The Special Theory of Relativity is dead

Hello Pete , You wrote , [ PMB ]
" a black hole is a geometric object
whose structure is not frame dependant "

But the observed temperature
as well as the observed relativistic mass
do depend on a scientist's frame of reference .

Jeff Relf wrote in message ...
Hello Pete , You wrote , [ PMB ]
" a black hole is a geometric object
whose structure is not frame dependant "

But the observed temperature
as well as the observed relativistic mass
do depend on a scientist's frame of reference .

Yo Jeff! What up! Long time no see! You okay?

Temperature is usually derfined in a prefered frame. E.g. the
temperature of a gas is defined in the zero momentum frame.

Yes - relativistic mass does depend on the frame. Many quantities in
relativity do. After all one of the main goals of relativity is to be
able to describe nature from any inertial frame of referance.

Pmb

Hello Gauge , You wrote ,
" Temperature is usually defined in a preferred frame "

Even in particle accelerators ?
( Particles must radiate " Heat " , I'd assume )

You say :
" Yo Jeff! What up ! Long time no see ! You okay ? "

I've been spending a little time in this group lately :
alt.sci.physics.new-theories

I haven't been to Sci.Physics for a while .

Do you spend much time in Sci.Physics ?

I think you're mostly in sci.physics.relativity , Right ?

Jeff Relf wrote in message ...
Hello Gauge , You wrote ,
" Temperature is usually defined in a preferred frame "

Even in particle accelerators ?
( Particles must radiate " Heat " , I'd assume )

They radiate energy in the form of electromagnetic energy. Not heat.



You say :
" Yo Jeff! What up ! Long time no see ! You okay ? "

I've been spending a little time in this group lately :
alt.sci.physics.new-theories

I haven't been to Sci.Physics for a while .

Do you spend much time in Sci.Physics ?

No. I should though. Recent interests of mine have been in Newtonian
mechanics

I think you're mostly in sci.physics.relativity , Right ?

Yep. But I have an idea. I will be making a new web page and will post
the it later. Its classical mechanics but a point that has never been
addressed. At least not in any of my texts

Pete

Hello Pete , [ PMB ]
Accelerated particles , You wrote ,
" They radiate energy in the form of electromagnetic energy .
Not heat . "

Electromagnetic energy has no temperature ?
( What about the 2.7 degrees Kelvin of the CMBR ? )

Given H.U.P. , how could anyplace lack heat ?
( Doesn't H.U.P. preclude a Perfect lack of motion ?
i.e. A temperature below which nothing can go . )

You say ,
" I will be making a new web page and will post the it later .
Its classical mechanics but a point
that has never been addressed .
At least not in any of my texts . "

What point is that ?

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
...
Hello Pete , [ PMB ]
Accelerated particles , You wrote ,
" They radiate energy in the form of electromagnetic energy .
Not heat . "

Electromagnetic energy has no temperature ?
( What about the 2.7 degrees Kelvin of the CMBR ? )

That is different. That is thermal radiation. A charged particle
accelerating is not radiating thermal radiation. An plane EM wave does not
have a temperature associated with it.

If you have a hot body and you analyze the EM radiation that it is emitting
then the radiation will have a certain spectrum to it. It's called a "Black
Body Spectrum". The CMBR has that spectrum and its meaningfull only in one
frame of referance since if you're moving with respect to the zero momentum
frame then you'll see different spectra in different directions.

Given H.U.P. , how could anyplace lack heat ?

A vacuum can't be truley empty due to vacuum fluctuations if that's what you
mean?

You say ,
" I will be making a new web page and will post the it later .
Its classical mechanics but a point
that has never been addressed .
At least not in any of my texts . "

What point is that ?

I'd rather not say at this moment. Its in regard to a paper a friend wrote.
I'm waiting his response. I'll tell you in e-mail right now if you want but
I'm holding off on making it public for a certain reason.

Pmb

Hello Pete , You wrote , [ PMB ]
" The CMBR has that spectrum
and its meaningful only in one frame of reference "

If I remember correctly ,
The closer to the big bang the CMBR is , the hotter it is .

And that is , as you say , frame dependent ... I assume .

Good luck with your new project .

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
news
Hello Pete , You wrote , [ PMB ]
" The CMBR has that spectrum
and its meaningful only in one frame of reference "

If I remember correctly ,
The closer to the big bang the CMBR is , the hotter it is .

And that is , as you say , frame dependent ... I assume .

What does "closer to the big bang" mean? Do you mean back in time? If so
then that is not what frame dependant means. That's time dependance

Pmb

"Jeff Relf" wrote in message
news
Hello Pete , You wrote , [ PMB ]
" The CMBR has that spectrum
and its meaningful only in one frame of reference "

If I remember correctly ,
The closer to the big bang the CMBR is , the hotter it is .

And that is , as you say , frame dependent ... I assume .

What does "closer to the big bang" mean? Do you mean back in time? If so
then that is not what frame dependant means. That's time dependance

Pmb

Hello Pete , [ PMB ]
You ask , " Do you mean back in time ? "

No , I was talking about two separate things :
1 _ Frame dependent temperature of the CMBR .
2 _ The temperature of the CMBR through " Cosmic time " .
( i.e. The CMBR was hotter
when it was closer to the big bang )