
There is no length contraction nor lack of simultaneity....
Relativity does not demand length contraction. To be actually RELATIVE
to such a thing as Einstein's relativity, calculations such as M-M's have to
EQUAL the AT REST condition NOT a length contraction to equal the
transverse return distance.
It has to equal the SAME DISTANCE for c to travel as the AT REST
observation of the traveling c.
The Time element has to be brought back to 2L / C return connected
with the direction of motion, the transverse direction, and the reverse
to direction of motion.
Related to the above, the gamma equation only functions in the transverse
direction as you will see below.
Orienting to first the direction of motion Time is dilated as follows:
Rest Time divided by 1-V/C.
Then, Transverse to the direction of motion:
Rest Time divided by SqRt 1-Vsq/Csq [= t x gamma (y)].
Then opposite to direction of motion:
Rest Time divided by 1+V/C.
Simultaneity is thus also regained for all observers by this fact.
The false concept of lack of simultaneity which leads inevitably to the
block-time/ frozen river of time concept (The Fabric Of The Cosmos
by Brian Greene) which falsely concludes that THE actual past and
future exist at all times and thus there would be no free will is thus
debunked by Simultaneous Relativity [SR - new definition].
Now, you may ask how time in a moving system can have different
time dilations. The answer is that it is each particle that has the
dilation depending on it's various motions in the moving system.
The time dilations are simply based on c being c for all observers
AND the simple trajectory differences that each lightwave/particle
has for the observer of the moving system compared to the
observer at rest.
Do the math, it finally works.
:)
Spirit
Copyright: Spirit of Truth
Sept. 13th, 2006
Modified Oct. 19, 2006
(using June's e-mail to communicate to you)!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 07:14:08 AM |
|
|
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message =
news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
=20
=20
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
=20
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald =
Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the first
bloody place.
=20
R U BLIND ?
You certainly are.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
.
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 10:00:58 AM |
|
|
Sorcerer Androcles wrote:
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the first
bloody place.
R U BLIND ?
You certainly are.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
A blind MMX Dummy does not explore the foundation which is responsible
for that which is known as " RELATIVITY ".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sorcerer Androcles" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 12:02:44 PM |
|
|
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message =
news:1168617658.632721.312000@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
=20
Sorcerer Androcles wrote:
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message =
news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 =
pages.
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald =
Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz =
Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the =
first
bloody place.
R U BLIND ?
You certainly are.
http://www.androcles01.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/mmx4dummies.htm
=20
A blind MMX Dummy does not explore the foundation which is responsible
for that which is known as " RELATIVITY ".
So you are a dumbfuck as well as blind.
http://www.aip.org/history/gap/PDF/michelson.pdf --November 1887
http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/einstein/specrel/www/ --June 1905
"the unsuccessful attempts to discover any motion of the earth =
relatively to the ``light medium,''=20
Relativity came along 17 years later, you fucking ignorant dipshit.
=20
=20
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
12 Jan 2007 11:44:42 AM |
|
|
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
Good grief, what a crackpot.
Dirk Vdm
What is it, can't anyone see the obvious ?
A simple analysis of motion presents the Lorentz-FitzGerald Contraction
Equation, the Time Dilation Equation, and the Lorentz Transformation
Equations, without even having to know of such equations in the first
bloody place.
R U BLIND ?
.
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
13 Jan 2007 07:06:10 PM |
|
|
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
"THE_ONE" <flopp...@idirect.com> wrote in message news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
Good grief, what a crackpot.
Dirk Vdm
Five words. You are progressing after all !
Next thing you know, you will start to explain your conclusions, rather
than just make them.
THE_ONE
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
13 Jan 2007 07:02:28 PM |
|
|
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
"THE_ONE" <flopp...@idirect.com> wrote in message news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
Good grief, what a crackpot.
Dirk Vdm
Five words. You are progressing after all !
Next thing you know, you will start to explain your conclusions, rather
thant just make them.
THE_ONE
.
|
|
|
| User: "Phineas T Puddleduck" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
13 Jan 2007 07:04:54 PM |
|
|
In article <1168736548.491888.151100@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote:
Five words. You are progressing after all !
Next thing you know, you will start to explain your conclusions, rather
thant just make them.
THE_ONE
Have you ever considered sanity?
I haven't seen that much illucidity outside of crank.net
--
Saucerhead lingo #2102 "However, since PTP is in reality NOT a budding
astrophysicist..." ... "Perhaps if we try distraction as a tactic people
will forget we cannot answer simple conflicting issues with our nonsense
theory"
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
13 Jan 2007 08:00:12 PM |
|
|
In sci.logic, Phineas T Puddleduck
<phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com>
wrote
on Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:04:54 +0000
<phineaspuddleduck-A800C0.01045314012007@free.teranews.com>:
In article <1168736548.491888.151100@s34g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote:
Five words. You are progressing after all !
Next thing you know, you will start to explain your conclusions, rather
thant just make them.
THE_ONE
Have you ever considered sanity?
I haven't seen that much illucidity outside of crank.net
http://www.timecube.com :-)
--
Saucerhead lingo #2102 "However, since PTP is in reality NOT a budding
astrophysicist..." ... "Perhaps if we try distraction as a tactic people
will forget we cannot answer simple conflicting issues with our nonsense
theory"
--
#191,
Windows Vista. It'll Fix Everything(tm).
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "THE_ONE" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILATION AND EINSTEIN'S FREEDOM TO CHOOSE |
13 Jan 2007 06:59:02 PM |
|
|
Dirk Van de moortel wrote:
"THE_ONE" <floppy01@idirect.com> wrote in message news:1168606659.585541.153350@i15g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Did any of you brain dead talking computers check this website yet
http://www.outersecrets.com/real/2_motion.htm along with next 4 pages.
Good grief, what a crackpot.
Dirk Vdm
Five words. You are progressing after all !
Next thing you know, you will start to explain your conclusions, rather
that just make them.
THE_ONE
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME ELUTION AND ERNIE'S CONDOM TO COUSCOUS |
12 Jan 2007 01:10:56 PM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The miraculous corollary of Einstein's false principle of constancy of
the speed of light - time dilation - implies that, if a single clock
belonging to the inertial system K consecutively meets clocks belonging
to the inertial system K', and if at every meeting the two readings are
compared, the single clock in K turns out to run SLOWER than clocks in
K'. That is, the difference in reading between clocks in K' and the
single clock in K gradually increases with the number of meetings. Yet
in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Einstein says the opposite: the clock
in the system at rest K runs FASTER than clocks placed on the periphery
of the rotating disc K'. True, the periphery of the rotating disc K' is
not an inertial system but does that justify the transition from SLOWER
to FASTER? Moreover, by increasing the diameter of the disc and keeping
the linear speed of the periphery constant one can convert the
periphery of the disc into an INERTIAL system: clocks on the periphery
would experience no gravitational field while meeting consecutively the
single clock from K. For such cases all textbooks say Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light predicts that the
difference in reading between clocks in K' and the single clock in K
must gradually INCREASE with the number of meetings. Then why does
Einstein say the opposite in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity"?
The radical solution to the problem involves abandoning Einstein's
false principle of constancy of the speed of light. This solution is
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
There is also a partial solution: The single clock in the system at
rest K runs both SLOWER and FASTER than clocks in the system K' and
Einstein was free to choose. He chose FASTER.
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dirk Van de moortel" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME ELUTION AND ERNIE'S CONDOM TO COUSCOUS |
12 Jan 2007 01:38:13 PM |
|
|
"John Jones" <jonescardiff@aol.com> wrote in message news:1168629056.495278.167590@11g2000cwr.googlegroups.com...
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The miraculous corollary of Einstein's false principle of constancy of
the speed of light - time dilation - implies that, if a single clock
belonging to the inertial system K consecutively meets clocks belonging
to the inertial system K', and if at every meeting the two readings are
compared, the single clock in K turns out to run SLOWER than clocks in
K'. That is, the difference in reading between clocks in K' and the
single clock in K gradually increases with the number of meetings. Yet
in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Einstein says the opposite: the clock
in the system at rest K runs FASTER than clocks placed on the periphery
of the rotating disc K'. True, the periphery of the rotating disc K' is
not an inertial system but does that justify the transition from SLOWER
to FASTER? Moreover, by increasing the diameter of the disc and keeping
the linear speed of the periphery constant one can convert the
periphery of the disc into an INERTIAL system: clocks on the periphery
would experience no gravitational field while meeting consecutively the
single clock from K. For such cases all textbooks say Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light predicts that the
difference in reading between clocks in K' and the single clock in K
must gradually INCREASE with the number of meetings. Then why does
Einstein say the opposite in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity"?
The radical solution to the problem involves abandoning Einstein's
false principle of constancy of the speed of light. This solution is
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
There is also a partial solution: The single clock in the system at
rest K runs both SLOWER and FASTER than clocks in the system K' and
Einstein was free to choose. He chose FASTER.
Pentcho Valev
Yes, that is what he wrote.
The average of the 5 most reliable estimates of the
number of times he wrote it, is 732.
Dirk Vdm
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: TIME DILUTION? EINSTEIN'S HAIRBRUSH & WASH N' GO |
14 Jan 2007 06:05:34 AM |
|
|
Pentcho Valev wrote:
The miraculous corollary of Einstein's false principle of constancy of
the speed of light - time dilation - implies that, if a single clock
belonging to the inertial system K consecutively meets clocks belonging
to the inertial system K', and if at every meeting the two readings are
compared, the single clock in K turns out to run SLOWER than clocks in
K'. That is, the difference in reading between clocks in K' and the
single clock in K gradually increases with the number of meetings. Yet
in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity" Einstein says the opposite: the clock
in the system at rest K runs FASTER than clocks placed on the periphery
of the rotating disc K'. True, the periphery of the rotating disc K' is
not an inertial system but does that justify the transition from SLOWER
to FASTER? Moreover, by increasing the diameter of the disc and keeping
the linear speed of the periphery constant one can convert the
periphery of the disc into an INERTIAL system: clocks on the periphery
would experience no gravitational field while meeting consecutively the
single clock from K. For such cases all textbooks say Einstein's false
principle of constancy of the speed of light predicts that the
difference in reading between clocks in K' and the single clock in K
must gradually INCREASE with the number of meetings. Then why does
Einstein say the opposite in Chapter 23 in his "Relativity"?
The radical solution to the problem involves abandoning Einstein's
false principle of constancy of the speed of light. This solution is
too dangerous. Einstein once said: "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."
There is also a partial solution: The single clock in the system at
rest K runs both SLOWER and FASTER than clocks in the system K' and
Einstein was free to choose. He chose FASTER.
Pentcho Valev
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
