"El Enrrabadore-mor" wrote in message

"Greg Neill" escreveu na mensagem
m...
"El Enrrabadore-mor" wrote in message



When |v(t)| is constant, it doesn't matter if it's
circular motion or linear motion, you always got Lorentz equation.

Indeed. What a pleasing result! Wouldn't it be more
strange if, despite the obvious analogs between the
mathematical physics of linear and circular motion
(v ~ w, T ~ F, L ~ momentum, etc., and the functional forms
of rotational and linear energy), that relativity would
predict different forms for the time dilation effect?

Since time dilatation is something that is very hard for
me to accept, I will say that maybe.

Imagine that the original inquiry about the circular motion
is a 100 seconds-light radius motion around Saturn.
People here on Earth will see that circular motion from an
external point of view of the circle.
It will be like looking to a spinning wheel and compare
clock rates from the point of view of a fixed external
observer. The symmetry of the problem simply cancels
out any possible time dilatation.
Therefore, we have the same circular motion problem and
two different inertial observer (one at the center of the circle,
the other an external observer) that disagree on time dilatation.
Which one is right?

Both. The Saturn-based observer sees the "ship" moving
at a constant velocity in a circular orbit, and measures
a constant time dilation a la Lorentz.

The external observer, say he's in the plane of the
cirular motion and at a fixed location with respect to
its center, will also ascribe the same time dilation
to the ship if he's careful to take into account the
effect of light travel time on the measurements.


To compare, or to say, that circular motion is the same
thing as linear motion, sounds ridiculous to me.

They are clearly not the same thing, as rotational and
linear momenta are separately conserved. Yet the
mathematical form for dealing with them run along parallel
lines.


I'm about to say that, relative to the XXI Century, relativity
theory is in its Stone Age. ...and people stoned with it.

Uh oh.

Indeed.

My point, that you didn't comment so far, is that effects have
consequences.
Relative to the original inquiry of this thread, you didn't comment
on the main issue. Both observers send electromagnetic signals
to each other. The distance between observers doesn't change
and light speed is isotropic and constant.
Why the moving observer see all signals send by the central
observer and the observer and the central observer can't ever
receive any signal from the moving observer (at the limit)?
Do you see the consequences of a wrong analysis?

First, "never" is a long time. Since the speed of light is
not attainable by material things time dilation cannot be
infinite. The moving observer will see all of the central
observer's signals in a short, finite time (according to
his clock). The central observer will be waiting a long
time for the moving observer to get around to sending even
the first signal. If he waits long enough, he'll see the
signals; again, time dilation cannot be infinite for material
things.

The right analysis is that time dilatation is a consequence
of the speed of light and the DISTANCE travelled by light.
That is, time dilatation only is required for observations made
at distance, by means of light, like Einstein said.
Not the actual bull**** that follows because physicists only
have a stone hammer to work with.

There is no medium or mediator that can transfer a signal
of any kind (including energy) at a speed greater than
light. If you think there is, name it and demonstrate it.